Shock: Barack Obama Did Indeed Join the Socialist “New Party”

By 12 Comments 396 views

I’m sure you’re as surprised as I am that the press missed a few things in 2008.

Stanley Kurtz got the minutes of the meeting.

In late October 2008, when I wrote here at National Review Online that Obama had been a member of the New Party, his campaign sharply denied it, calling my claim a “crackpot smear.” Fight the Smears, an official Obama-campaign website, staunchly maintained that “Barack has been a member of only one political party, the Democratic Party.” I rebutted this, but the debate was never taken up by the mainstream press.Recently obtained evidence from the updated records of Illinois ACORN at the Wisconsin Historical Society now definitively establishes that Obama was a member of the New Party. He also signed a “contract” promising to publicly support and associate himself with the New Party while in office.

Minutes of the meeting on January 11, 1996, of the New Party’s Chicago chapter read as follows:

Barack Obama, candidate for State Senate in the 13th Legislative District, gave a statement to the membership and answered questions. He signed the New Party “Candidate Contract” and requested an endorsement from the New Party. He also joined the New Party.

Consistent with this, a roster of the Chicago chapter of the New Party from early 1997 lists Obama as a member, with January 11, 1996, indicated as the date he joined.

Breitbart’s piece castigates Ben Smith for believing the campaign’s apparent lies, and for dismissing it as another right-wing smear.

I’m willing to give him a break on that. Sometimes, people are simply misled.

But now that there are records from the New Party itself, will Ben Smith correct the record?

Read More

Filed under Uncategorized

Curt served in the Marine Corps for four years and has been a law enforcement officer in Los Angeles for the last 24 years.

12 Responses to “Shock: Barack Obama Did Indeed Join the Socialist “New Party””

  1. 1


    Web Archives Confirm Barack Obama Was Member Of Socialist ‘New Party’ In 1996

    …during his campaign for the State Senate in Illinois, Barack Obama was endorsed by an organization known as the Chicago “New Party”. The ‘New Party’ was a political party established by the Democratic Socialists of America (the DSA) to push forth the socialist principles of the DSA by focusing on winnable elections at a local level and spreading the Socialist movement upwards. The admittedly Socialist Organization experienced a moderate rise in numbers between 1995 and 1999. By 1999, however, the Socialist ‘New Party’ was essentially defunct after losing a supreme court challenge that ruled the organizations “fusion” reform platform as unconstitutional.

    After allegations surfaced in early summer over the ‘New Party’s’ endorsement of Obama, the Obama campaign along with the remnants of the New Party and Democratic Socialists of America claimed that Obama was never a member of either organization. The DSA and ‘New Party’ then systematically attempted to cover up any ties between Obama and the Socialist Organizations. However, it now appears that Barack Obama was indeed a certified and acknowledged member of the DSA’s New Party.

    It was discovered that the web page mentioning Obama and other NP candidates had been scrubbed from the New Party’s website. The non-profit Internet Archive Organization, however had archived the page.

    More on Obama and the Chicago branch of the New Party:

    In 1995, the New Ground, the newsletter of the Chicago Chapter of Democratic Socialists of America, noted, “In Chicago, the New Party’s biggest asset and biggest liability is ACORN.

    Obama Caught Lying Again: He Was Member of ‘New Party,’ Says Kurtz:

    Barack Obama was, in fact, a member of the socialist New Party in the 1990s and sought its endorsement for the Illinois senate–contrary to the misrepresentations of Obama’s presidential campaign in 2008, and in spite of the efforts of Politico’s Ben Smith to quash the story. Stanley Kurtz, author of Radical-in-Chief: Barack Obama and the Untold Story of American Socialism (2010), has released new “smoking gun” evidence at National Review Online. It is evidence that the mainstream media can no longer ignore–and Obama can no longer deny.

  2. 2

    Nan G

    Thanks for including that ”way back machine” link.
    I knew I had seen that very page BEFORE it was scrubbed, but since I could not find it later I thought perhaps I had conflated two things.

    So, Obama RAN as a Democrat while NP acknowledged him as one of their own candidates.

    Illinois: Three NP-members won Democratic primaries last Spring and face off against Republican opponents on election day: Danny Davis (U.S. House), Barack Obama (State Senate) and Patricia Martin (Cook County Judiciary).

    I guess the term “Manchurian Candidate,” does apply to Obama.

  3. 3


    Gee, it looks like if the MSN had really wanted to live up to their responsibilities to provide the people with facts the voters likely would have made different decisions in 2008! BHO is who he wants to be when the situation calls!

  4. 4


    Hey, it’s not like he belongs to an organization that teaches that God was the product of a sexual union between another God and Goddess, that Jesus had three wives and was the brother of Lucifer, and that all who keep the faith can be rewarded in the afterlife by becoming Gods of their own planets.

    Before you call me a religious bigot, do your research. And don’t forget your endless attacks on “Obama’s Muslim Faith” and/or his “Black Liberation Theology.” Attacks which, by the way, weren’t anywhere near as accurate as the single sentence I posted just above.

    A member of the New Party. pfft! Big deal.

  5. 5


    BTW . . . If you think any of that bothers me, think again. I’d vote for a Buddhist if I though him or her to be the best person for the job. I might even consider it a plus. This is your problem to deal with. Not mine.

  6. 6


    @Greg: What concerns us Greg is you idea of what the best person is and how he will run the country. You voted and continue to support a socialist. That means he has a specific ideology that is inconsistent with the values of our founding documents and the majority of the US population. If the MSN had done their job and let everyone know BHO was a socialist and he palled around with domestic terrorists, he would not have been elected.

  7. 8

    another vet

    @Greg: In 2008, he denied he was a member of the party or sought its endorsement. The facts that are coming out that show otherwise making him a liar. You accused Romney of being a liar but have no problem with Obama lying. Thanks for the clarification.

  8. 9



    Why is it only Leftists we hear harping on Romney’s Mormonism? Clearly because they are trying hard to spread bigoted anti-Morman commentary in order to convince evangelicals not to support him. This is worse than simple prejudice, as it is a calculated attempt to whip up intolerance towards a religious group purely for political reasons. That in my book makes you Greg a despicable sleazebag and yes still a bigot.

    The now proven fact of Obama’s being a card carrying socialist extremist while he and the MSM hid this truth from the voters is a very big deal indeed, as the goal of the New Party socialists was to replace our Constitutional proscribed form of government into an elitist controlled Socialistic regime, in clear violation of their oaths of office and in total contempt for the established Law Of The Land. This secretive infiltration of the Democratic party in order to insinuate their socialist candidates and perform a con-job on unaware voters (the Democratic party faithful and later to the nation as a whole,) was a complete betrayal of public faith and trust.

  9. 11


    @Ditto, #9:

    Why is it only Leftists we hear harping on Romney’s Mormonism?

    I think there’s curiosity as to why the silence about it on the other side is so deafening. The proper sort of religion always seemed like a big deal over there.

  10. 12

    another vet

    @Greg: Why did he go to their meetings? Just for grins or to get their endorsement? Normally, when a politician meets with a group under those circumstances, it’s to secure their endorsement. In 2008, Team Obama specifically said, he never sought their endorsement. Look at the situation. Of course he was there seeking their endorsement. That enabled him to build a tie to that part of the community and further his future political ambitions. As for the membership, I agree, Kurtz needs to produce the documentation or STFU. And if he does, there will be spin denying it probably to the point where the claim will be made it wasn’t his signature or he was forced at gunpoint.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *