Barack Obama's Stealth Socialism
Election '08: Before friendly audiences, Barack Obama speaks
passionately about something called "economic justice." He uses the term
obliquely, though, speaking in code — socialist code.

By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY | Posted Monday, July 28, 2008 4:20 PM PT

IBD Series: The Audacity Of Socialism
<http://www.ibdeditorials.com/series8.aspx>


During his NAACP speech earlier this month, Sen. Obama repeated the term
at least four times. "I've been working my entire adult life to help
build an America where economic justice is being served," he said at the
group's 99th annual convention in Cincinnati.

And as president, "we'll ensure that economic justice is served," he
asserted. "That's what this election is about." Obama never spelled out
the meaning of the term, but he didn't have to. His audience knew what
he meant, judging from its thumping approval.

It's the rest of the public that remains in the dark, which is why we're
launching this special educational series.

"Economic justice" simply means punishing the successful and
redistributing their wealth by government fiat. It's a euphemism for
socialism.

In the past, such rhetoric was just that — rhetoric. But Obama's
positioning himself with alarming stealth to put that rhetoric into
action on a scale not seen since the birth of the welfare state.

In his latest memoir he shares that he'd like to "recast" the welfare
net that FDR and LBJ cast while rolling back what he derisively calls
the "winner-take-all" market economy that Ronald Reagan reignited (with
record gains in living standards for all).

Obama also talks about "restoring fairness to the economy," code for
soaking the "rich" — a segment of society he fails to understand
that includes mom-and-pop businesses filing individual tax returns.

It's clear from a close reading of his two books that he's a firm
believer in class envy. He assumes the economy is a fixed pie, whereby
the successful only get rich at the expense of the poor.

Following this discredited Marxist model, he believes government must
step in and redistribute pieces of the pie. That requires massive
transfers of wealth through government taxing and spending, a return to
the entitlement days of old.

Of course, Obama is too smart to try to smuggle such hoary collectivist
garbage through the front door. He's disguising the wealth transfers as
"investments" — "to make America more competitive," he says, or
"that give us a fighting chance," whatever that means.

Among his proposed "investments":

• "Universal," "guaranteed" health care.

• "Free" college tuition.

• "Universal national service" (a la Havana).

• "Universal 401(k)s" (in which the government would match
contributions made by "low- and moderate-income families").

• "Free" job training (even for criminals).

• "Wage insurance" (to supplement dislocated union workers' old
income levels).

• "Free" child care and "universal" preschool.

• More subsidized public housing.

• A fatter earned income tax credit for "working poor."

• And even a Global Poverty Act that amounts to a Marshall Plan for
the Third World, first and foremost Africa.

His new New Deal also guarantees a "living wage," with a $10 minimum
wage indexed to inflation; and "fair trade" and "fair labor practices,"
with breaks for "patriot employers" who cow-tow to unions, and sticks
for "nonpatriot" companies that don't.

That's just for starters — first-term stuff.

Obama doesn't stop with socialized health care. He wants to socialize
your entire human resources department — from payrolls to pensions.
His social-microengineering even extends to mandating all employers
provide seven paid sick days per year to salary and hourly workers
alike.

You can see why Obama was ranked, hands-down, the most liberal member of
the Senate by the National Journal. Some, including colleague and
presidential challenger John McCain, think he's the most liberal member
in Congress.

But could he really be "more left," as McCain recently remarked, than
self-described socialist Sen. Bernie Sanders (for whom Obama has openly
campaigned, even making a special trip to Vermont to rally voters)?

Obama's voting record, going back to his days in the Illinois
statehouse, says yes. His career path — and those who guided it
— leads to the same unsettling conclusion.

The seeds of his far-left ideology were planted in his formative years
as a teenager in Hawaii — and they were far more radical than any
biography or profile in the media has portrayed.

A careful reading of Obama's first memoir, "Dreams From My Father,"
reveals that his childhood mentor up to age 18 — a man he
cryptically refers to as "Frank" — was none other than the late
communist Frank Marshall Davis, who fled Chicago after the FBI and
Congress opened investigations into his "subversive," "un-American
activities."

As Obama was preparing to head off to college, he sat at Davis' feet in
his Waikiki bungalow for nightly bull sessions. Davis plied his
impressionable guest with liberal doses of whiskey and advice,
including: Never trust the white establishment.

"They'll train you so good," he said, "you'll start believing what they
tell you about equal opportunity and the American way and all that
sh**."

After college, where he palled around with Marxist professors and took
in socialist conferences "for inspiration," Obama followed in Davis'
footsteps, becoming a "community organizer" in Chicago.

His boss there was Gerald Kellman, whose identity Obama also tries to
hide in his book. Turns out Kellman's a disciple of the late Saul "The
Red" Alinsky, a hard-boiled Chicago socialist who wrote the "Rules for
Radicals" and agitated for social revolution in America.

The Chicago-based Woods Fund provided Kellman with his original $25,000
to hire Obama. In turn, Obama would later serve on the Woods board with
terrorist Bill Ayers of the Weather Underground. Ayers was one of
Obama's early political supporters.

After three years agitating with marginal success for more welfare
programs in South Side Chicago, Obama decided he would need to study law
to "bring about real change" — on a large scale.

While at Harvard Law School, he still found time to hone his organizing
skills. For example, he spent eight days in Los Angeles taking a
national training course taught by Alinsky's Industrial Areas
Foundation. With his newly minted law degree, he returned to Chicago to
reapply — as well as teach — Alinsky's "agitation" tactics.

(A video-streamed bio on Obama's Web site includes a photo of him
teaching in a University of Chicago classroom. If you freeze the frame
and look closely at the blackboard Obama is writing on, you can make out
the words "Power Analysis" and "Relationships Built on Self Interest"
— terms right out of Alinsky's rule book.)

Amid all this, Obama reunited with his late father's communist tribe in
Kenya, the Luo, during trips to Africa.

As a Nairobi bureaucrat, Barack Hussein Obama Sr., a Harvard-educated
economist, grew to challenge the ruling pro-Western government for not
being socialist enough. In an eight-page scholarly paper published in
1965, he argued for eliminating private farming and nationalizing
businesses "owned by Asians and Europeans."

His ideas for communist-style expropriation didn't stop there. He also
proposed massive taxes on the rich to "redistribute our economic gains
to the benefit of all."

"Theoretically, there is nothing that can stop the government from
taxing 100% of income so long as the people get benefits from the
government commensurate with their income which is taxed," Obama Sr.
wrote. "I do not see why the government cannot tax those who have more
and syphon some of these revenues into savings which can be utilized in
investment for future development."

Taxes and "investment" . . . the fruit truly does not fall far from the
vine.

(Voters might also be interested to know that Obama, the supposed
straight shooter, does not once mention his father's communist leanings
in an entire book dedicated to his memory.)

In Kenya's recent civil unrest, Obama privately phoned the leader of the
opposition Luo tribe, Raila Odinga, to voice his support. Odinga is so
committed to communism he named his oldest son after Fidel Castro.

With his African identity sewn up, Obama returned to Chicago and fell
under the spell of an Afrocentric pastor. It was a natural attraction.
The Rev. Jeremiah Wright preaches a Marxist version of Christianity
called "black liberation theology" and has supported the communists in
Cuba, Nicaragua and elsewhere.

Obama joined Wright's militant church, pledging allegiance to a system
of "black values" that demonizes white "middle classness" and other
mainstream pursuits.

(Obama in his first book, published in 1995, calls such values
"sensible." There's no mention of them in his new book.)

With the large church behind him, Obama decided to run for political
office, where he could organize for "change" more effectively. "As an
elected official," he said, "I could bring church and community leaders
together easier than I could as a community organizer or lawyer."

He could also exercise real, top-down power, the kind that grass-roots
activists lack. Alinsky would be proud.

Throughout his career, Obama has worked closely with a network of
stone-cold socialists and full-blown communists striving for "economic
justice."

He's been traveling in an orbit of collectivism that runs from Nairobi
to Honolulu, and on through Chicago to Washington.

Yet a recent AP poll found that only 6% of Americans would describe
Obama as "liberal," let alone socialist.

Public opinion polls usually reflect media opinion, and the media by and
large have portrayed Obama as a moderate "outsider" (the No. 1 term
survey respondents associate him with) who will bring a "breath of fresh
air" to Washington.

The few who have drilled down on his radical roots have tended to
downplay or pooh-pooh them. Even skeptics have failed to connect the
dots for fear of being called the dreaded "r" word.

But too much is at stake in this election to continue mincing words.

Both a historic banking crisis and 1970s-style stagflation loom over the
economy. Democrats, who already control Congress, now threaten to
filibuster-proof the Senate in what could be a watershed election for
them — at both ends of Pennsylvania Avenue.

A perfect storm of statism is forming, and our economic freedoms are at
serious risk.

Those who care less about looking politically correct than preserving
the free-market individualism that's made this country great have to
start calling things by their proper name to avert long-term disaster.




  [http://icanplainlysee.files.wordpress.com/2008/06/obama20halo3.gif]

Reply via email to