November 27, 2011
#1. The Center for American Progress: From David Horowitz and Discover The Networks:
On virtually every policy matter—health-care reform, fiscal policy, civil rights, immigration, housing, labor, national security, foreign policy, media, energy, or the environment—CAP’s recommendations fit hand-in-glove with the Obama administration’s values and agendas. In many cases, as in the examples cited above, the administration actually follows CAP’s instructions.
After Barack Obama was elected President in 2008, CAP served as perhaps the most influential organization advising the new administration. Among Obama’s leading advisers were John Podesta and at least ten additional CAP experts. CAP formulates policy for the administration and supplies the White House with a steady stream of talking points designed to make that policy palatable to the public. Indeed, as of December 2008, before then-President-elect Obama had even taken his oath of office, he had already pledged his intent to fulfill some of CAP’s chief policy recommendations. These included the Center’s call for a gradual withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq coupled with a buildup of forces in Afghanistan, a plan to implement universal health-care coverage, and a plan to create “green jobs” designed to combat “global warming.” According to Bloomberg.com, CAP “has become … an intellectual wellspring for Democratic policy proposals, including many that are shaping the agenda of the … Obama administration.”
Robert Dreyfuss reports in the March 1, 2004 edition of The Nation: “The idea for the Center began with discussions in 2002 between [Morton] Halperin and George Soros, the billionaire investor. … Halperin, who heads the office of Soros’ Open Society Institute, brought [former Clinton chief of staff John] Podesta into the discussion, and beginning in late 2002 Halperin and Podesta circulated a series of papers to funders.”
Soros and Halperin recruited Harold Ickes — chief fundraiser and former deputy chief of staff for the Clinton White House — to help organize the Center. It was launched on July 7, 2003 as the American Majority Institute. The name was changed to Center for American Progress (CAP) on September 1, 2003. The official purpose of the Center was to provide the left with something it supposedly lacked — a think tank of its own.
Persistent press leaks confirm that Hillary Clinton, and not Podesta, is ultimately in charge of CAP. “It’s the official Hillary Clinton think tank,” an inside source confided to Christian Bourge of United Press International. Robert Dreyfuss notes in The Nation, “In looking at Podesta’s center, there’s no escaping the imprint of the Clintons. It’s not completely wrong to see it as a shadow government, a kind of Clinton White-House-in-exile — or a White House staff in readiness for President Hillary Clinton.” Dreyfuss notes the abundance of Clintonites on the Center’s staff, among them Clinton’s national security speechwriter Robert Boorstin; Democratic Leadership Council staffer and former head of Clinton’s National Economic Council Gene Sperling; former senior advisor to Clinton’s Office of Management and Budget Matt Miller; and others. In 2007, Mrs. Clinton told the YearlyKos convention of leftwing bloggers that she “helped to start and support” CAP.
Regarding the new think tank proposed by Soros and Halperin, Hillary Clinton told Matt Bai of The New York Times Magazineon October 12, 2003, “We need some new intellectual capital. There has to be some thought given as to how we build the 21st-century policies that reflect the Democrat Party‘s values.” She later told The Nation‘s Robert Dreyfuss, “We’ve had the challenge of filling a void on our side of the ledger for a long time, while the other side created an infrastructure that has come to dominate political discourse. The Center is a welcome effort to fill that void.”
#2: The “Shadow Party”
In one of his most significant and effective efforts to shape the American political landscape, Soros was the prime mover in the creation of the so-called “Shadow Democratic Party,” or “Shadow Party,” in 2003. This term refers to a nationwide network of more than five-dozen unions, non-profit activist groups, and think tanks whose agendas are ideologically to the left, and which are engaged in campaigning for the Democrats. This network’s activities include fundraising, get-out-the-vote drives, political advertising, opposition research, and media manipulation.
- Morton H. Halperin: Director of Soros’ Open Society Institute
- John Podesta: Democrat strategist and former chief of staff forBill Clinton
- Jeremy Rosner: Democrat strategist and pollster, ex-foreign policy speechwriter for Bill Clinton
- Robert Boorstin: Democrat strategist and pollster, ex-national security speechwriter for Bill Clinton
- Carl Pope: Co-founder of America Coming Together,Democrat strategist, and Sierra Club Executive Director
- Steve Rosenthal: Labor leader, CEO of America Coming Together, and former chief advisor on union matters to Clinton Labor Secretary Robert Reich
- Peter Lewis: Major Democrat donor and insurance entrepreneur
- Rob Glaser: Major Democrat donor and Silicon Valley pioneer
- Ellen Malcolm: Co-founder and President of America Coming Together, and founder of EMILY’s List
- Rob McKay: Major Democrat donor, Taco Bell heir, and McKay Family Foundation President
- Lewis and Dorothy Cullman: Major Democrat donors
To develop the Shadow Party as a cohesive entity, Harold Ickes undertook the task of building a 21st-century version of the Left’s traditional alliance of the “oppressed” and “disenfranchised.” By the time Ickes was done, he had created or helped to create six new groups,and had co-opted a seventh called MoveOn.org. Together, these seven groups constituted the administrative core of the newly formed Shadow Party:
- America Coming Together
- America Votes
- Center for American Progress
- Joint Victory Campaign 2004
- Media Fund
- Thunder Road Group
These organizations, along with the many leftist groups with which they collaborate, have played a major role in helping Soros advance his political and social agendas.
According to Richard Poe, co-author (with David Horowitz) of the 2006 book The Shadow Party:
“The Shadow Party is the real power driving the Democrat machine. It is a network of radicals dedicated to transforming our constitutional republic into a socialist hive. The leader of these radicals is … George Soros. He has essentially privatized the Democratic Party, bringing it under his personal control. The Shadow Party is the instrument through which he exerts that control. … It works by siphoning off hundreds of millions of dollars in campaign contributions that would have gone to the Democratic Party in normal times, and putting those contributions at the personal disposal of Mr. Soros. He then uses that money to buy influence and loyalty where he sees fit. In 2003, Soros set up a network of privately-owned groups which acts as a shadow or mirror image of the Party. It performs all the functions we would normally expect the real Democratic Party to perform, such as shaping the Party platform, fielding candidates, running campaigns, and so forth. However, it performs these functions under the private supervision of Mr. Soros and his associates. The Shadow Party derives its power from its ability to raise huge sums of money. By controlling the Democrat purse strings, the Shadow Party can make or break any Democrat candidate by deciding whether or not to fund him. During the 2004 election cycle, the Shadow Party raised more than $300 million for Democrat candidates, prompting one of its operatives, MoveOn PAC director Eli Pariser, to declare, ‘Now it’s our party. We bought it, we own it…’”
#3: The Traditions and Development of Progressivism through the Center for American Progress:
The new Progressive Tradition Series from the Center for American Progress traces the development of progressivism as a social and political tradition stretching from the late 19th century reform efforts to the current day. The series is designed primarily for educational and leadership development purposes to help students and activists better understand the foundations of progressive thought and its relationship to politics and social movements. Although the Progressive Studies Program has its own views about the relative merit of the various values, ideas, and actors discussed within the progressive tradition, the essays included in the series are descriptive and analytical rather than opinion based. We envision the essays serving as primers for exploring progressivism and liberalism in more depth through core texts—and in contrast to the conservative intellectual tradition and canon. We hope that these papers will promote ongoing discourse about the proper role of the state and individual in society, the relationship between empirical evidence and policymaking, and how progressives today might approach specific issues involving the economy, health care, energy-climate change, education, financial regulation, social and cultural affairs, and international relations and national security.
Part one examines the philosophical and theoretical development of progressivism as a response to the rise of industrial capitalism in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Read part one »
Part two examines the politics of national progressivism from the agrarian populists to the Great Society. Read part two »
Part three examines the influence of social movements for equality and economic justice on the development of progressivism. Read part three »
Part four of the series examines the important role of human rights in the development of progressive thought and activism both domestically and globally. Read part four »
Part five examines the relationship between progressivism and America’s founding. Read part five »
Part six examines the religious roots of progressivism. Read part six »
#4. Helping to Set Policy with CHINA?
Center for American Progresss’ Trip to CHINA with Andy Stern in tow:
Read the entire report HERE.
Center for American Progress Delegation during visit to CHINA.
(Andy Stern far left. John Podesta Center Left)
Why Are Andy Stern and Anna Burger of the SEIU Partisan To China’s ACFTU (Ties To Chinese Communist Party)?
A 10-day trip in May(2007) by a high profile delegation from Change to Win (CtW), and a recent letter on China’s proposed draft labor law from the General Secretary of the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) to China’s President spotlight new approaches by the world’s trade unions as they grapple with how to deal with China’s emergence as a global economic powerhouse—and how to promote labor rights for Chinese workers.
The Change to Win delegation which included Teamster President James Hoffa, SEIU President Andy Stern, United FarmWorkers President Aruto Rodriguez, CtW Chair Anna Burger, and CtW Executive Director Greg Tarpinian met with Chinese government officials, executives from US based companies doing business in China, and significantly, with officials from the All China Federation of Trade Unions (ACFTU), the government controlled union federation to which all Chinese unions must belong.
Anna Burger, president of Change to Win (CTW), and Wang Zhaoguo, president of the All-China Federation of Trade Unions (ACFTU), shake hands after signing a memorandum to facilitate exchanges and cooperation between the two federations.
This type of agreement could be useful. The protocol reportedly includes a clause encouraging cooperation within the framework of common transnational employers sought by the Teamsters. However its positive potential can only be realized by it being followed up by concrete and practical exchanges at sectoral and local levels closer to the more than 100 million Chinese workers that ACFTU claims to represent and the six million members of unions currently affiliated to the CTW.
Related Link: Soros Fixer Podesta Meets with Chinese Reds
SOURCE: XINHUA NEWS SERVICE
BEIJING, Nov. 18, 2011 (Xinhua) — Li Yuanchao, a member of the Political Bureau of the Communist Party of China (CPC) Central Committee, met with a U.S. delegation here on Friday, calling for the “stable development” of bilateral ties between China and the United States.
“The stable development of the China-U.S. relationship is not only related to the interests of the people of the two nations, but also to the peace, stability and development of the whole world,” Li told the delegation from the Center for American Progress, a Washington-based think tank.
“The two countries need to respect each other’s core interests and major concerns, enhance mutual strategic trust and expand reciprocal cooperation to advance the partnership between China and the United States,” said Li, who is also the head of the Organization Department of the CPC Central Committee.
John Podesta, president and CEO of the Center for American Progress, said that the think tank is willing to continue to put forth efforts for further exchanges and dialogue with the Chinese side, and make contributions to improving bilateral ties.
FOR MORE ON John Podesta and the Center for American Progress, please read: John Podesta, the Center for American Progress, and the Communist-friendly Modern Progressive Movement.
#5: STATEMENT: Anna Burger Joins Center for American Progress Action Fund Board of Directors
December 9, 2010
Washington, D.C.—The following is a statement from John D. Podesta, Chairman of the Board of Directors of the Center for American Progress Action Fund:
“The Center for American Progress Action Fund is pleased to welcome Anna Burger to our Board of Directors. She has been a longtime friend of the Center for American Progress and CAP Action and we’re very happy that she has agreed to help us advance our mission by serving in this new capacity.
Anna Burger has been fighting hard for progressive ideas and policies for nearly 40 years, including the visionary leadership she has provided for the progressive movement over the past decade. We face numerous opportunities and many challenges over the next two years and look forward to Anna’s help in charting our course. As we continue to push for an economy built on a strong middle class that works for all Americans, Anna’s continued leadership and experience could not come at a more important time.”
Anna Burger recently retired after serving as the secretary treasurer of, Service Employees International Union, or SEIU, the nation’s fastest growing union. Burger was the chair of Change to Win, and the first woman to head an American labor federation.Burger is a member of the President’s Economic Recovery Advisory Board and has been an outspoken voice on the role the unions can play to restore economic fairness and rebuild the American economy.
November 18, 2010
The liberal Center for American Progress doesn’t believe significant GOP gains in the House and Senate should stop the president from implementing more of his polices. The group released a report Tuesday suggesting ways Obama can bypass Congress to accomplish a progressive agenda, and it cites the president’s power as commander-in-chief to make its point.
“I think most of the conversation since the election has been about how President Obama adjusts to the new situation on Capitol Hill,” Center for American Progress head and former Bill Clinton Chief of Staff John Podesta told the Daily Caller. “While that’s an important conversation, it simply ignores the president’s ability to use all levels of his power and authority to move the country forward.”
How does one “move the country forward”? In the center’s report, Podesta explains that Obama can use executive orders, rule-making, and even the armed forces “to accomplish important change” and that such means “should not be underestimated.”
What exactly does Podesta think the president should use such powers to “accomplish”? Among others, the report suggests “job creation,“ ”quality affordable health care,“ ”sustainable security,“ and ”a clean energy future.”
The report cites specific goals such as mitigating the effects of the military’s “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy, supporting a Palestinian state, and reducing greenhouse gasses by 17 percent by 2020.
“The U.S. Constitution and the laws of our nation grant the president significant authority to make and implement policy,” Podesta writes. ”Congressional gridlock does not mean the federal government stands still.”