Thanks To Some Inept Senators In Congress…..We Now Have Czar Sunstein. Sunstein: Obama, not courts, should interpret law


Are some Senators in our Congress just plain inept (Displaying a lack of judgment, sense, or reason; foolish), dunces or just plain idiots?

Will the ones that voted for Czar Cass Sunstein’s confirmation pull a Charlie Gibson of “I didn’t know”?


Sunstein: Obama, not courts, should interpret law

‘Beliefs and commitments’ of nation’s leader should supersede judges

September 18, 2009
By Aaron Klein

The interpretation of federal law should be made not by judges but by the beliefs and commitments of the U.S. president and those around him, according to President Obama’s newly confirmed regulatory czar, Cass Sunstein.

“There is no reason to believe that in the face of statutory ambiguity, the meaning of federal law should be settled by the inclinations and predispositions of federal judges. The outcome should instead depend on the commitments and beliefs of the President and those who operate under him,” argued Sunstein.

This statement was the central thesis of Sunstein’s 2006 Yale Law School paper, “Beyond Marbury: The Executive’s Power to Say What the Law Is.” The paper, in which he argues the president and his advisers should be the ones to interpret federal laws, was obtained and reviewed by WND.

Sunstein debated the precedent-setting 1803 case, Marbury v. Madison, which determined it is “emphatically the province and duty of the judicial department to say what the law is.”

He lamented multiple recent examples of U.S. presidents interpreting law only to have their interpretations overturned by the Supreme Court.

He concludes “the executive should usually be permitted to interpret (law) as it reasonably sees fit.”

“The allocation of law-interpreting power to the executive fits admirably well with the twentieth-century shift from common law courts to regulatory administration if the governing statute is ambiguous,” he writes.

Sunstein is not shy about expressing his radical beliefs in papers and books, although many of his controversial arguments have received little to no news media attention or public scrutiny.

Earlier this week, WND first reported Sunstein drew up in an academic book a “First Amendment New Deal” – a new “Fairness Doctrine” that would include the establishment of a panel of “nonpartisan experts” to ensure “diversity of view” on the airwaves.

WND also reported Sunstein proposed a radical new “bill of rights” in a 2004 book, “The Second Bill of Rights: FDR’S Unfinished Revolution and Why We Need It More than Ever,” in which he advanced the radical notion that welfare rights, including some controversial inceptions, be granted by the state.

WND has learned that in April 2005, Sunstein opened up a conference at Yale Law School entitled “The Constitution in 2020,” which sought to change the nature and interpretation of the Constitution by that year.

Sunstein has been a main participant in the movement, which openly seeks to create a “progressive” consensus as to what the U.S. Constitution should provide for by the year 2020. It also suggests strategy for how liberal lawyers and judges might bring such a constitutional regime into being.

Read this entire article HERE:


His confirmation was held up in June 2009 because of his beliefs.

It is not like his beliefs and background were not discussed on the Senate floor:

Discussion excerpt from Sen. Sessions (the day Sunstein was confirmed 9-10-09) on Senate floor follows:


During President Reagan’s time, I believe, Congress passed a law that created this position: the Administrator for the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, the idea being to have another unelected bureaucrat–and that is what this one is–but to be a central clearinghouse for all the proposed regulations and to question the lawfulness or the necessity or the cost of these thousands of regulations that get promulgated on a yearly basis.
It is an important position that can protect and at least somewhat ensure that our constitutional liberties are not being eroded.

“Enter Mr. Sunstein . He is a most likable person, a national intellectual, always interesting, sometimes taking positions that those on the left–of which he clearly is a part–disagree. Indisputably, he is a man of the left. However, he has taken, over the years, quite a number of positions, some of which are pretty shocking. So I think he is not normally the kind of person you would appoint to this kind of green-eyeshades position–somebody who would be sitting down on a daily basis reading the regulations and studying them and researching them–to be a free spirit, as our nominee is. So I have some concerns about it.

Over the course of his career in academia, Professor Sunstein has clearly advocated a number of positions that are outside–well outside–the American mainstream. While much of the criticism of his nomination rightly has focused on his animal rights advocacy, where he, in effect, and plainly said he thought animals should be able to have lawyers appointed to defend their interests–and these are controversial matters–but he has other legal writings that are controversial also and do not just deal with the question of animal rights. I would like to highlight just a few of those positions.

In his 2008 book titled “Nudge: Improving Decisions About Health, Wealth and Happiness,” Professor Sunstein advocates an approach to the law based on economic and behavioral principles which he dubs “libertarian paternalism.”

Under Professor Sunstein’s theory, the government can take steps to “nudge” individuals toward making what he would say are better decisions, and at least what the government considers to be more desirable social behavior.

Professor Sunstein argues that the government can achieve these goals while not being actively, or at least obviously, coercive. His theory operates on the assumption that the average person is “lazy, busy, impulsive, inert, irrational, and highly susceptible to predictable biases and errors.”

So the government needs to be a little paternalistic, he suggests, and take care of them and issue regulations and pass laws that keep them from doing things that some bureaucrat or some Congressman thinks is not socially desirable.”

As Professor Sunstein argues:

For too long, the United States has been trapped in a debate between the laissez-faire types who believe markets will solve all our problems and the command-and-control types who believe that if there is a market failure then you need a mandate. The laissez-faire types are right that ….. government can blunder, so opt-outs are important. The mandate types are right that people are fallible, and they make mistakes, and sometimes people who are specialists know better and can steer people in directions that will make their lives better.

That is what he has said.

Presumably, in Professor Sunstein’s view, the “specialists” who “know better” than ordinary Americans are government bureaucrats. He seems to believe Americans are “lazy” and “inert,” and I think this is not a healthy view. So I question whether anyone who thinks Americans are fundamentally lazy can perform his role as the gatekeeper of government regulation in the Obama administration.

Professor Sunstein’s approach is consistent with much of what we have seen from this administration, I have to say, which seems to believe that government control of health care, the financial markets, and the business community generally is preferable to free market policies. Americans are not comfortable with this.

I have been out having townhall meetings. I know they are not comfortable with it. According to recent polling, 52 percent of voters worry that the government will do too much to “help” the economy.

That is from a Rasmussen poll of June 2, 2009. Fifty-nine percent of voters believe the financial bailouts were a “bad idea.” The masters of the universe thought it was going to be great. We spent $800 billion, the largest expenditure in the history of the American Republic, and every penny of that is going to the national debt because we were already in debt. We borrowed every penny of it. We have had very low stimulative effect from that. The American people are right about that.

Only 31 percent of voters believe this stimulus bill has helped the economy. And we do not need a poll to tell us how uncomfortable the American people are with the President’s effort to overhaul health care.

So the American people ought to understand if we confirm Professor Sunstein , he will be the chief architect and gatekeeper over all of the regulations that this administration will be attempting to implement in a myriad of areas.”


After Senator Sessions completed his discussion:

Under the previous order, the question is, will the Senate advise and consent to the nomination of Cass R. Sunstein , of Massachusetts, to be Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget?

The Senator from Minnesota is recognized.

Ms. KLOBUCHAR. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?

There is a sufficient second.

The clerk will call the roll.

The assistant legislative clerk called the roll.

Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from California (Mrs. BOXER) and the Senator from West Virginia (Mr. BYRD) are necessarily absent.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber desiring to vote?

The result was announced–yeas 57, nays 40, as follows:

[Rollcall Vote No. 274 Ex.]











































Nelson (FL)










Udall (CO)

Udall (NM)



































Nelson (NE)














The nomination was confirmed.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the motion to reconsider is considered made and laid upon the table.

The President shall be immediately notified of the Senate’s action


My own end note:

Is your Senator on the list of Yea’s?

Mine is and I will start to work toward voting them OUT in their next re-election cycle.


Obama Manufacturing “Czar” Ron Bloom’s Socialist Vision for US Industry


Obama “Czar” Ron Bloom’s Socialist Vision for US Industry


From New Zeal: Reprinted with assistance and permission from Trevor Loudon.

Obama file 85 here

Ron Bloom was named the Manufacturing Czar for the United States by President Barack Obama on September 8, 2009-two days after communist “Green Jobs Czar” Van Jones resigned under pressure.

To understand Ron Bloom’s assigned role, it helps to know the environment he comes from.

The Obama administration has emphasised Bloom’s investment banking and business background.

But Bloom has spent far longer in the labor and socialist movements than he has on Wall Street. There is even some evidence that Bloom specifically went into banking, in order to better serve organized labor.

Like Obama himself, Bloom has moved in circles close to Democratic Socialists of America (DSA)-an organization far more “socialist” than “democratic”.

To illustrate DSA’s radicalism I cite their journal Democratic Left, Spring 2007. The article by Detroit DSA chair and National Political Committee member David Green supports the Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA)-or “card check”.

What distinguishes socialists from other progressives is the theory of surplus value. According to Marx, the secret of surplus value is that workers are a source of more value than they receive in wages. The capitalist is able to capture surplus value through his ownership of the means of production, his right to purchase labor as a commodity, his control over the production process, and his ownership of the final product. Surplus value is the measure of capital’s exploitation of labor

Our goal as socialists is to abolish private ownership of the means of production. Our immediate task is to limit the capitalist class’s prerogatives in the workplace…

In the short run we must at least minimize the degree of exploitation of workers by capitalists. We can accomplish this by promoting full employment policies, passing local living wage laws, but most of all by increasing the union movement’s power…

The Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA) provides an excellent organizing tool through which we can pursue our socialist strategy while simultaneously engaging the broader electorate on an issue of economic populism.

Green explained how DSA could play a role in getting the Act passed through the Senate after the 2008 elections.

The fact that we face an uphill battle in the Senate does not detract from the value of DSA doing organizing work around EFCA. At a minimum, we can force conservative senators to place themselves on record as opposed to EFCA. This would then make these incumbents even more vulnerable in the 2008 elections. If we replace only a few of these anti-labor senators in 2008, we should be able to pass EFCA in the next Congress.

DSA could play a role in organizing support for EFCA. We have locals and activists across the country capable of organizing successful public events – as demonstrated by our Sanders house parties. We have “notables” capable of attracting non-DSA members to public events. We have academics, writers and speakers capable of elucidating public policy issues in clear and simple language. We have a solid relationship with several major unions-UAW, USW, IAM.

Green went on to explain how DSA’s EFCA campaign could work-DSA could organize public meetings in coalition with other groups, including the AFL-CIO’s Voice at Work Department, state AFL-CIOs and central labor councils, American Rights at Work, America Votes, Progressive Democrats of America, Committees of Correspondence, ACORN and state Democratic parties.

Green also listed individuals who could be invited to speak in support including John Edwards, John Sweeney , Cornel West, Barbara Ehrenreich, Leo Gerard, Ron Gettlefinger, David Bonior and openly socialist Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders.

Note that Green emphasises DSA’s ties to USW-United Steel Workers of America- also that the list of speakers included four DSA members AFL-CIO president John Sweeney , Cornel West, Barbara Ehrenreich and David Bonior, plus Steel Workers Union President Leo Gerard.

Interestingly it was Leo Gerard who recruited Ron Bloom into the USW in 1996.

“I said, why don’t you come work at what you really believe in?…He could play a lead role in bargaining, play a role in a number of different sectors in the economy and shape policy.”

Bloom initially served as an adviser to then union president George Becker, then to Leo Gerard when he assumed leadership in 2001.

George Becker was close to DSA-serving on the board of the Economic Policy Instiute under DSA member Larry Mishel.

In 1996 Becker also helped found campaign for America’s Future-with DSA linked activists John Atlas, Barry Bluestone, Julian Bond, Richard Cloward, Peter Dreier, Barbara Ehrenreich, Jackie Kendall, Nelson Lichtenstein, Steve Max, Jay Mazur, Gerald McEntee, Harold Meyerson, Larry Mishel, Frances Fox Piven, Joel Rogers, Richard Rorty and John Sweeney.

In 1997, George Becker was honored by Chicago Democratic Socialists of America at their annual Debs – Thomas – Harrington Dinner-the first Steelworker to be an honoree at the event.

George Becker spoke with pride about his birthplace, Granite City, Illinois. In the 1920s, they had a Socialist Mayor and a Socialist Council and Eugene Debs was an honored speaker at many events. He also spoke of a relative of his wife, in Missouri, who ran for office as a Socialist when Norman Thomas ran for President.”

Leo Gerard, Ron Bloom’s most recent boss, is also well within the DSA “orbit”.

Gerard serves on the board of the DSA led Economic Policy Institute and on the advisory board of Wellstone Action with Julian Bond, Gerald McEntee and Frances Fox Piven. Wellstone Action is named after late Minnesota Senator Paul Wellstone, once faculty adviser to a DSA student group.

Leo Gerard also serves on the board of the Apollo Alliance with Joel Rogers and SEIU vice president and DSA member Gerry Hudson. It is unclear if Gerard has ever worked with Apollo founder Van Jones, or New York director, former Weather Underground terrorist leader Jeff Jones.

When Gerard became president of the United Steel Workers in 2001, Bob Roman of Chicago DSA wrote;

The USWA has a long tradition of militant, good mostly leadership. Now they have someone both militant and radical, which is not surprising as Girard is a Canadian export with ties to the Canadian New Democratic Party.

The New Democratic Party is the Canadian counterpart of Democratic Socialists of America-both organizations are Socialist International affiliates.

In May 2007 Chicago DSA honored Leo Gerard with its annual Debs – Thomas – Harrington award- the second Steelworker to be an honoree at the event.

For your lifetime of service to your union and its members;

For your leadership in building working class solidarity across borders;

For your advocacy of fair trade over free trade;

For your work in seeking public policies that support a healthy environment and energy independence;

For your commitment to finding a better way to run the economy for working people everywhere;

The Debs – Thomas – Harrington Dinner Committee does hereby present you with its annual award this 4th day of May, 2007.

Ron Bloom’s background is similarly socialist.

Much of Bloom’s childhood revolved around Habonim a progressive Labor Zionist youth movement that emphasizes cultural Judaism, socialism and social justice.”

At age 10, Bloom was sent with his two siblings to Camp Galil, a movement-run summer camp in Pennsylvania. He returned each season for the next four years-eventually becoming a camp counselor.

Bloom recently said of his Habonim experience;

“That’s part of what I try to do in my work life…That’s one of the things that made me want to work for Obama.”

After graduating from Wesleyan University in 1977, Bloom worked as an organizer and research and negotiating specialist for the SEIU-working for a time under John Sweeney.

He later worked as executive director of the Massachusetts Coalition for Full Employment and as New England Regional Director of the Jewish Labor Committee.

Incidentally the contact for the Detroit Jewish Labor Committee, Selma Goode, works closely in Greater Detroit DSA, with David Green, author of the Democratic Left tract which opened this post.

While at SEIU, Ron Bloom came to the conclusion that unions lacked the technical skills to negotiate with management teams and their advisers at the bargaining table.

“Unions were being backed into corners by companies and couldn’t understand on a sophisticated level, the company’s arguments…Labor needed to be armed with the equivalent skills.”

Bloom’s next mission was to learn the ways of Wall Street.

Bloom went to Harvard Business School, then became an investment banker with Lazard Freres, in New York.

According to future business partner Gene Keilin.

“He recruited himself to Lazard…Unlike most young bankers, he was fully formed by the time he got here. He worked really hard. He came as a very strong technical analyst. He understood valuation and financial instruments. The fact is he was a 24x7guy long before that term was ever coined.”

After a period in partnership with Keilin, Bloom took a pay cut in 1996 to join the Steel Workers Union as a Special Assistant to the President and later head of the Union’s Corporate Research, Industry Analysis and Pattern Bargaining Departments.

That Wall st did not dampen Bloom’s socialist zeal is evident in an article he contributed to the Fall 2006 edition of DSA’s Democratic Left.

Based on a remarks delivered to the metal industry’s Steel Success Strategies XXI conference in New York in June 2006, Bloom revealed a strong antipathy towards America’s traditional competitive free enterprise system.

The Steelworkers have some advice for industry execs on how to make sure there’s plenty for both shareholders and workers. The theme of this advice will be really quite simple – be hard-headed and pragmatic capitalists – run the companies and actively participate in the political process on the basis of what is good for your shareholders – and not based on outmoded nostrums about unions, free enterprise, deregulation, free markets and free trade.

In today’s world the blather about free trade, free-markets and the joys of competition is nothing but pablum for the suckers. The guys making the real money know that outsized returns are available to those who find the industries that get the system to work for them and the companies within those industries that dominate them.

Unsurprisingly Bloom promoted the virtues of business/union “partnership”;

The starting point is that companies need to get along with the union. Companies that establish a constructive partnership with their unions do far better for their shareholders than those that do not.

Socialized health care:

Health Care Costs-The first is one where conflicts between labor and management do still exist, and that is health care. On that issue, however, given the fact that the shareholders want us to get along, the answer is to get it out of collective bargaining and into the public sphere. That means that management must support universal single-payer national health care…

Industry “protection”;

Historically, the industry has focused on the threat from unfairly traded imported steel. And while that threat is real and should continue to be monitored, today the more immediate threat comes from the demand for steel being lost because those who use the steel will use it somewhere else…

The steel industry, in its own self-interest, needs to broadly engage in the fight to save the overall manufacturing sector. Every other nation in the world has a specific and targeted strategy to preserve or expand its manufacturing base…

The growth of China and India can be a great opportunity. But not if we, as Lenin so aptly put it, sell them the rope with which to hang us.

Steel industry managers need to repudiate the race-to-the bottom model of globalization. We need world trade that brings the bottom up, not the top down, and we need to tell the American government to do what every one of its trading partners does – stand up for those who operate on their soil.

State control of energy;

The steel industry and manufacturers in general need to stop worrying about offending their business school classmates, political soul mates, and friends at the country club and to stand up for their owners. It is time to support a comprehensive national energy program…

As Manufacturing Czar Ron Bloom will almost certainly push for a more centralized, unionized, government dependent manufacturing base-exactly what Democratic socialists of America are calling for.

He will almost certainly try to sell big business on socialized health care to make business more competitive. He will drive the labor union agenda from on high.

Bloom will almost certainly work closely in this with Labor Secretary Hilda Solis, who also has DSA connections.

David Bonior with Detroit DSA chair David Green, 2008

The pair will also be aided by John Bonior-a paid up Detroit DSA member (and colleague of David Green) who President Obama has delegated to re-unite the US’s two major labor federations AFL-CIO and Change to Win, under one banner.

Three of the most influential union affiliated officials of the Obama administration have connections to Democratic Socialists of America-an organization whose “goal as socialists is to abolish private ownership of the means of production“.

This doesn’t appear to worry the Obama administration-which is well known for its vigorous vetting procedures.

Perhaps it concerns you a little?

Obama file 87 here

Valerie Jarrett’s Radicalism



On September 9, 2009, I posted a blog via Trevor Loudon of New Zeal with the title of “Why was Obama’s “Brain” Valerie Jarrett So Happy To Hire Communist Van Jones? Was it fate? Is She Obama’s Handler?





On September 16, 2009, there was  an article that links to this titled:


Glenn Beck Exposes Valerie Jarrett’s Radicalism

by Ben Johnson

Thanks to Glenn Beck, the nation is beginning to see how high up the Obama administration’s chain-of-command radicalism is embedded. The problem doesn’t originate with Van Jones or some low-level staffer with ties to ACORN, but where the buck stops: the president, his wife, and their closest mutual friend and adviser Valerie Jarrett. On his radio show Tuesday, Beck interviewed Scott Baker, now of Breitbart TV, a self-described “news junkie” who clearly did his research on Jarrett.[1]

Jarrett’s relationship with the Obamas, incoming administration radicals, and a socialist revolutionary who says she “probably” rejects violence (and allegedly offered Rod Blagojevich access to Obama’s fundraisers if he appointed Jarrett to Obama’s senate seat) filled up 4,000 words in my article for Monday’s FrontPage Magazine. Jarrett is, by all accounts, the closest friend and adviser to the first family. Obama says he doesn’t make a decision without her, and Jarrett described her relationship with the president by saying, “We have kind of a mind meld.” That’s scary, since she recruited Van Jones, Regulation Czar Cass Sunstein, and FCC Chief Diversity Officer Mark Lloyd.[2] Administration staff said without her intervention, white advisers may have rejected “the often-legitimate concerns voiced by black leaders like [Al] Sharpton.” It’s more disturbing yet to explore the claustrophobic social circle of extremists she is facilitating into the White House.


Michelle Obama owes her career at Chicago’s city hall to Valerie Jarrett. In turn, Jarrett owes her secular career in real estate (at a firm called Habitat) to Marilyn Katz, an SDS radical who showed Days of Rage protesters how to fuse nails together to throw at oncoming police officers in 1968 Chicago. She is now a high-powered PR exec for Chi-town government agencies, a 40-year associate of former Weather Underground terrorist Bill Ayers, and according to Michelle Obama’s biographer, a vibrant part of the Obamas’ social circle. She spent the next 20 years fighting for a socialist “revolution” and promoting groups like the ACLU, Mother Jones, and UAW Local 719.

But Katz’s anti-American extremism was decades ago, when Barack Obama was seven, right? Asked six years ago if she had evolved since ‘68, she said while she, like Ayers, regrets “nothing,” she “would probably reject violence as a useful form of revolution.” Probably?

In 2004, Katz endorsed John Kerry but acknowledged his imperfection, writing, “The day after Bush’s defeat, the U.S. will still be an imperialist power.” Like all radicals, her all-consuming focus is transforming the nation into a socialist haven, adapting her techniques as the situation requires.

She thought Obama (for whom she raised tens of thousands of dollars) and Jarrett were the best instruments for this purpose. Rod Blagojevich writes in his new book that Katz contacted him after Obama’s election and “indicated that if I appointed Valerie Jarrett to the U.S. Senate, the Obama people would help me raise money from their network of contributors across the country.” Jarrett declined to pursue the seat, but repaid Katz by inviting her patron to attend the Obama administration’s 37th anniversary of Title IX in July.  


Baker picked up a few extra strands in the radio interview:

In fact, when you look even at Van Jones, one of the things that we looked at that Pam Key over at Naked Emporer News turned up was that Van Jones spoke in 1998 at a conference in Chicago, was the first Black Radical Congress [at which] Jeremiah Wright was also a speaker.

Though the Van Jones-Rev. Wright tie was perhaps a one-time affair, they share a common ideology.

The far greater threat is a stealth adviser who establishes the Obamas’s “whole notion of authenticity” by circumscribing their social reference to a world where Marilyn Katz, Bill Ayers, Rev. Wright, and Louis Farrakhan dictate the limits of acceptable debate. Understanding Jarrett’s influence over Obama is key to understanding him and the quasi- or overtly socialist advisers he’s hoisting upon our country. (Read Baker’s interview and my expose.)

1. Baker is a former longtime anchor of Pittsburgh’s WTAE-TV, as well as a teacher of the Leadership Institute’s Broadcast Journalism School, a Wheaton College grad, and a high school winner of the VFW Voice of Democracy Speech Contest.

2.Lloyd also got an assist from the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, George Soros’s Open Society Institute, and John Podesta’s Center for American Progress., the large and well-financed leftist network Lloyd served in various capacities.


My own End note:

The information is finally getting out to America.  WHERE the he!! are the other MSM’s besides Fox News?  Glenn Beck and Bill O’Reilly are maintaining MILLLIONS of viewers each day. 

HOW can Charlie Gibson of ABC not even know about the ACORN scandal? 

Accolades are to be given out toGlenn Beck, Trevor Loudon of New Zeal,, Breitbart news, Michelle Malkin, Atlas Shrugs, for their unabashed investigations and reports  ….. with bloggers that are unafraid to assist in the “spreading  of the news” via conduits such as blogs, twitter, etc.


The Liberal media bias is flagrant and unapologetic.

NBC and MSNBC has Jeffrey Immelt IN THE WHITE HOUSE.  NBC even has Obama paraphernalia for sale in its NBC store. GE is also connected to Jeffrey Immelt. Notice HOW MANY GE commercials you see lately?

ABC via George Stephanopoulos is connected to Ian Cameron (ABC producer of George’s SUNDAY MORNING SHOW…….Obama happens to be on this Sunday)  WHO IS MARRIED TO SUSAN RICE, Obama’s US Ambassador to the United Nations.

We assume CNN is definitely LEFT leaning media reporting.


America needs to WAKE UP!


What Would a Communist Do?


In addendum/adding  to Trevor Loudon’s work at New Zeal, I ran across this article posted in the American Thinker blog.

The following article is credited in its entirety to the author, Randall Hoven and American Thinker blog:

September 17, 2009

What Would a Communist Do?

By Randall Hoven

The best person to answer that question would be a communist.  Since I don’t have a communist under my bed (I looked), I turned to the Communist Party USA as a source.  Here then, is my report on what the CPUSA has been up to recently (or at least what it is willing to post on its public web site).

(Some of you might be thinking it a bit retro to call someone a communist.  I am very aware that we cannot read what is written in the heart of another man.  But when a person is a member of the Communist Party, calls himself a communist, and justifies his arguments based on the teachings of Marx and Lenin, I think it safe to call him a communist.)


The CPUSA’s home page consists of various articles posted in reverse chronological order.  I list and summarize those below.


Resetting the Health Care Debate, by Sam Webb, National Chair, 9/10/2009.  In this article, Sam praises President Obama’s speech of the previous night for turning the debate back around after being attacked by


“the right-wing extremists, the letting loose of the demagogues of hatred, fear, racism, and division, and the digging in of private insurance companies and other sections of corporate America. ….

“As for the supporters of health care reform, we have to be every bit as tenacious as right-wing reaction. Justice, morality, and truth are on our side, but they are not enough. Only when combined with persistence, united action, and struggle over the bill’s content, including a public option, will real health care reform see the light of day.”


So what would a communist do about health care?  Support Obama, tenaciously and with persistence, and especially insist on including a public option.  And attack your opponents as right-wing extremists and racists.


Summer Health Care fight heats up!, by CPUSA National Board, 8/10/2009.  This is more of the same about the health care debate.  While Sam, above, listed who the bad guys are (right-wing extremists, racists, insurance companies and corporate America), the National Board lists who the good guys are.
If health care reform fails, it will be a giant step backwards for the Obama administration and for working people, the labor movement, African American, Latino, Asian-Pacific Island communities, women and youth on every issue including the economy, peace and democracy.”


We are warned again of “right wingers” who “are using strong-arm tactics to disrupt town hall meetings, oppose any public option…”


What would a communist do?  Again, support Obama’s health care plan, especially a public option, with help from “the labor movement, Health Care for America Now, Organizing for America and so many other organizations… the AFL-CIO.”


Running behind the “Redwood Curtain”, by Michael Robert Langdon, 8/4/2009.  This article reports on all the local good works being performed by the author in and about McKinleyville, California.


“Besides my regular duties of first aid, referrals and consultations, I spend a great deal of time talking to the politicians within the community… To these politicians, we are not just a fringe element on the horizon, we are the true people representing the needs and wants of the community.”


What would a communist do?  Provide first aid, referrals, and consultations, and “spend a great deal of time talking to the politicians.”


Speech to Chautauqua: The Communist Party – A work in progress, by Sam Webb, 7/30/3009.  This being a speech by Sam Webb, it is characteristically long winded.  Some excerpts.


“Karl Marx and Frederick Engels, who together developed an analytical structure and methodology that enabled the working class to…
“Engels, in an effort to counter a dogmatic interpretation of historical materialism that was fashionable in the socialist movement of that time, wrote…
“Vladimir Lenin, the leader of the Russian revolution asserted…”


You get the idea.  After a stem-winding history of the struggle, Sam gets to what good communists should do now.


“President Obama and progressive Congress people can’t be the only change agents and will be change agents only up to a point. Our responsibility is to support them, prod them, and constructively take issue with them when we have differing views.

“But more importantly — and this is the heart of the matter — we have to reach, activate, unite, educate, and turn millions of Americans into ‘change agents’ who can make the political difference in upcoming struggles.”


In this context, I think what Sam means by “change” is change to Marxism.


Communist Party statement on the situation in Honduras, by CPUSA, 7/28/2009.   The CPUSA of course supports ousted Honduran President Manuel Zelaya, dear friend of Hugo Chavez.


By way of background, as summarized by American Thinker contributor Humberto Fontova, 


“Honduras’ Supreme Court voted unanimously to oust Zelaya, and her legislature voted the 125- 5 for same. The five contrarian legislators belong to Honduras’ Communist party…”


They did that because Zelaya was breaking Honduran law in an attempt to become president-for-life, and using his own private militia to do it.


But what should a good communist do about it?


“The CPUSA agrees that it is necessary to ratchet up the pressure on the de-facto regime, and calls for the following actions:

“We should contact the White House and the State Department to demand that the US government respond to President Zelaya’s request by taking the following immediate steps:

“Cancel US visas for the top military and political leaders of the coup.

“Freeze bank accounts in the US belonging to coup leaders as requested by Zelaya.

“Remove US personnel from the military base at Soto Cano, cease all coordination with the coup government’s armed forces…

“We should demand an end to the activities in support of the coup government…

“Further, we should be contacting our members of Congress … and work for the passage of House Resolution 630…

“Finally, the AFL-CIO, US Steelworkers and Local 10 of the International Longshore and Warehouse Union have led the way in calling for the restoral of Zelaya and the constitutional order in Honduras. We should build on these initiatives…”


I leave it as an exercise for the reader to determine how far down this checklist President Obama and progressive Congress people got.  (I do know that some visas were revoked for Honduran officials H.R. 630 now has 44 cosponsors and has been referred to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs.)


Call on Congress to Support Elected President of Honduras, by CPUSA International Department, 7/9/2009.  More of the same as above.  But specifically, support the initiative in Congress.


“Congressmen Bill DeLaHunt (D-MA) and James McGovern (D-MA) have taken the initiative with a resolution described below in a message from the Alliance for Global Justice.”


A few more names to add to the list of who CPUSA wants to work with:  Bill DeLaHunt, James McGovern, and the Alliance for Global Justice.


Previously, the list consisted of “the labor movement, Health Care for America Now, Organizing for America” and “the AFL-CIO, US Steelworkers and Local 10 of the International Longshore and Warehouse Union.”  And Mother Jones.  Coincidentally, the SEIU also supports Zelaya and HR 630. 


Not all these people and organizations are communist, of course.  They just happen to be people and organizations whose interests coincide with those of the Communist Party right now. 


That about wraps it up for recent CPUSA events.  I reported previously on the CPUSA’s platform and Obama’s progress through it. 


To review:  What Would a Communist Do?


  • Support Obama.  Specifically, support his health care reform, especially a public option.
  • Support progressive Congress people.  Specifically support Massachusetts Democrats Bill DeLaHunt and James McGovern in punishing Honduras for legally ousting Zelaya.
  • “Reach, activate, unite, educate” and create millions of “change agents.”  (What is a change agent?  Well, Obama and progressive Congress people are some examples.)
  • Work with the Alliance for Global Justice, Health Care for America Now, Organizing for America, Mother Jones, the labor movement generally and specifically the AFL-CIO, US Steelworkers, Local 10 of the International Longshore and Warehouse Union and the SEIU.


Like Sam says,


“communists of our generation would do well to follow the example of our Depression-era comrades. Without giving up their longer-term vision of socialism, … they were a vital part of the political process of the Depression era.”


Hey wait a minute.  You mean not only were there active communists here in the 1930s, but they influenced New Deal policy?  Are we supposed to know that?


Randall Hoven can be contacted at or  via his web site,
Add this comment by a reader:
“…Moreover, it is ready to strike the first and absolutely necessary blow in a few weeks, that is, to elect Barack Obama and bigger majorities in the House and Senate by a landslide…”

Author: Sam Webb, National Chair,
Communist Party USA
First published 09/27/2008 17:43

Napolitano Halts Border Construction Until Internal Review Completed


Napolitano has faced questions since the AP reported last month that Homeland Security officials did not follow their internal priority lists when choosing which border checkpoints would get money for renovations.


WASHINGTON — Facing criticism for her handling of federal stimulus money, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano said Wednesday that she would not start any new border construction projects while the department reviewed how projects were selected.

Napolitano has faced questions since The Associated Press reported last month that Homeland Security officials did not follow their internal priority lists when choosing which border checkpoints would get money for renovations. Under a process that is secretive and susceptible to political influence, officials planned to spend millions at tiny checkpoints, passing over busier, higher-priority projects.

The criticism peaked Wednesday when a senior Senate Democrat, Byron Dorgan of North Dakota, said that, despite Napolitano’s assurances, he felt Homeland Security was treating the economic stimulus plan like a “bottomless pit” of taxpayer money. It was unusually pointed criticism from a member of the president’s own party about how the administration is handling economic recovery spending.

“There’s no common sense at all to a requirement that says you’ve got to put up a $15 million facility for a small port of entry that’s host to about five vehicles an hour,” Dorgan, whose state stood to receive $128 million for checkpoint improvements, said in a telephone interview.

Within hours, Napolitano promised not to begin any new border construction projects and set up a 30-day review of how the projects were selected.

“At the end of that review, I will make all information, not involving national security concerns, public,” Napolitano wrote in a letter to Dorgan.

So far, Homeland Security has refused to release its internal priority list or its justifications for deviating from it. Instead, officials say the final project list is all they need to make public.

While Napolitano’s review may disclose information about the selection process, it appears unlikely to change much. That’s because Homeland Security has already signed many construction contracts, including low-priority projects such as the $15 million renovation for the sleepy border checkpoint at Whitetail, Mont.

Congress required the department to create a priority list in 2003 but the Obama administration added its own subjective decision-making to the process, making it vulnerable to the political influence that Obama pledged to keep out of the stimulus.

Two Montana Democratic senators, for instance, said they personally appealed to Napolitano to get money for lower-priority border projects. That includes the $15 million plan for Whitetail, which will build a checkpoint the size and cost of a Hollywood mansion at a crossing that serves three travelers a day.

Napolitano defended those decisions in her letter, saying northern border stations could be repaired for a fraction of the cost of busier checkpoints. But she said the department would review those decisions.

Read the entire article HERE.



End note: 

Is this why Janet Napolitano keeps insisting that the drug cartels and violence is not spilling over the US/Mexican border?  Defending the possible misappropriation of Stimulus dollars to secure our southern border?

NO WONDER Governor Rick Perry is sending Texas Rangers to the Texas-Mexican border.  Reported HERE. 

Doesn’t it just give you a “tingle up your leg” of how efficient our government is about spending our taxpayer Stimulus dollars?

Time To Make Mulch Out of Peanut and Acorn Shells? The Peanut Farmer and the ACORN Hustlers


Read this first:

From NewsReal blog:

The Peanut Farmer and the ACORN Hustlers

2009 September 16

By Joseph Klein

Jimmy Carter, the failed president and erstwhile peanut farmer, continues to make a fool of himself.    His latest rantings on NBC News were re-played last night on Sean Hannity’s show:

“I think an overwhelming portion of the intensely demonstrated animosity toward President Barack Obama is based on the fact that he is a black man, that he’s African-American.”

“That racism inclination still exists, and I think it’s bubbled up to the surface because of belief among many white people — not just in the South but around the country — that African-Americans are not qualified to lead this great country.”


Wake up Jimmy!  You were not qualified to lead this great country and the last time I checked you are white.    You were voted out of office in a landslide because the American people were sick of your appeasement policies abroad and disastrous economic policies at home.

The majority of Americans voting for president in 2008 rejected a white guy and voted for an African-American.   Some now regret the choice not because they suddenly woke up one morning and realized that an African-American is in the White House.   They regret the choice because they strongly disagree with President Obama’s policies –  his appeasement policies abroad and disastrous economic policies at home.   Sound familiar?

Newt Gingrich had it exactly right when, in commenting on Carter’s idiotic statement on Hannity’s show, he said that it is “destructive for America to suggest you cannot criticize the President without it being a racial act.”

As the saying goes, the acorn does not fall far from the tree.  In this case, the peanut farmer helped to put ACORN Housing (the subject of the recent videos exposing its corruption) into business in the first place by signing the Community Reinvestment Act. And just like the peanut farmer, the Acorns are crying “racism” now that they have been caught counseling how to evade the law and to house underage El Salvadorians who would be brought into this country to turn tricks.

It is time for the peanut farmer and the ACORN hustlers to leave the public arena for good.


Then add this: From Big

ACORN Co-Founder Defends Group’s Integrity, Blasts ‘Unfair’ Critics

by Publius reports:

Wade Rathke, ACORN’s co-founder and former chief organizer, blasted FOX News on Tuesday for its “unfair” coverage of a group he said has served as a champion for social justice since 1970. Rathke, in an interview, said FOX News should be careful and fair about how it looks at the organization’s work.” [My note: “be careful”?  Is that to be taken as attempted intimidation?]

[ACORN co-founder Wade] Rathke has repeatedly blasted the news media and conservative groups for intentionally targeting ACORN because of its progressive agenda. In a posting on his “Chief Organizer Blog,” Rathke said the Census Bureau’s decision to break ties with ACORN showed “how willing the Obama administration is open to a cave-in to the conservatives on false pretenses on a completely fake ‘issue.’”

But Rathke, who left the group in June 2008, defended the group’s objectives and touted its role in raising the minimum wage and passing the Community Reinvestment Act — a federal law enacted in 1977 to reduce discriminatory credit practices against those living in low-income communities.

“This is all just more reputational McCarthyism as the rightwing and Republicans attack ACORN,” he wrote.

Read the full article here.


My end note:

1.  A failed President, Jimmy Carter, speaking out and using the word “racism” AGAIN!  One thing I have found out about the Left:  they like to use the word racism or racist to end arguments.  How about using the words: “Disagreement over policies”? To lay the blame of Rep. Wilson’s outburst on racism is a futile attempt to pump the base.

2.  Wade Rathke claims that he is no longer associated with ACORN; yet is the “Chief Organizer” and has his own blog.  Note: Acorn International has changed its name to Community Organization International

3.  There are 361 groups connected to the ACORN COUNCIL.

4.  WHY did Obama give $880,000 to ACORN from his Presidential campaign funds?




We have seen how great a job Eric Holder does at the DOJ already……Americans should DEMAND that Independents investigate. 





Exclusive by Mike Roman: ACORN Operating Illegally in Maryland


Exclusive:  ACORN Operating ILLEGALLY in Maryland

by Mike Roman

Last week, we saw some pretty disturbing activities revealed in the undercover footage from ACORN Housing’s Baltimore office. By any measure of conduct, the actions of ACORN’s employees should never have happened. It turns out the actions shouldn’t have happened for another, very simple, reason: ACORN can’t legally operate in the state of Maryland.

According to the following documents, ACORN, Inc.–the parent organization of all things ACORN–forfeited its corporate charter in Maryland in 2006. ACORN Housing forfeited its corporate charter in 2008. Any ACORN office in the state of Maryland is potentially operating illegally.

The Maryland Attorney General has made noise about prosecuting the intrepid journalists who undercovered the misdeeds of ACORN employees. Perhaps he should focus instead on how ACORN was able to operate without a license in his state.

 ***Documents from the State of Maryland can be viewed HERE.



My end note:

It is time for a RICO investigation into this enterprise.


Soros: Republic Enemy #1.


From CanadaFreePress: All Credits go to Jim O’Neill and CanadaFreePress.

Soros: Republic Enemy #1

By Jim O’Neill

Tuesday, September 15, 2009

“The main obstacle to a stable and just world order is the United States.”—George Soros

“George Soros is an evil man. He’s anti-God, anti-family, anti-American, and
anti-good.” —Rev. Jesse Lee Peterson

Is it possible to lay the global financial meltdown, the radicalizing of the Democratic Party, and America’s moral decline, at the feet of one man?

It is indeed possible.

If George Soros isn’t the world’s preeminent “malignant messianic narcissist,” he’ll do until the real thing comes along.  Move over, Hitler, Stalin, Mao, and Pol Pot.  There’s a new kid on the block.

What we have in Soros, is a multi-billionaire atheist, with skewed moral values, and a sociopath’s lack of conscience.  He considers himself to be a world class philosopher, despises capitalism, and just loves social engineering. 

Uh oh.  Can you say “trouble,” boys and girls? 

Soros is a real life version of Dr. Evil—with Obama in the role of Mini-Me.  Which is not as humorous as it might at first sound.  In fact, it’s bone-deep chilling.

György Schwartz, better known to the world as George Soros, was born August 12, 1930 in Hungary.  Soros’ father, Tivadar, was a fervent practitioner of Esperanto—a language invented in 1887, and designed to be the first global language, free of any national identity.

The Schwartz’s, who were non-practicing Jews, changed the family name to Soros, in order to facilitate assimilation into the gentile population, as the Nazis spread into Hungary during the 1930s.  Soros is an Esperanto word meaning “to soar.”

In 1944 Hitler’s henchman Adolf Eichmann arrived in Hungary, to oversee the murder of that country’s Jews.  The Soros children were all given fake identity papers, and were shipped out to various Christian families.  George Soros ended up with a man whose job was confiscating property from the Jewish population.  Soros went with him on his rounds.

Soros has repeatedly called 1944 “the best year of his life.” 

In an article in the Wall Street Journal, Joshua Muravchik notes that, “70% of Mr. Soros’s fellow Jews in Hungary, nearly a half-million human beings, were annihilated in that year. They were dying and disappearing all around him, and their numbers no doubt included many whom he knew personally. Yet he gives no sign that this put any damper on his elation, either at the time or indeed in retrospect.”

During an interview with “Sixty Minute’s” Steve Kroft, Soros was asked about his “best year:” 

Sweetness & Light

KROFT: My understanding is that you went out with this protector of yours who  
swore that you were his adopted godson.

SOROS: Yes. Yes.

KROFT: Went out, in fact, and helped in the confiscation of property from the Jews.

SOROS: Yes. That’s right. Yes.

KROFT: I mean, that sounds like an experience that would send lots of people to the
psychiatric couch for many, many years. Was it difficult?

SOROS: Not, not at all.  Not at all. 

KROFT: No feeling of guilt?


Of course he didn’t feel guilty.  Soros has the moral depth of a clam.  Nonetheless, he has said, “my goal is to become the conscience of the world.” 

In his article, Muravchik describes how Soros has admitted to having “carried some rather potent messianic fantasies with me from childhood, which I felt I had to control, otherwise they might get me in trouble.” 

Can you imagine the results of this messianic sociopath being “the conscience of the world?”  Ye gods.

Be that as it may.  After WWII, Soros attended the London School of Economics, where he fell under the thrall of fellow atheist and Hungarian, Karl Popper, one of his professors.  Popper was a mentor to Soros until Popper’s death in 1994.  Two of Popper’s most influential teachings concerned “the open society,” and Fallibilism.

Fallibilism is the philosophical doctrine that all claims of knowledge could, in principle, be mistaken.  Then again, I could be wrong about that.

The “open society” basically refers to a “test and evaluate” approach to social engineering.  Regarding “open society” Roy Childs writes, “Since the Second World War, most of the Western democracies have followed Popper’s advice about piecemeal social engineering and democratic social reform, and it has gotten them into a grand mess.
In 1956 Soros moved to New York City, where he worked on Wall Street, and started amassing his fortune.  He specialized in hedge funds and currency speculation.

Soros is absolutely ruthless, amoral, and clever in his business dealings, and quickly made his fortune.  By the 1980s he was well on his way to becoming the global powerhouse that he is today.

In an article Kyle-Anne Shiver wrote for “The American Thinker” she says, “Soros made his first billion in 1992 by shorting the British pound with leveraged billions in financial bets, and became known as the man who broke the Bank of England.  He broke it on the backs of hard-working British citizens who immediately saw their homes severely devalued and their life savings cut drastically…almost overnight.”

In 1994 Soros crowed in “The New Republic” that “the former Soviet Empire is now called the Soros Empire.”  The Russia-gate scandal in 1999, which almost collapsed the Russian economy, was labeled by Rep. Jim Leach, then head of the House Banking Committee, to be “one of the greatest social robberies in human history.”  The “Soros Empire” indeed.

In 1997 Soros almost destroyed the economies of Thailand and Malaysia.  At the time, Malaysia’s Prime Minister, Mahathir Mohamad, called Soros “a villain, and a moron.”  Thai activist Weng Tojirakarn said, “We regard George Soros as a kind of Dracula. He sucks the blood from the people.” (Source)

The website Greek national Pride reports, “[Soros] was part of the full court press that dismantled Yugoslavia and caused trouble in Georgia, Ukraine and Myanmar [Burma].  Calling himself a philanthropist, Soros’ role is to tighten the ideological stranglehold of globalization and the New World Order while promoting his own financial gain.  He is without conscience; a capitalist who functions with absolute amorality.”

France has upheld an earlier conviction against Soros, for felony insider trading.  Soros was fined 2.9 million dollars. (Source)

Recently, his native Hungary fined Soros 2.2 million dollars for “illegal market manipulation.”  Elizabeth Crum writes that “The Hungarian economy has been in a state of transition as the country seeks to become more financially stable and westernized.  [Soros’] deliberately driving down the share price of its largest bank put Hungary’s economy into a wicked tailspin, one from which it is still trying to recover.” (Source)

Soros’ grasp, greed, gluttony have a global reach

My point here is that Soros is a planetary parasite.  His grasp, greed, and gluttony have a global reach.
But what about America?  Soros told Australia’s national newspaper “The Australian” “America, as the centre of the globalised financial markets, was sucking up the savings of the world.  This is now over. The game is out,” he said, adding that the time has come for “a very serious adjustment” in American’s consumption habits.

Ready to tighten your belts, America?

World financial crisis was”stimulating” and “in a way, the culmination of my life’s work.”

Soros also told “The Australian” that the world financial crisis was”stimulating” and “in a way, the culmination of my life’s work.”

Stimulating.  Have you found the job losses, house foreclosures, and incredible national debt—stimulating?  Me neither.

Obama has recently promised 10 billion of our tax dollars to Brazil (yes, billion with a “b”), in order to give them a leg-up in expanding their offshore oil fields.  Obama’s largesse towards Brazil, came shortly after Soros invested heavily in Brazilian oil (Petrobras). 

Tait Trussel writes, “The Petrobras loan may be a windfall for Soros and Brazil, but it is a bad deal for the U.S.  The American Petroleum Institute estimates that oil exploration in the U.S. could create 160,000 new, well-paying jobs, as well as $1.7 trillion in revenues to federal, state, and local governments, all while fostering greater energy security.”

Do you get the feeling that American taxpayers are being treated like gullible suckers? 

(By the way, if you want a short primer on Far Left economics—and a great cartoon from a 1911 St. Louis Post-Dispatch—go to actor Michael Moriarty’s website).
A blog you might want to keep an eye on is  This is their mission: “This blog is dedicated to all…who have suffered due to the ruthless financial pursuits of…George Soros. Your stories are many and varied, but the theme is the same:  the destructive power of greed without conscience. We pledge to tirelessly watch Soros wherever he goes and to print the truth in the hope that he will one day stop preying upon the world’s poor…that justice will be served.” 

Back to America.  Soros has been actively working to destroy America from the inside out for some years now.  People have been warning us.  Two years ago Bill O’Reilly said on “The O’Reilly Factor” that “Soros [is] an extremist who wants open borders, a one-world foreign policy, legalized drugs, euthanasia, and on and on. This is off-the-chart dangerous….” (Source)

In 1997 Rachel Ehrenfeld wrote, “Soros uses his philanthropy to change—or more accurately deconstruct—the moral values and attitudes of the Western world, and particularly of the American people.  His “open society” is not about freedom; it is about license. His vision rejects the notion of ordered liberty, in favor of an ideology of rights and entitlements.”

Perhaps the most important of these “whistle blowers” are David Horowitz and Richard Poe.  Their book “The Shadow Party” outlines in detail how Soros hijacked the Democratic Party, and now owns it lock, stock, and barrel. 

Soros has been packing the Democratic Party with radicals, and ousting moderate Democrats for years.  I don’t have time to do the subject justice in this article, but FrontPage’s Jamie Glazov has an excellent interview with Richard Poe, which will fill you in on many of the facts.

The Shadow Party became the Shadow Government, which became the Obama Administration. (another good source) writes, “By his [Soros’] own admission, he helped engineer coups in Slovakia, Croatia, Georgia, and Yugoslavia.  When Soros targets a country for “regime change,” he begins by creating a shadow government—a fully formed government-in-exile, ready to assume power when the opportunity arises. The Shadow Party he has built in America greatly resembles those he has created in other countries prior to instigating a coup.”
The above quote was, of course, written before the Presidential Election.  So was the following quote from a November 2008 edition of the German magazine “Der Spiegel,” in which Soros gives his opinion on what the next POTUS should do after taking office.  “I think we need a large stimulus package….”  Soros thought that around 600 billion would be about right. 

Soros also said that “I think this is a great opportunity to finally deal with global warming and energy dependence. The U.S. needs a cap and trade system with auctioning of licenses for emissions rights.”

Any of this sound familiar?

Although Soros doesn’t (yet) own the Republican Party, like he does the Democrats, make no mistake, his tentacles are spread throughout the Republican Party as well.

Soros is a partner in the Carlyle Group where he has invested more than 100 million dollars.  According to an article by “The Baltimore Chronicle’s” Alice Cherbonnier, the Carlye Group is run by “a veritable who’s who of former Republican leaders,” from CIA man Frank Carlucci, to CIA head [and ex-President] George Bush, Sr. 

In late 2006, Soros bought about 2 million shares of Halliburton—Dick Cheney’s old stomping grounds. 

When the Democrats and Republicans held their conventions in 2000, Soros held Shadow Party conventions in the same cities, at the same time.  Republican Senator John McCain was the keynote speaker at the “Soros Convention” (so labelled by the late Robert Novak) in Philadelphia.

Soros has dirtied both sides of the aisle, trust me.  And if that weren’t bad enough, he has long held connections with the CIA.

And I musn’t forget to mention Soros’ involvement with the LSM (Lame Stream Media), the entertainment industry (e.g. he owns 2.6 million shares of Time Warner), and the various political advertising organizations he funnels millions to.

As Matthew Vadum writes, “The liberal billionaire-turned-philanthropist has been buying up media properties for years in order to drive home his message to the American public that they are too materialistic, too wasteful, too selfish, and too stupid to decide for themselves how to run their own lives.”

Richard Poe writes, “Soros’ private philanthropy, totaling nearly $5 billion, continues undermining America’s traditional Western values. His giving has provided funding of abortion rights, atheism, drug legalization, sex education, euthanasia, feminism, gun control, globalization, mass immigration, gay marriage and other radical experiments
in social engineering.”

Some of the many NGOs (None Government Organizations) that Soros funds with his billions are:, the Apollo Alliance, Media Matters for America, the Tides Foundation, the ACLU, ACORN, PDIA (Project on Death In America), La Raza, and many more.  For a more complete list, with brief descriptions of the NGOs, go to

Poe continues, “Through his global web of Open Society Institutes and Open Society Foundations, Soros has spent 25 years recruiting, training, indoctrinating and installing a network of loyal operatives in 50 countries, placing them in positions of influence and power in media, government, finance and academia.”
As I’ve said before, America currently faces the greatest challenge to its existence as a free republic since the Civil War.  And as we go, so goes the world.

So is Soros to blame for all of America’s woes?

Without Soros, would the Saul Alinsky Chicago machine still be rolling?  Would SEIU, ACORN, and La Raza still be pursuing their nefarious activities?  Would Big Money and lobbyists still be corrupting government?  Would our college campuses still be retirement homes for 1960s radicals?  Yes, yes, yes, and yes—but to much less of a degree.

The purpose of this article is to point out that without the financial skullduggery and Machiavellian manipulations of Soros, America would be a considerably safer, saner, and stabler place to live. 

America stands at the brink of an abyss, and that fact is directly attributable to Soros.  Soros has vigorously, cleverly, and insidiously planned the ruination of America.

His conduct has been immoral, duplicitous, and traitorous.  Stripping Soros of his U.S. citizenship, should be one of the first steps taken during the upcoming courtroom trials.

And trials there must be.  No matter the cost, the nest of vipers on Capitol Hill, and all of the traitors in the government at large, must be brought to task for their behavior, or a free America is doomed. 

The words of Patrick Henry are apropos: “Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery?  Forbid it, Almighty God!  I know not what course others may take, but as for me, give me liberty, or give me death!”

These days, Patrick Henry’s sentiment is more than just some quaint hyperbole from long ago—it’s a slow burning, but intense, glow that fires our courage and heart.

A Fractured Nation? Destruction From Within…..


Has Osama Bin Laden won?  Think about that.

Or has American allowed destruction from within of our Founding Father’s dreams for America?

First this:

The New American Reality

This essay from Eowyn at Giovanni’s World succintly sums up the new American reality

America Divided

America Divided

No Longer One Nation, Under God

During the ‘08 campaign, an essay written by Dennis Prager made a deep impression on me because it said out loud what increasingly was in my mind and heart: The Left and Right in America have become irreconcilable.

As Prager wrote then:

It is time to confront the unhappy fact about our country: There are now two Americas….
For most of my life I have believed, in what I now regard as wishful thinking, that the right and left wings have essentially the same vision for America, that it’s only about ways to get there in which the two sides differ. Right and left share the same ends, I thought.

That is not the case. For the most part, right and left differ in their visions of America and that is why they differ on policies.

Right and the left do not want the same America.


The latest pundit to say the same thing is Patrick Buchanan:

We seem not only to disagree with each other more than ever, but to have come almost to detest one another. Politically, culturally, racially, we seem ever ready to go for each others’ throats….
The question invites itself. In what sense are we one nation and one people anymore? For what is a nation if not a people of a common ancestry, faith, culture and language, who worship the same God, revere the same heroes, cherish the same history, celebrate the same holidays and share the same music, poetry, art and literature?

…Christmas and Easter, the great holidays of Christendom, once united Americans in joy. Now we fight over whether they should even be mentioned, let alone celebrated, in our public schools.

…One part of America loves her history, another reviles it as racist, imperialist and genocidal…. But the old holidays, heroes and icons endure, as the new have yet to put down roots in a recalcitrant Middle America.

We are not only more divided than ever on politics, faith and morality, but along the lines of class and ethnicity. Those who opposed Sonia Sotomayor for the Supreme Court and stood by Sgt. Crowley in the face-off with Harvard’s Henry Louis Gates were called racists. But this time they did not back down. They threw the same vile word right back in the face of their accusers, and Barack Obama.

Consider but a few issues on which Americans have lately been bitterly divided: school prayer, the Ten Commandments, evolution, the death penalty, abortion, homosexuality, assisted suicide, affirmative action, busing, the Confederate battle flag, the Duke rape case, Terri Schiavo, Iraq, amnesty, torture.

Now it is death panels, global warming, “birthers” and socialism. If a married couple disagreed as broadly and deeply as Americans do on such basic issues, they would have divorced and gone their separate ways long ago. What is it that still holds us together?


I believe that there is a fundamental and irreconcilable difference between conservatives and liberals.

Conservatives truly believe that in 1776 something remarkable happened — the founding of the United States of America. The American republic, though far from perfect — given the shameful treatment of the indigenous “Indians” and black slaves — nevertheless was something special in human history. Conservatives therefore revere the Constitution and the Founding Fathers. We also believe that it is only because of American ideals as embodied in the Constitution that later reforms — emancipation of slaves and women, the civil rights movement — were even possible.

But conservatives are like the Ents in J.R.R. Tolkien’s Lord of the Rings. Revering what the Founding Fathers instituted, conservatives are by our nature not revolutionaries. And so, we became complacent — while the Left infiltrated and took over every institution in American society.

Liberals, however, especially the far Left, fixate on America’s imperfections, past and present, and in so doing create and embrace Identity Politics with its narcissistic permanent sense of aggrieved victimhood.

More importantly, instead of faulting flawed men who did not live up to the Declaration of Independence’s promise that all human beings “are created equal,” the Left blame “The System” — the very essence and institutions of the American republic for our problems and imperfections. They do not think something very special happened in 1776. They do not revere the Constitution or the Founding Fathers and, worshiping at the altar of radical feminism, insist that the latter be referred to as gender-neutral emasculated “Founders.”

The Left mean to destroy and transform America.

What to do then?

I don’t believe it is productive to lament this reality. Better that we be clear-eyed, for we can’t fix something if we can’t even name what’s wrong.

And the last thing conservatives should do is play nice because the Left don’t. Being the revolutionaries they are, they actually had known our differences are irreconcilable long before we did.

What we must do is:

Stand firm on our beliefs, ideals, and principles.
Inform and educate the American people.
Take back our schools, colleges, universities, and pop culture.
And fight, fight, fight to win elections at the national, state, and local levels, so that the Left, who are a numerical minority in the population, never again seize political power.

The Ents were slow to anger and to action. But when they finally realized that the very continuation of Middle-Earth was in peril, led by the great Treebeard, the Ents went to war.

We have numbers on our side because recent survey data say conservatives are an ideological majority, at 40%. We simply need to be energized and mobilized to action — which we are.

Our labor will be hard and unrelenting and unending. To do otherwise is to consign the American Republic to the trash-heap of history.

Hat tip to Trevor Loudon




Pledge of Confusion? Schools Wrestle With Flag Policy in Classroom


 Monday, September 14, 2009

By Allison Pataki


It’s a new school year, but an old fight is brewing in American classrooms. Teachers and administrators around the country are scratching their heads once again over the Pledge of Allegiance.

The courts have consistently ruled that students have the right not to recite the pledge in public schools. But now some First Amendment advocates are taking it one step further, arguing that the law compels educators to inform kids at the beginning of school that the decision is entirely up to them.

They’re advocating a “Miranda warning” for the Pledge — an administrative notice to students that they have the right to remain silent.

“The Pledge of Allegiance creates a constitutional problem. You have to tell students they can opt out,” the Rev. Barry Lynn, executive director of Americans United for Separation of Church and State, told FOX News.

New Mexico dealt with this question last month when its education secretary upheld that students are permitted to opt out of the Pledge, but rejected an ACLU-backed amendment that would require schools to inform parents and students that they have the option.

In Florida, schools have tried to resolve uncertainty by announcing a new policy — students don’t have to participate, as long as they have a letter from Mom and Dad.

These are just the latest in a litany of challenges to the Pledge and its place in the classroom.

Americans have recited the tribute to the stars and stripes since the oath was written by Francis Bellamy, a Baptist minister, in 1892. But Bellamy’s pledge did not include the words “under God,” which were added by Congress in 1954 during the McCarthy era, when Cold War tensions with the Soviet Union — an atheist nation — were high in the United States.

Thirty-six states now have laws requiring that the Pledge of Allegiance be recited daily in public schools. But the oath as it’s written does not sit well with some Americans.

“The Pledge doesn’t even state the truth. We are not one nation under God,” Lynn said. “I don’t think we should lie to students, and there’s no way we can require them to say it.”

But supporters of the Pledge insist that the words are both constitutional and an important part of our national heritage.

“There has been a recurring effort by the ACLU and others to try to stop the Pledge of Allegiance from being said. The fact of the matter is that the American people like the Pledge of Allegiance, they like it the way it is,” Phyllis Schlafly, founder of the Eagle Forum, told Fox News.

“The teachers are government employees, their paychecks are paid by the taxpayers, and the American people support the Pledge. I’m with the American people,” Schlafly said.

The majority of Americans do, in fact, overwhelmingly support the Pledge of Allegiance in its current form. A FOX News/Opinion Dynamics Poll from November of 2005 showed that 90 percent of Americans approve of the oath. Only 7 percent of people polled said they would change the language of the Pledge, while three percent of Americans were undecided.

The Pledge’s popularity aside, the Supreme Court ruled in 1943 that mandating a student to participate in the oath was an unconstitutional violation of the First Amendment right to free speech.

Now the ACLU and other critics of the Pledge are taking the dispute a step further — arguing that students, whether they do or don’t support the oath, should be told up front that they are not required to recite the words.

They lost the first round in New Mexico last month, when state Education Secretary Veronica Garcia ruled not to change state policy — which requires that the Pledge be recited daily — to inform students of their right to opt out.

Read the entire article HERE.


End note:

So there you have it America! 

Remember the words of the Pledge of Allegiance:

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America.

And to the Republic for which it stands,

One Nation, Under God, with Liberty and Justice for all.”


I’ve seen some blogs that state we should Pledge to Obama.

I’ve seen a You Tube of the leftist Hollywood talking about their Pledge.


My words to THEM???

“America…..Love it or LEAVE it.”

I’m sure Palau and Bermuda will take a few of you.


 The Leftist have awakened a sleeping Giant……..The Patriots.

The Patriots have but one objective.  To SAVE America from the Progressives, the Marxists and the one’s that don’t think America is the greatest nation on earth!


Taxpayer March On Washington,D.C.

Taxpayer March On Washington,D.C.


“Live From New York”….another ACORN video. Congress MUST Investigate ACORN!


ACORN Watch: “Honesty is not going to get you the house”

By Michelle Malkin • September 14, 2009

James O’Keefe and Hannah Giles visited one of ACORN’s New York offices in August, where they picked up handy tips on how to lie on housing forms to cover up a prostitution business (”Honesty is not going to get you the house,” one ACORN official advises) and how to hide cash from their illicit business (”When you buy the house with the backyard, you get a tin…and you bury it down in there…cover it…and put the grass over it…”).

Watch the whole thing at Big Government. This is now the third videotaped sting exposing the ACORN racket’s law-undermining, truth-sabotaging counseling sessions.

If the Census Bureau no longer trusts ACORN to collect data as a result of these videotapes, why is Congress still allowing taxpayer money to be funneled to the ACORN Housing Corporation?

AHC has received an estimated $16 million in taxpayer funds between 1997-2007, according to the Employment Policies Institute.

Last week, I noted that ACORN is now managing apartments in Bedford-Stuyvesant for the newly completed Atlantic Avenue Apartments.

In April, I noted that the bone-headed Bush administration shoved another $1.6 million into AHC’s pockets to subsidize the left-wing mortgage counseling racket.

AHC has a long history of abusing federal housing funds and Americorps grants for political activities. Thanks to the Consumer Rights League and brave ACORN whistleblowers, we also know their shady practices include working to obtain mortgages for illegal aliens and relying on undocumented income, “under the table” money, that may not be reported to the Internal Revenue Service.

And thanks to the Employment Policies Institute, we know the stench goes back decades. Just one infamous episode from 1994:


In 1994 the ACORN Housing Corporation (AHC) was awarded a $1.1 million grant by AmeriCorps, a program of the Corporation for National Service (CNS). The money was intended to fund the training of 42 AmeriCorps members in 13 cities. The workers were expected to identify low-income families hoping to purchase a first home, to assist them in finding suitable housing, and to advise them in securing the
necessary financing.

During the grant-making process, AHC was asked about its relationship to ACORN, because political advocates were ineligible for the grant. At the time, AHC maintained that it was a completely separate entity from ACORN, and CNS awarded the grant based on this understanding.

Evidence uncovered by Luise Jordan, the Inspector General for AmeriCorps, suggests that this promised separation was simply not true. In testimony before a house subcommittee, Jordan stated:

Our preliminary research determined that AHC was part of a number of ACORN-related organizations.

… Not only did we find references to ACORN having “created” AHC to serve purposes common to both organizations, we noted numerous transactions and activities involving AHC and other “fraternal” ACORN-related corporations. These transactions included costs charged to AHC, and thus to the CNS grant, by ACORN or other ACORN-related entities. … Charges of this nature were made to our grant for the AHC locations where AHC and ACORN (or other ACORN-related activities) were co-located.

AHC’s initial subterfuge pales in comparison to the illegal fundraising scheme it subsequently operated, using its AmeriCorps grant to increase ACORN’s membership.

According to Jordan, one ACORN member in the Dallas regional office stated that “the only reason for having the AmeriCorps program was to gain new ACORN members, and that if AmeriCorps loan counseling clients did not start becoming ACORN members, she could and would halt the AmeriCorps project.” Jordan found that this understanding was not limited to the Dallas office. Using government funds to solicit membership in an organization that— like ACORN—participates in direct political advocacy is a violation of federal guidelines.

AHC also utilized its government-funded loan counseling program to steer low-income families toward ACORN memberships. Jordan found that AHC had distributed leaflets stating that low income, first-time homebuyers were required to join ACORN, at an annual cost of $60, in order to receive the government-subsidized counseling. “An AHC loan counseling client in New Orleans (who is a retired high school business teacher),” she explained, “was escorted by an AmeriCorps member to an ACORN organizer who solicited membership in ACORN. The client felt like she was not going to be allowed to leave until she gave the ACORN organizer a $60 check, or authorized a $5 per month automatic bank draft for ACORN membership dues.” And as with ACORN’s own employees who attempted to unionize, AmeriCorps members who refused to participate in this illegal fundraising scheme faced the threat of immediate termination.

The Inspector General’s office (IG) was lucky to find out as much about the improper relationship between AHC and ACORN as it did. And AHC made every effort to obstruct the investigation. The IG issued subpoenas to AHC and ACORN, whose response “did not include several documents, or parts of documents that we had obtained from our other sources.” Jordan later wrote, “Our subpoena clearly called for these documents, and they were critical in supporting the conclusions of our investigation.” Withholding required documentation was only the beginning of AHC’s attempt to hinder the investigation. AHC also limited the ability of investigators to interview AmeriCorps members in private. This greatly hampered the IG’s ability to obtain reliable information regarding the activities of AmeriCorps members. Eventually, in response to a torrent of red flags raised by the IG, the Corporation for National Service terminated AHC’s grant…

• Tax forms show that the ACORN Housing Corporation has received more than $11,230,000 in public funds since fiscal year 1997. More than $5,100,000 was paid in fees or grants to ACORN entities.

I’ll ask again: If the Census Bureau no longer trusts ACORN to collect data as a result of these videotapes, why is Congress still allowing taxpayer money to be funneled to the ACORN Housing Corporation?

It’s all about the coordinated corruption.

Call your congressional representatives (202-224-3121) and say it louder:

ACORN is a criminal enterprise.

Not one more taxpayer dime.






The independent filmmaker whose hidden-camera videos prompted the firing of four ACORN workers is demanding an apology from ACORN for calling his work a fabricated “scam” and daring the activist group to take legal action against him. 

“Bring it on,” filmmaker James O’Keefe said Sunday on FOX News. 

That was after ACORN lashed out at O’Keefe, who with his friend Hannah Giles posed as a pimp and prostitute looking to evade the IRS and apply for an illegal housing loan for a brothel. The sting operation caught four ACORN workers in the Baltimore and Washington, D.C., offices appearing to offer their help. 

Those workers were subsequently fired, and the U.S. Census Bureau severed ties with ACORN in the wake of the controversy. But ACORN chief organizer Bertha Lewis issued a written statement Saturday saying that while she cannot defend the actions of the workers who were terminated, O’Keefe may have committed a “felony” with his operation. She also threatened legal action against FOX News, which aired the videos but did not produce them

“It is clear that the videos are doctored, edited, and in no way the result of the fabricated story being portrayed by conservative activist ‘filmmaker’ O’Keefe and his partner in crime. And, in fact, a crime it was — our lawyers believe a felony — and we will be taking legal action against Fox and their co-conspirators,” she said. 

In an interview with FOX News senior correspondent Eric Shawn, O’Keefe said he wants an apology from those media outlets “covering for ACORN” as well as from ACORN itself. He said he doubts ACORN will file suit. 

“They don’t have any leg to stand on, so they’re saying I dubbed in my voice which is completely absurd,” he said. “When the truth comes out in the end, they’re going to be apologizing to us.” 

O’Keefe said he was “just trying to hold these organizations accountable.” 

Lewis said in her statement that O’Keefe’s “scam” was attempted in several other cities but had “failed for months.” 

O’Keefe declined to comment on the allegedly unsuccessful attempts, but said it’s a “lie” to claim that any ACORN offices “kicked us out.”


End note:

O’Keefe’s response to a possible lawsuit?  “Bring It On.”

IF a lawsuit is filed, it will expose ACORN further.  It is called DISCOVERY; information that has to be turned over to both parties before a lawsuit is heard.


Will the “Powers that Be”, according to Rep. Conyers continue to obstruct any investigation into ACORN now?

Any Congressional members with a BACKBONE should demand an investigation into the corruption of ACORN……….NOW!