Obama and communist party in US

B

BobF

Well-known Member
Location
Ohio, USA
Obama has never stood and called himself a communist that I know of, but the Communist Party United States America sure thinks he is fully a communist.

He grew up among communist believers, leaders, followers since in his youth in Hawaii. He moved to Chicago to be with some of his communist friends. He was an organizer and leader, but still never used the term in his public life.

If you don't belief these comments then please use these links to refresh your minds.

http://www.keywiki.org/Barack_Obama_and_the_Communist_Party

Barack Obama's involvement with the Communist Party USA

[h=2]Communist leader on "friend" Barack Obama[/h] On November 15, 2008, Sam Webb, National Chair of the Communist Party USA delivered an address to the Communist Party USA National Committee. During his address, he noted the following concerning the party's relationship with Obama,


"The left can and should advance its own views and disagree with the Obama administration without being disagreeable. Its tone should be respectful. We are speaking to a friend."

[h=2]Marable on Obama and Chicago communists[/h]The late marxist academic Manning Marable claimed that Barack Obama has read some of his books and "understands what socialism is."


Marable, writing in the December 2008 issue of British Trotskyist journal Socialist Review, also claimed that Obama worked in Chicago with socialists with backgrounds in the Communist Party.[SUP][1]

[/SUP]

What makes Obama different is that he has also been a community organiser. He has read left literature, including my works, and he understands what socialism is. A lot of the people working with him are, indeed, socialists with backgrounds in the Communist Party or as independent Marxists. There are a lot of people like that in Chicago who have worked with him for years... [h=2]Frank Marshall Davis[/h]And another link:

http://www.independentsentinel.com/obamas-platform-is-eerily-similar-to-the-communist-party-usas/

[h=1]Obama’s Platform Is Eerily Similar to the Communist Party USA’s[/h] [h=2]by Guest Post • April 20, 2014[/h]
Have you noticed the similarities between Barack Obama’s platform and that of the Communist Party USA (CPUSA)? The correlations are undeniable to anyone who is being honest.
Americans voted for this man not once, but twice! Al Sharpton did say that the American people knew they were voting for socialism when they voted for Barack Obama.

(I did not listen to the film.)

And another article I kept when Obama was first elected.


http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=99104


WND Exclusive OBAMA WATCH CENTRAL
Obama: Top Red's dream come true
Communist Party official shares White House's ambitious agenda
Posted: May 24, 2009
7:54 pm Eastern


By Aaron Klein
© 2009 WorldNetDaily


Sam Webb


With Obama as president, health care and the economy can be "reformed," U.S. troops can be evacuated from the Middle East, a second stimulus bill can be passed, the criminal justice system can be overhauled and union rights can be expanded – in other words, it's a Christmas list come true – declared the leader of the Communist Party USA.


"All these – and many other things – are within our reach now!" exclaimed Sam Webb in a New York banquet speech for the People's Weekly World, the official newspaper of the Communist Party USA.

.......................

Obama won't say it, but the US communist party sure does. One year and a half and then hopefully we can get someone less fanatical about destroying this country and ignoring our Constitution.
 

I did not think that Communism was legal in America. Here in Canada where it is an accepted, although minute political voice, the party members consider President Obama far too moderate in his views to be considered even a "soft" socialist, never mind a Communist. Interesting. Perhaps someone could clear up my confusion re this matter?
 
I've come across a few communists in my time (not personally) that I have admired for their commitment to building a better society. Their names are Frank Hardy, novelist who wrote Power Without Glory, Phillip Adams, no longer a communist and now a radio presenter on our ABC and Jack Mundey, organiser of the Builders Laborers Union during a period when developers were knocking down heritage building in Sydney. He led the campaign of opposition and was an ally to the conservative matrons attempting to preserve inner city parklands.

The Communist Party in Australia is now pretty much defunct although it was never banned. It just fell out of favour with its members after the tanks rolled into Hungary. I'm surprised that there seem to be branches of the Communist Party in so many states, but I wonder how many members they actually have.

I seriously doubt that President Obama is a member or even a fellow traveller. It is not uncommon for people to be labelled a communist when they are not nor never have been one. History shows that that has happened to several high profile Australians in the past.
 

Shalimar said:
I did not think that Communism was legal in America. Here in Canada where it is an accepted, although minute political voice, the party members consider President Obama far too moderate in his views to be considered even a "soft" socialist, never mind a Communist. Interesting. Perhaps someone could clear up my confusion re this matter?
Click to expand...

This Wiki give some info on the American Communist Party: http://www.keywiki.org/Communist_Party_USA

These are the state groups listed
[h=2]State Affiliates[/h]KeyWiki has in depth information on the following state affiliates and Party clubs of the CPUSA:


 
Not at all Jim. It is part of the US political machine and no reason to deny it at all.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communist_Party_USA

Communist Party USA


The Communist Party USA (CPUSA) is a communist political party in the United States.[SUP][5][/SUP] It is the largest communist party in the country. Established in 1919, it has a long, complex history that is closely related to the U.S. labor movement and the histories of similar communist parties worldwide.


For the first half of the 20th century, the Communist Party was a highly influential force in various struggles for democratic rights. It played a prominent role in the U.S. labor movement from the 1920s through the 1940s, having a major hand in founding most of the country's first industrial unions (which would later use the McCarran Internal Security Act to expel their Communist members) while also becoming known for opposing racism and fighting for integration in workplaces and communities during the height of the Jim Crow period of U.S. racial segregation. Historian Ellen Schrecker concludes that decades of recent scholarship[SUP][6][/SUP] offer "a more nuanced portrayal of the party as both a Stalinist sect tied to a vicious regime and the most dynamic organization within the American Left during the 1930s and '40s".[SUP][7]
[/SUP]

By August 1919, only months after its founding, the Communist Party claimed 50,000 to 60,000 members. Members also included anarchists and other radical leftists. At the time, the older and more moderate Socialist Party of America, suffering from criminal prosecutions for its antiwar stance during World War I, had declined to 40,000 members. The sections of the Communist Party's International Workers Order organized for communism around linguistic and ethnic lines, providing mutual aid and tailored cultural activities to an IWO membership that peaked at 200,000 at its height.[SUP][8]
[/SUP]

But the Communist Party's early labor and organizing successes did not last. As the decades progressed, the combined effects of the second Red Scare, McCarthyism, Nikita Khrushchev's 1956 Secret Speech denouncing the previous decades of Joseph Stalin's rule, and the adversities of the continued Cold War mentality, steadily weakened the Party's internal structure and confidence. The Party's membership in the Comintern and its close adherence to the political positions of the Soviet Union made the party appear to most Americans as not only a threatening, subversive domestic entity, but also as a foreign agent fundamentally alien to the American way of life. Internal and external crises swirled together, to the point where members who did not end up in prison for party activities tended either to disappear quietly from its ranks or to adopt more moderate political positions at odds with the Communists' party line. By 1957, membership had dwindled to less than 10,000, of whom some 1,500 were informants for the FBI.[SUP][9]
[/SUP]

The party attempted to recover with its opposition to the Vietnam War during the civil rights movement in the 1960s, but its continued uncritical support for an increasingly stultified and militaristic Soviet Union increasingly alienated them from the rest of left-wing America, which saw this supportive role as outdated and even dangerous. At the same time, the party's aging membership demographics and noticeably hollow calls for "peaceful coexistence" failed to speak to a new Left in the United States.


With the rise of Mikhail Gorbachev and his effort to radically alter the Soviet economic and political system from the mid-1980s, the Communist Party finally became estranged from the leadership of the Soviet Union itself. In 1989, the Communist Party of the Soviet Union cut off major funding to the CPUSA due to its opposition to glasnost and perestroika. With the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991, the party held its convention and attempted to resolve the issue of whether the Party should reject Marxism-Leninism. The majority reasserted the party's now purely Marxist outlook, prompting a minority faction which urged social democrats to exit the now reduced party. The party has since adopted Marxism-Leninism within its program,[SUP][5][/SUP] In 2014, the new draft of the party constitution declared: "We apply the scientific outlook developed by Marx, Engels, Lenin and others in the context of our American history, culture and traditions."[SUP][10]
[/SUP]
The Communist Party USA is based in New York City. For decades, its West Coast newspaper was the People's World, and its East Coast newspaper was The Daily World.[SUP][11][/SUP] The two newspapers merged in 1986 into the People's Weekly World. The PWW has since become an online only publication, called People's World. The party's former theoretical journal, Political Affairs Magazine, is now also published exclusively online, but the party still maintains International Publishers as its publishing house. In June 2014, the Party held its 30th National Convention in Chicago.[SUP][12][/SUP]
 
I would be inclined to think that in a true democracy, we are all allowed to have and speak different opinions, hold to different viewpoints......and is discussion of these differences as bad as forcing them into silence? Exposure and discussion is how we hash out which way to go, which is the better direction.

Personally, I can't have too much of an opinion because I've never researched this issue. Just off the top of my head, I'd say that I'm all for equality and respect for us all and taking care of those of our brethren who have need of a hand up. Do those ideals have anything to do with Communism or its manifesto?

Maybe one of these days I'll do a bit of reading....or maybe not:rolleyes:! I'm already trying to keep up with a bunch of reading that I want to do and the summer weather is so nice and the garden needs care! Hard to find a time to squeeze in more reading.
 
It's a little late for any attempts to smear and label Obama a communist, as he's well into his 2nd term as president of the United States of America.

Similarly, any noise from the "birthers" regarding Obama's citizenship is really just a little too late, and not relevant to the upcoming elections anymore than the [very lame] "Obama's a commie" assertions are.

bir·ther
ˈbərTHər/
nouninformal

plural noun: birthers

 
Why are so many Americans intent on demonising Obama? His Presidency seems to have been good for the country and he's leaving next year anyway. Seems to be a case of personal dislike by sore losers.
 
Barack Obama has to be a communist! Just like the other 78 to 81 members of the Democratic Party are members of the communist party. We know it's true because Allen West said so!





Another Allen got into hot water when the Republican congressman from Florida got caught on video, during a Florida town hall meeting, saying he believed "there's 78-81 members of the Democrat Party that are members of the Communist Party."

When West was asked to name them, he said, "It's called the Congressional Progressive Caucus."

West's comments angered many on the left, including Massachusetts Rep. Barney Frank, who said "not even Joe McCarthy would have said anything so stupid."

Six months later West, who said he did not regret the comment "whatsoever," lost the seat to Democrat Patrick Murphy by 2,146 votes.
Click to expand...


And what about that Michelle in China, huh?! Waving those red Commie flags like that!


redflag.jpg




During her visit to China, Michelle Obama was photographed holding red banners (as shown above), an image that was later widely circulated via social media out of context, accompanied by criticisms that it portrayed the First Lady "waving red communist flags."

Although red flags
Click to expand...
have been used as symbol of communism since the 1870s, and the national flag of China (like that of the former Communist USSR) is predominantly red in design, the red banners that Michelle Obama was pictured waving in China were not Chinese/communist flags or other overt political symbols but rather accessories employed by a troupe of traditional Chinese folk dancers whose performance the First Lady joined:
Click to expand...
Michelle Obama gamely joined in with a troupe of folk dancers as she visited the Chinese city of Xi'an.

The First Lady swayed to the music, having earlier accepted an invitation to jump rope and tested out her shuttlecock-kicking skills.

Crowds three or four deep strained for a glimpse of the first family, according to a pool report.
Click to expand...


image: http://www.snopes.com/politics/graphics/redflag2.jpg
redflag2.jpg

Last updated: 1 April 2014

Read more at http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/photos/redflag.asp#ivdOsYccgcMSM53M.99


Honestly, I'm surprised Obama is still such a target for the losers of the two Presidential elections, you would think they'd be more focused on bashing Hillary now.
 
I would think after the Bush fiasco, most Americans would elevate President Obama for his accomplishments in spite of/because of the vicious antics of certain Republicans determined to smear his presidency at all costs, regardless of the damage at home or abroad.
 
I think most Americans respect the President and his many accomplishments while in office. It is so pathetic to continue this hate campaign against him but one only look at who the attackers are to understand.
 
mitchezz said:
Why are so many Americans intent on demonising Obama? His Presidency seems to have been good for the country and he's leaving next year anyway. Seems to be a case of personal dislike by sore losers.
Click to expand...

I don't think too many realize how radical Obama's and the current Democratic party's politics are. Throw in some Libertarians and Socialist like Sanders it's a lot different than in decades past. Republicans got their extremists too. But one could very easily associate things like Obama Care or increased & encouraged use of government benefits like food stamps as being communist or actually socialism. The federalization or over use of the federal government could also be considered communism-federal government equals big government which socialism is. Good or bad those politics are associated with communism. Obama should not get a free pass on his politics because he is the first black president. He is leftist Democrat, not a Democrat but an extreme left leaning Democrat worthy of criticism.

I'm more worried about biased judges as much as anything. Judicial activism is not good for anyone. The law is the law and should not be open to that much interpretation. Split supreme court decisions are scarey and not a good sign. One should always know what the law is and that it will be enforced equally and based on the law, the system and not a personal bias. If one doesn't like it challenge it or push for change. The courts should not be arbitrators of which way the wind is blowing but rather is it legal or not. The courts are part of the system of checks and balances so one branch of government can't ram through an illegal and/or personal agenda. Communist governments usually don't have a strong court system or they are a puppet of their leader.

As far as a communist president I think the communist party used to run the same candidate for a couple of decades-Gus Hall, no one made a fuss and he was there for many elections.
 
My responses in blue so that I can answer point by point.

WhatInThe said:
I don't think too many realize how radical Obama's and the current Democratic party's politics are. Throw in some Libertarians and Socialist like Sanders it's a lot different than in decades past. Republicans got their extremists too. But one could very easily associate things like Obama Care or increased & encouraged use of government benefits like food stamps as being communist or actually socialism. The federalization or over use of the federal government could also be considered communism-federal government equals big government which socialism is. Good or bad those politics are associated with communism.

Maybe in your world, whatinthe, but not in other English speaking countries such as the United kingdom, Australia, New Zealand and Canada. These countries all have some form of socialised medicine and income support for the unemployed, the sick and very low income families and these countries are nothing like communism.

Obama should not get a free pass on his politics because he is the first black president. He is leftist Democrat, not a Democrat but an extreme left leaning Democrat worthy of criticism.

I'm more worried about biased judges as much as anything. Judicial activism is not good for anyone. The law is the law and should not be open to that much interpretation. The law is always open to interpretation. The Supreme Court is charged with interpretation of the Constitution and any laws that might be in contravention and to provide a ruling based on their collective interpretation.

Split supreme court decisions are scarey and not a good sign. Split decisions are perfectly normal. The dissenters have the opportunity to set out the minority decision but in the end, the majority decision stands. One should always know what the law is and that it will be enforced equally and based on the law, the system and not a personal bias. Agreed, and there should be political bias either. Once a judge is appointed, by whichever administration, he/she should only be beholden to the law, not to any political masters. If one doesn't like it challenge it or push for change. The courts should not be arbitrators of which way the wind is blowing but rather is it legal or not. Agreed. Do you have examples where this is not happening? The courts are part of the system of checks and balances so one branch of government can't ram through an illegal and/or personal agenda. Communist governments usually don't have a strong court system or they are a puppet of their leader.
You don't have a communistic system and not likely to ever have one because those judges who interpret the Constitution would rule against it.

As far as a communist president I think the communist party used to run the same candidate for a couple of decades-Gus Hall, no one made a fuss and he was there for many elections. Your system is strong enough to cope with a communist or two standing for election. It won't fall apart if one actually wins a seat. There's no way a communist candidate would succeed in a presidential election. You can stop worrying.
Click to expand...
 
WhatInThe said:
I don't think too many realize how radical Obama's and the current Democratic party's politics are. Throw in some Libertarians and Socialist like Sanders it's a lot different than in decades past. Republicans got their extremists too. But one could very easily associate things like Obama Care or increased & encouraged use of government benefits like food stamps as being communist or actually socialism. The federalization or over use of the federal government could also be considered communism-federal government equals big government which socialism is. Good or bad those politics are associated with communism. Obama should not get a free pass on his politics because he is the first black president. He is leftist Democrat, not a Democrat but an extreme left leaning Democrat worthy of criticism.

I'm more worried about biased judges as much as anything. Judicial activism is not good for anyone. The law is the law and should not be open to that much interpretation. Split supreme court decisions are scarey and not a good sign. One should always know what the law is and that it will be enforced equally and based on the law, the system and not a personal bias. If one doesn't like it challenge it or push for change. The courts should not be arbitrators of which way the wind is blowing but rather is it legal or not. The courts are part of the system of checks and balances so one branch of government can't ram through an illegal and/or personal agenda. Communist governments usually don't have a strong court system or they are a puppet of their leader.

As far as a communist president I think the communist party used to run the same candidate for a couple of decades-Gus Hall, no one made a fuss and he was there for many elections.
Click to expand...

Your entire post is based on the assumption that Right is right.........it's not....it's just a political stance.
 
Well, he has a Muslim name, so one could think that he is one. Some guy named O'Malley I would suspect to be an Irish Catholic...:eek:nthego:
 
Well, my first name if Irish, middle name Scandinavian (Viking?) and surname English. I'm not any of these. I'm Australian. I was born here, of an Australian mother.

Here are the origins of the names Barack Hussein Obama.

The 44th President of the United States is named after his father, who was a Kenyan economist. Barack is an African name meaning “blessed.” It is a form of both the Hebrew name Baruchand the Arabic name Mubarak, which also mean “blessed” and relate to the Arabic barakah. Another common spelling of the name is Barak.

Obama is an ancient Kenyan surname. The name is found frequently among the Luo, the third largest ethnic group in Kenya. It is believed that the name derived from the root word obam, which means “to lean or bend.”

Obama’s middle name Hussein is the first name of his paternal grandfather. The name, which is of Arabic origin, means “good” or “handsome one.”
Click to expand...
Obama in neither Kenyan, nor a Hebrew or an Arab. He is not Muslim either. He's an American in the same way that I am an Australian.
 
I don't think too many realize how radical Obama's and the current Democratic party's politics are. ........... But one could very easily associate things like Obama Care or increased & encouraged use of government benefits like food stamps as being communist or actually socialism. The federalization or over use of the federal government could also be considered communism-federal government equals big government which socialism is. Good or bad those politics are associated with communism...........

........ Communist governments usually don't have a strong court system or they are a puppet of their leader.
Click to expand...


So now trying to make sure that anyone who isn't rich or at least 'comfortable', doesn't face sickness and/or death as a result of no medical care, or starvation because the jobs are not there for the average person, is a terrible thing? Why is it considered radical and terrible to help one another? Is there something that I'm missing here? If nothing else, maybe one should consider food stamps for example as a nod to the wrong of government allowing a countries corporations to ship jobs to China or Taiwan or wherever. Sort of a 'well we let your jobs go so you don't have one now, but at least we can quiet the empty rumble in your stomach by giving you access to some food, here have a book of food stamps'.

Or another question, is everyone still connecting the word communism to horrible despots like Stalin or Mau and that's where the fear comes from (because you don't want to be like they were) or is it a case of not wanting to help out those who need help as in 'sharing' a little bit of their wealth?

I read an article a while back that said Finland was one of the 'happiest' countries in the world and when I looked into it, I found out that they have an extremely high tax rate, but that makes sure that every child can get a university education if they want it, old people will never live in substandard housing, food for all, etc. Is that the picture of 'success' or is it what you (had) in America, where an illness either went untreated or could bankrupt you, poor families didn't have enough food or only well off people could ever hope to see their children go to secondary education and thereby raise their standard of living and on the 'happiness' meter, we were disappointingly in the middle of the pack?

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...e-the-happiest-countries-in-the-world#media-2
According to that Bloomberg study, out of a field of 20, the US is 14th on the 'happiness scale'.

One thing I do find interesting is that in that Bloomberg study, Canadians featured up at the top (5th) even though our old folks are less protected (I think but am not positive) than the Fins and our kids have the same problems with that university education that American kids do, i.e. so expensive that it becomes exclusionary to many. Maybe that just means that we're more inclined to settle or are ...... Don't quite know what to make of that.


Also, if you don't think your court system is at the behest of 'government' than I think you might need to rethink that position.
 
This is a documentary about that two decade old Stella Liebeck case where that woman got scalded in her lap by McDonalds hot coffee. I'm sure you remember that case. This link: is a trailer to an HBO documentary about it (can't find the actual documentary, sorry) in which it talks about how corporate America bought the legal system as a result of that case. And we all know how corporations in the US have lobbyists interacting on their behalf, with the decision makers of the country.
[video]http://www.hotcoffeethemovie.com/Default.asp[/video]

And if you can't find the documentary, here's an article in The Atlantic that discusses what the HBO piece shows. Personally, I watched the documentary when it first came out and I remember being quite shocked.


http://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2011/07/hot-coffee-and-the-scalding-of-the-american-jury/241787/

'HBO's new documentary sheds light on the misconceptions surrounding tort reform, and how civil justice already has been sold, in some cases lock, stock and gavel, to the highest corporate bidder......It's a tale of how corporate interests, and their dutiful tribunes in political office and on the bench, have stripped the American jury of much of its authority to dispense justice to civil litigants.....'

So is it really possible to point the finger at Communist governments and say: 'Communist governments usually don't have a strong court system or they are a puppet of their leader.', and still feel superior to their example?

 
Well, I don't think too many realize that socialism and communism are not the same thing, they need to 'refresh their mind' on this. It is just too sad that there are those that spend so much time twisting the facts to show their hatred for this president.
 
My post was intended to speak of US politics and our current President. Seems some felt I was attacking or pointing to their country. Not intended at all. Also some felt it was poor to point to Obama as he is so late in his 'successful' terms. It does not matter as what I was intending was to widen the knowledge of our communist party and how happy they are with the way Obama has been doing so many things they, CPUSA, wants things to be done.

Obama is definitely a far far left socialist. Pretty obvious the way he works and also pretty obvious is the way he has damaged the US economy with his failures to balance the budget even once in his 6.5 years so far. Obama's adding of 8.5 trillion additional debt, so far, will be a major problem for many years to come.

Some of Obama's non Congressional happenings will be challenged as soon as he leaves, and rightfully so. One big effort that has some good ideas also has some rather scary ideas and will be challenged. That will be the medical system. Another area needing challenge is the 'green' ideas like solar panels and wind machines. Who is paying for all this effort that allows the companies to offer free installations of the solar panels. Big bucks behind all that 'free' stuff. Question on private money or taxes going wild. Not all the Obama things will survive any new administration, Dem or Rep, when trying to put money to where it would do the best job and get our budgets balanced once again.

Surprise in a way about how some took my post as threatening Obama. He has done just about as much as he can, his term is essentially over. His health care program will remain his big thing. Still some tweaking and explaining till the public really knows how it works, is working correctly, and will remain in place. Lots of information was never publicized and Obama did some tweaking as time went by. It still needs a good review and fixing. My success in the Obama care program. I pay more now and really don't have a clue as to what should be paid, charges paid, just several pages of paper each month that tells me what I have received and any owed.

Doctors getting $7 for a visit? Not so. I would like to know more about how much charged, how much medical services got paid, how much I must pay to close that charge. Open and honest statements is what I prefer,

So much for now. May have more later.
 
Com'on! He is in cahoots with the One World Order group and everyone knows it who is paying attention. The end of the Republic is near...
 

You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top