Old commies like new face
Posted: February 16, 2008
1:00 am Eastern


Pity poor Hillary.

She worked so hard in New Left and Old Left causes in her youth only to be abandoned by the hard-line Communist Party establishment in favor of the fresh new face of Barack Hussein Obama, who seems to toe the party line without even trying – perhaps without even realizing he's doing it.

There are few things more undeniable in life than that the Communist Party USA has a party line. It has been this way since the days of Josef Stalin. With Hillary Rodham Clinton having paid her dues years ago, working with all the right people and all the right causes (or should that be all the left people and all the left causes), she might have assumed the support of this small, but highly organized and disciplined group.

If so, her assumptions have been proven wrong.

The CPUSA is going all the way with Barack Hussein Obama.

How do I know?

Sometimes you have to read between the lines. But let this Google search of the CPUSA website make your research a little easier.

It shows the People's Weekly World (it was the People's Daily World in the good old days before the fall of the Soviet Union) pulling out all the stops for Obama. The little red rag can't even disguise its giddiness about the junior senator from Illinois. A similar search on Hillary turns up respectful, but unenthusiastic coverage of her campaign.

So what's the takeaway? What does this mean to real Americans – the hundreds of millions of us who don't read the People's Weekly World?

It means Obama is more radical, more revolutionary, more socialist, more Communist in his worldview than even Hillary.

I know. I know. It would seem nearly an impossible challenge. But that's how this veteran Commie watcher sees it.

These guys don't make rash decisions. They don't jump on bandwagons. They make calculated and well-considered choices based on one thing – who comes closer to representing the highest ideals of the Communist Manifesto and Marxist-Leninism.

These are Stalinists, stuck in another era, unable to see the world as it really is because of their delusional pathology that leads them down the deadly, oppressive path of totalitarianism.

They looked hard into the faces of Hillary and Obama. They studied their records. They pored over their position papers. And they – the U.S. version of the Politburo – determined Barack Obama is their man.

When the Communist Party gets behind a candidate, it's not just words on a newspaper. The party dispatches apparatchiks to work hard for the candidate. It occurs to me we may very well have seen a couple of those workers of the world inside Obama's Houston office – those ladies flying the Cuban flags emblazoned with images of Ernesto "Che" Guevara.

Think about this now.

Barack Obama is pummeling Hillary in the polls. He is cleaning her clock in the primaries and caucuses. He is leading John McCain in head-to-head matchups with the Republican standard bearer by 14 points!

This guy could actually become the president of the United States.

If he does, it won't be like the Manchurian Candidate backing into the highest office in the land. If Barack Obama wins the White House, the Communists will have gotten their man the conventional way – through an actual election, working through the system.

There's an old Chinese proverb: "May you live in interesting times."

Some non-newsmen suggest it's actually a curse.

Indeed, we are living in extraordinary times. While they may be good for journalists, I'm sure they are not good for the American way of life.

I'm sorry. Who's the one supporting the health care program founded by Socialist countries again? Oh yeah! Idiots....

Both of them.

Are you trying to tell me that this plan:

http://www.barackobama.com/issues/healthcare/

...is more "socialistic" than a mandated one?

Let's first define "communism"

a system of social organization in which all economic and social activity is controlled by a totalitarian state dominated by a single and self-perpetuating political party.

Since Obama is a wealthy lawyer with many assets, I can't see why he would want the government to take that all away. Neither would Hillary. They simply want to make health care more affordable for the common citizen (why in the world is that a bad thing?). Don't confuse that with communism, in which individuals aren't allowed to own any assets. No democrat would want that (considering they're all RICH and are getting greater private fundraising than the GOP candidates this year).

In short, before you label somebody, first learn the meaning of the label you're using. All of the top democrats are very wealthy (as are the GOP), and therefore, calling any of them "commies" defies both logic and the English language. If anything, the GOP are more like communists, as they have been chipping away at our rights (Patriot Act) and are closer to trying to create a totalitarian state (for example, Bush tried to strip all other branches of as much power as he could).

In reality, the nation won't change that much no matter who wins (Obama, Hillary, or McCain). But Obama is the only guy with the speaking skills required for the job, which is why he's getting more and more support.

__________________
Winner of the Post of the Week award:

The Niner Zone

We who are about to pay, salute you!

Enjoy.

Health Care
Quotes are cut from Obama's website.

Translation (Obamunise) -
No American taxpayer will be expected just to pay for his own family's healthcare. You, who are working, will pay us...

Translation (Obamunise) -
People who object to financing abortions, too bad! We are going to force you to pay for Suzy to kill her baby. You, who are working, will pay us...


Translation (Obamunise) -
If you work hard, you will pay more than your fair share. You, who are working, will pay us...


Translation (Obamunise) -
Worker's paradise. Long live the proletariat. You, who are working, will pay us...


Translation (Obamunise) -
We will make it so that all you have to do is look at the pictures. We will do your thinking for you. You, who are working, will pay us...


Translation (Obamunise) -
Register on-line or else. You, who are working, will pay us...

Translation (Obamunise) -
Because we the govt. will take care of all that for you. (Another 20,000 strong, public govt. work force.) You, who are working, will pay us...

Translation (Obamunise) -
The rich motherless dogs who exploit the masses for their own greed and profit will be shot - to the sound of the cheering throngs. You, who are working, will pay us...

Signed, your beloved Che' Obama
You, who are working, will pay us...

(The attached picture was created by the poster of this forum message. All rights reserved. (c) 2008 )

Attached Images

Barak2006.jpg (61.2 KB, 5 views)

__________________
"I know no method to secure the repeal of bad or obnoxious laws so effective as their stringent execution." March 4, 1869, Grant's First Inaugural Address

Hahahaha. Funny.

Point is, the current democrat and left wing parties want to have the government do the thinking for you when it comes to lifestyle.

If my wife wants to have an abortion, why should the govvernment tell me to have or not to have? When it comes to chosing doctors, why should they tell me who to see? When it comes to what sort of plan I can get, why should they tell me what plan to go for?
This is called a nanny state.....

To keep it positive, let's talk about what I'm thankful for.

Thank goodness that all three of the top candidates (McCain, Obama, Clinton) are all social liberals. Perhaps all three of them have what it takes to prevent insurance companies from denying paying customers coverage, based on a health episodes of many years ago.

If it were McCain vs. Obama, that would be refreshing, as both men think independently from their party, and are willing to defy party wishes to do what they believe is right. They are also willing to compromise with other leaders to find solutions to common problems that everybody can live with. Neither candidate is a polarizing figure (Bushes and Clintons both are), which will hopefully bring together this nation that has been split due to the policies. rhetoric, and poor speaking skills of G.W. Bush.

I don't believe the country will be that much different depending on who wins. They are all moderates (social liberals) with some common sense (and they all say things to please their constituents, but that doesn't mean it will be a top priority), so I'm going to go out on a limb, and predict that any of them will do fine.

I'm voting for Obama because that's what my gut tells me. He speaks more about working together for common sense causes, which we need more of on the capital hill. And if he weren't an intelligent problem solver, he would not have made it as a successful lawyer and a senator. Unlike Bush, this is a man we can look up to as an example of defying the odds (just look at his full name) to achieve the American dream. Out of all of the candidate, who will have the problem solving and communication skills to be an efficient head of state? That's Obama, without a doubt.

The MONEY QUESTION: Why do you oppose the idea of anybody who's willing to pay being able to get health coverage? If we can do it for cars, why not people? My friend, who was denied by Keiser due to a past illness, wants to know.

__________________
Winner of the Post of the Week award:

The Niner Zone

Yet the Communist Party is endorsing Osama......I mean Obama. They endorsed John Kerry last time around.

current rneocon and religious right ight wing want to have the government do the thinking for you when it comes to lifestyle.

I am alert enough to not let either extreme "think" for me.

__________________
"I was born at night, but it was not last night night"