Slashdot Mirror

The MacArthur Foundation long ago devolved into an engine of cultural Marxisism (see Antonio Gramsci). I wouldn't trust anything they say. Teaching kids teh gay is a priority of theirs and no doubt thats a reason they like the social sites and the proselytising that goes on there "In addition to its support of radical environmentalism, the MacArthur Foundation funds groups that advocate gun control, juvenile justice reform, alternatives to incarceration for criminals, low-rent housing for the poor, radical feminist causes, gay rights, and "community change" initiatives to counter America's allegedly rampant racism, sexism, classism, and homophobia. Further, it supports organizations that oppose Social Security privatization, school choice, and the U.S. military's development of an anti-missile defense system." http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/funderProfile.asp?fndid=5223

http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=2336
"The Closing Argument"

By John Perazzo
October 31, 2008

Now that Barack Obama has delivered his nationally televised "closing argument" summarizing the supposed justifications for electing him to be the next President, I present this compelling argument against such a vote. It is an argument based on a thorough analysis of Obama's record vis a vis the votes he has cast, the positions he has taken, and the promises he has made during the course of his entire political career--eight years in the Illinois state senate and four years in the U.S. Senate (of which the last two years, incidentally, were spent almost entirely on campaigning for the presidency rather than on attending to any legislative duties--as evidenced by the very large number of votes for which he was not present during that period).

I will look also at several of Obama's alliances that are of immense significance, examining the nature of those relationships and the reasons why they are so important.

If you, the reader, are already aware of the considerations discussed herein and you intend nevertheless to vote for Barack Obama, your decision is to be respected. In the marketplace of ideas, we are not all required to select items from the same shelves.

But perhaps you are an Obama supporter who is unaware of many or most of the things discussed in this document. It is for your consideration that this is written.

You may approach this document in either of two ways. You may, as is recommended, start at the beginning of the narrative and read it through to the end. But if you prefer, you may also click on those particular subheadings that most interest you, and read them in any sequence you wish.

Table of Contents:

Obama's Major Alliances, Affiliations, and Influences

* William Ayers: "Someone Who Lives in My Neighborhood"
* Bernardine Dohrn: Another ex-Terrorist. Marxist Political Ally
* Pro-Soviet Political Ally: Alice Palmer
* Attending the Socialist Scholars Conferences
* Saul Alinsky: The Marxist Who Was Obama's Strongest Enduring Influence
* ACORN: Socialists and Criminals with Longstanding Ties to Obama
* Fannie Mae and Obama
* Endorsement by the Democratic Socialists of America
* Alliance with the Marxist "New Party"
* Alliance with Carl Davidson, Marxist
* Obama Cites Arafat/PLO Supporter, Rashid Khalidi, As Voice of Reason
* Obama's Pro-Arafat Political Advisor
* Another Obama Associate Who Sees Israel's Creation As a "Catastrophe"
* Obama's Alliance with Multi-Billionaire George Soros, and Why It Matters so Greatly
* Louis Farrakhan
* Rev. Jeremiah Wright
* Rev. Otis Moss
* Rev. Michael Pfleger
* Cornel West (Marxist) and Obama's Black Advisory Council
* Rev. Al Sharpton
* Khalid al-Mansour
* Political Alliance with MoveOn.org
* Political Alliance with an Advocate of Reparations for Slavery
* Obama's Lies about His Muslim Upbringing As a Child

Issues and Perspectives

* Redistribution of Wealth
* Abortion
* Immigration
* Energy Policy
* Taxes
* Foreign Policy
* Homeland Security / War on Terror
* Should Terror Suspects Be Tried by Military Commissions (or by Civilian Courts)?
* Habeas Corpus for Detained Terror Suspects?
* Military / Missile Defense / Weapons Systems
* The War in Afghanistan
* The Iraq War
* Education
* Busing and Race-Conscious Admissions Policies
* Affirmative Action
* Constitution / Supreme Court
* Environment
* Same-Sex Marriage
* Racial Gerrymandering of Voting Districts
* Welfare Reform
* Earmarks
* Criminal Justice
* Gender Discrimination
* Foreign Aid
* Foreign Contributions to Obama's Presidential Campaign
* Obama Likens Aspects of America to Nazi Germany

Conclusion

Obama's Major Alliances, Affiliatio

> Oh get off of it. The reason for the economic meltdown has little to do with Freddie and Fannie.

It had everything to do with Freddie and Fannie. Where do you think those mortage backed securities came from? Who do you think established the lending rules for what paper could go into a Freddie/Fannie/US Fedgov guaranteed securiy? Who was pushing Freddie, Fannie, banks in general to 'make home ownership easier for people in redlined communities'?

No, this was not a problem caused by deregulation. This was a problem caused by Congressional meddling in the marketplace. This was caused by 'community organizers' like ACORN sending mobs to bank president's houses. This was caused by ignoring the multiple warnings from Democrats, Republicans, Regulators, Independent accountants, everybody. Anybody with a functioning brain saw that giving out loans to people, who by definition, had almost no chance to repay them was going to end up in an epic fail. Some people knew the risk and didn't care. See Cloward-Piven Strategy

I'm already hearing the apologists with their tired story that this is just registration fraud, no evidence of actual election fraud. Nothing to see here, move along.....

But they are wrong. Most are just repeating Kos talking points and aren't actually in on the scam, but they are useful idiots. So what IS the scam?

Go check out the CLOWARD-PIVEN STRATEGY for details. Basically the idea is to totally swamp the system so that there is insufficient manpower to detect fraud. So that is a win for them since it brings chaos. Be allowing them to actually commit fraud under the cover of all this noise is yet another win. Finally as they undermine public confidence in our elections they win yet again.

I said nothing about the current crop of candidates or this go-around. You read that into my post when it was never there. I said there is still time to change things by voting. I did't say there was much chance this time around. However the internet is beginning to bear fruit when it comes to smart-mob activity and a new type of smart grass-roots efforts. Ron Paul for example is no joke. He has ammassed a large sum of money. In terms of revenue generation he beats McCain, and in terms of liquid capital he even beats Gulianni. Thanks to the massive internet driven new-age grass-roots efforts around him, he has hardly had to spend any money at all for his advertising. I can't go anywhere without seeing home made signs for him. So he'll have millions to spend on the first primaries. I'm not saying he will win, but he won't be a no-show either. He may be a sign of what is to come. If the internet begins to reinvigorate part of the voting base that has been silent up till now and they rally in nearly spontaneous but organized fashion around a candidate, then we could actually see the rise of viable alternative or 3rd party candidates.

I singled them out because your statement that the Dems are just as bad or worse is complete lunacy. The Democrats are disorganized, incompetent idiots.

The first part doesn't even make sense. You couldn't have singled Republicans out based on my statements because the first time I responded to anything you said was AFTER you had singled out Republicans! You are obviously not paying much attention to what is being said by whom and instead are lost in your emotions.

The second part is just plain ignorant. The Republicans have no real analog to the massive network known as the Shadow Democratic Party. Democrats are outraising Republicans 3 to 1. Democrats control the house. Yeah, real disorganized and incompetent.

IMO the Republicans are now mostly Fascists with deep and organized ties to corporations. Democrats are now mostly Socialists with deep and organized ties to neo-Socialists and international Communism. Go ahead and write the Democrats off as disorganized fools if that make sleep better.

I think you're frothing at the mouth again. Better have that looked at.

And as for citing non-partisan resources, way to use DiscoverTheNetworks as a resource, a site run by righty David Horowitz, or if you prefer, David Horowitz. He's precisely the objective individual we should quote in a constitutional crisis such as this!

Uh, yeah. Patrick Leahy is a reliable source. No bias in his comments. As I recall he had to resign from the Intelligence Committee in the 80s for passing classified documents to reporters. That used to be called treason. "in a 1985 television appearance Leahy disclosed classified information that one of Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak's telephone conversations had been intercepted. The information that Leahy revealed had been used in the operation to capture the Arab terrorists who had hijacked the Achille Lauro cruise ship and killed American citizens, and the Union-Tribune claimed that Leahy's indiscretion may have cost the life of at least one of the Egyptian operatives involved in that operation. In 1987, The Washington Times reported that Leahy had also leaked secret information about a 1986 covert operation planned by the Reagan administration to overthrow Libyan dictator Moammar Gadhafi. Leahy allegedly had said, "I thought [the operation] was probably the most ridiculous thing I had seen, and also the most irresponsible," and had threatened to expose the operation to CIA Director William Casey. A few weeks later, details of the plan appeared in The Washington Post, and the operation was cancelled." ... "Another example of Leahy revealing confidential information occurred just before the Iran-Contra hearings were to begin, when he allowed an NBC reporter to look through the Senate Intelligence Committee's confidential draft report on the burgeoning scandal. After NBC used the privileged information in a January 1987 report, Leahy came under increasing fire, and after a six-month internal investigation he was forced to step down from his seat on the Senate Intelligence Committee. Leahy's leak was considered to be one of the most serious breaches of secrecy in the Intelligence Committee's then-10-year history. http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=2038 A True Hero of the Left!

That said - yes, historically there have been truly massive corruption scandals in the Democratic party - as with any long and distinguished history. Before the Democratic party was the party of civil rights it was the party of segregation.

This isn't necessarily the case today. I believe it was in a book by Tony Brown back in the mid 90's when I came across a concept of the liberal white racism. I can't find this book or the name of it but here is a page describing the Idea with a lot of links to other books with similar sentiments. I won't spend any time on it, it isn't important other then to say, if they don't get caught does that mean it isn't happening.

However I ignore that, for the same reason I ignore that the land my house was built on once belonged to the indians - it was before my time. In the time since I was whelped, the Democratic party has had its share of individual cases of corruption - their rivals have had repeated cases of deep rooted systemic corruption.

There is a minor difference here. The land your house is on was taken several generations ago, the people who owned it or took it aren't alive and that act isn't effecting anyone directly that might be alive today. We are at least three if not more generations removed from it. In the act's of the 60's and so on, we still have people who participated, learned the tricks of the trade from these people, and supported their action still in government. And we still have people who were directly effected by some of this alive today being effected.

I know when you say ignore, you don't mean block out of your mind entirely, your meaning you don't let that rule your decisions today. But the fact is, you have to consider this to some degree as long as some of them are still participating in politics. There are several analogies with sex offenders and thieves living close by but those don't fit entirely and end up be just a malformed strawman argument so I'll skip that step.

However, I am puzzled as to why Nixon is so important when the Watergate scenario happened less then 10 years after those I posted of. And a lot of people seem to think there is an effort to keep two Americas to this day.

I have every hope that congressman Jefferson will go to jail for what seem to me to be fairly obvious crimes, but they do not begin to match the crimes of attempting to defraud the voter during the Nixon era, the allegations (proven to my satisfaction) that arms were traded for hostages to affect the outcome of the 1980 elections, or the sins too great to count that have occurred during this administration. The blunt fact is that while Oliver North was lying to congress, Gary Hart was losing an election based on having a woman on his boat.

The problem isn't that a single person made it to office and was corrupt. The problem becomes when they reach high levels of office and their policy is by default over shadowing everyone else's. Nixon's ordeal wasn't instituted by the Republicans, It wasn't and still isn't some systemic party ideology. The American people saw that when they elected Reagan over Carter in '80. Of course Carter's trouble getting anything working and failed domestic policies had some to do with it.

As for Oliver North getting caught in a lie to congress. This page pretty well sums it up. And if the North ordeal still bothers you, why do you discount the Clintons who did the same things. Except in their case, the lies spread into a federal court were Bill Clinton actually received penalties for it. He was fined by the court, lost his bar credentials (law license), had to pay a fine to the State bar of Arkansas and needs to be sponsored to get the license to practice law back.

But it didn't stop or wasn't limited to t

Also is it just me or the bigger a "capitalist" company becomes the more dictatorial/communist it ends up?