Octoldit
Gold Member
- Sep 8, 2008
- 1,003
- 174
- 130
There’s an old saying, “Tell me who your friends are, and I’ll tell you who you are.” If this be true, Hillary Clinton’s got some 'splainin’ to do — because the Communist Party USA (CPUSA) is all in for her candidacy.
Oh, the CPUSA hasn’t technically endorsed Clinton; that would hurt its street cred because she’s not an out-of-the-closet Marxist. But they certainly are burning red with Democrat passion. As WND.com writes:
That passion was in full display with a seven-person team of “reporters” covering their national political convention last month. And their convention was the Democratic National Convention that nominated Hillary Rodham Clinton as their undisputed candidate for president of the United States.
… The Communists, who for decades ran their own candidates for president and vice president but supported Barack Obama in 2008 and 2012, don’t just like Hillary and Bernie [Sanders]. The party also gave a big thumbs-up to Clinton’s running mate, Tim Kaine.
“He’s a great choice,” wrote staffer Larry Rubin on the first day of the convention. “Kaine pushed the political envelope of Virginia, an erstwhile red southern state, in a progressive direction — and won! He was elected mayor of Richmond, then governor of the state and then senator. Everyone agrees: he’s a sincere, nice guy.”
This matters because it’s obvious that, with communist adherents’ history of murdering 100 million people during the 20th century, they’re all about advancing nice guys. And Kaine and Unable fit the bill.
And if the above doesn’t convince you that the CPUSA and the Democratic Party are currently, if unofficially, joined at the hipster, consider that Charisma News reported on Tuesday that “CPUSA National Chairman John Bachtell actually supported U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) for the Democratic Party's presidential nomination. But when it became obvious to everyone — except the Sanders supporters — that Hillary Clinton would be the Democrat nominee, he announced he would vote for her in the November election.” Charisma News then pointed out that Bachtell wrote the following in a June CPUSA website article:
What direction the country goes in depends in large measure on the fight for unity, the ability to build a broad multiracial labor-led movement working with the Democratic Party that can reach, educate and mobilize millions of voters and turn them out on Election Day….
There has been the growth of a broad democratic alliance over the past 25 years on a range of economic, political, social and environmental issues. Today, there are broad majorities in support of progressive ideas like taxing the rich, curbing greenhouse gases, higher minimum wage, criminal justice reform, reproductive rights, immigration reform, marriage equality, etc. This was a driving force behind the Sanders campaign.
Of course, Sanders, who was very much at home in the Democrat primaries and drew huge support, has long been an avowed socialist. Note that under Marxist doctrine, socialism is the transitional stage between economic freedom (what the socialists termed “capitalism”) and communism; contrary to popular belief, this socialist stage involves government ownership of the means of production — something people incorrectly associate with “communism” — which actually is the culmination of the socialist revolution and is the stage at which, the theory goes, the government will just melt away and “the people” will live in harmony in a state of economic equality and bliss. This is why the despotic U.S.S.R. did, without any false advertising, stand for the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. And it’s why Cuban leader Fidel Castro did call his government a “socialist regime” in 1961.
And where does Clinton stand relative to socialist Sanders? FiveThirtyEight.com wrote last year that based on the OnTheIssues.org scale, “She is as liberal as Elizabeth Warren and barely more moderate than Bernie Sanders.” Even more alarming is a testimonial from former Bill Clinton political operative Larry Nichols. He said in 2015 that the first time he met Hillary, she was wearing a medal around her neck stating, “Proud member of the American Communist Party” (video here; forward to 6:07). Of course, this having been in Arkansas in the 1970s, some will no doubt shrug the matter off as a “youthful indiscretion.” Note, though, there’s no record of a Clinton political “conversion,” of someone who knew her “when” saying, “Wow, she was pretty radical, but, boy, did she ever change.” So perhaps, just maybe, this explains why the CPUSA appears quite comfortable going all in for Clinton.
And a July 26 People’s World (their website) editorial bears witness to their desire to get Clinton elected. As they wrote:
Donald Trump steals wages. He'd pick your pocket in a New York minute. He lies and spreads hate. He's a racist and a bully.
… While the establishment GOP was surprised by the successful insurgency of so-called outsider Trump, they are united in purpose: delivering more inequality, more misery, more instability and violence against working-class people of all races, genders, religions and sexual orientations. They are united with giant corporations and the billionaire class in their drive to lower wages and living conditions and increase their profits and power.
As opposed to the CPUSA, of course, which has purely altruistic motives.
Many, no doubt, will scoff at the notion that Americans could elevate in government a Marxist in shepherd’s clothing. But it has already happened. New York City mayor “Bolshevik” Bill de Blasio used to raise money for the Sandinistas (Nicaraguan Marxists), subscribed to their newsletter, and honeymooned in Cuba. Barack Obama’s former “green jobs czar” Van Jones proclaimed himself to be a communist, and the president’s former communications director Anita Dunn called Mao Tse-tung one of her “two favorite political philosophers” (perhaps his philosophy on how to kill 60 million people impressed her). Obama himself was mentored as a boy by the notorious Frank Marshall Davis, a card-carrying member of the CPUSA. And the teaching apparently stuck. Note here that ex-Marxist Dr. John Drew maintains that when he met Obama at Occidental College in 1980, Obama was "in 100-percent total agreement" with his communist professors and was a flat-out "Marxist-Leninist" who believed in old-style communist revolution.
Given the above, it’s not surprising that David Kupelian, managing editor of WND.com, had the following to say about the Democrat Party’s devolution. Writes WND.com:
“Amazing as it may seem, Barack Obama has dragged the entire Democratic Party so far leftward over the past seven-plus years that today’s Democratic Party has become almost indistinguishable from the Communist Party.
“If that sounds hyperbolic to you, just stop reading right now and pull up the CPUSA’s website,” he added. “Spend some time reading and digesting it. Try to discern any major differences between the Communist Party’s concerns, sensibilities and solutions — on issues from ‘gay’ rights, to unfettered immigration, to renewable energy, to wealth redistribution, to condemning cops as racist, to universal health care — and those of today’s Democratic Party.”
This all brings to mind the somewhat famous quotation about how “under the name of 'liberalism,'” Americans “will adopt every fragment of the socialist program, until one day America will be a socialist nation, without knowing how it happened." This has been, apparently, incorrectly attributed to socialist Norman Thomas. Yet the sentiment certainly was expressed to Thomas by socialist author Upton Sinclair, who stated, “The American People will take Socialism, but they won't take the label.…There is no use attacking it [our enemies] by a front attack, [sic] it is much better to out-flank them.”
And whoever said it first, it now certainly seems prophetic. So much so, that some patriots might lament: Where is Joe McCarthy when you really need him?
Source: Communist Party Goes All In for Hillary
LINK: www.octoldit.info/communism
Oh, the CPUSA hasn’t technically endorsed Clinton; that would hurt its street cred because she’s not an out-of-the-closet Marxist. But they certainly are burning red with Democrat passion. As WND.com writes:
That passion was in full display with a seven-person team of “reporters” covering their national political convention last month. And their convention was the Democratic National Convention that nominated Hillary Rodham Clinton as their undisputed candidate for president of the United States.
… The Communists, who for decades ran their own candidates for president and vice president but supported Barack Obama in 2008 and 2012, don’t just like Hillary and Bernie [Sanders]. The party also gave a big thumbs-up to Clinton’s running mate, Tim Kaine.
“He’s a great choice,” wrote staffer Larry Rubin on the first day of the convention. “Kaine pushed the political envelope of Virginia, an erstwhile red southern state, in a progressive direction — and won! He was elected mayor of Richmond, then governor of the state and then senator. Everyone agrees: he’s a sincere, nice guy.”
This matters because it’s obvious that, with communist adherents’ history of murdering 100 million people during the 20th century, they’re all about advancing nice guys. And Kaine and Unable fit the bill.
And if the above doesn’t convince you that the CPUSA and the Democratic Party are currently, if unofficially, joined at the hipster, consider that Charisma News reported on Tuesday that “CPUSA National Chairman John Bachtell actually supported U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) for the Democratic Party's presidential nomination. But when it became obvious to everyone — except the Sanders supporters — that Hillary Clinton would be the Democrat nominee, he announced he would vote for her in the November election.” Charisma News then pointed out that Bachtell wrote the following in a June CPUSA website article:
What direction the country goes in depends in large measure on the fight for unity, the ability to build a broad multiracial labor-led movement working with the Democratic Party that can reach, educate and mobilize millions of voters and turn them out on Election Day….
There has been the growth of a broad democratic alliance over the past 25 years on a range of economic, political, social and environmental issues. Today, there are broad majorities in support of progressive ideas like taxing the rich, curbing greenhouse gases, higher minimum wage, criminal justice reform, reproductive rights, immigration reform, marriage equality, etc. This was a driving force behind the Sanders campaign.
Of course, Sanders, who was very much at home in the Democrat primaries and drew huge support, has long been an avowed socialist. Note that under Marxist doctrine, socialism is the transitional stage between economic freedom (what the socialists termed “capitalism”) and communism; contrary to popular belief, this socialist stage involves government ownership of the means of production — something people incorrectly associate with “communism” — which actually is the culmination of the socialist revolution and is the stage at which, the theory goes, the government will just melt away and “the people” will live in harmony in a state of economic equality and bliss. This is why the despotic U.S.S.R. did, without any false advertising, stand for the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. And it’s why Cuban leader Fidel Castro did call his government a “socialist regime” in 1961.
And where does Clinton stand relative to socialist Sanders? FiveThirtyEight.com wrote last year that based on the OnTheIssues.org scale, “She is as liberal as Elizabeth Warren and barely more moderate than Bernie Sanders.” Even more alarming is a testimonial from former Bill Clinton political operative Larry Nichols. He said in 2015 that the first time he met Hillary, she was wearing a medal around her neck stating, “Proud member of the American Communist Party” (video here; forward to 6:07). Of course, this having been in Arkansas in the 1970s, some will no doubt shrug the matter off as a “youthful indiscretion.” Note, though, there’s no record of a Clinton political “conversion,” of someone who knew her “when” saying, “Wow, she was pretty radical, but, boy, did she ever change.” So perhaps, just maybe, this explains why the CPUSA appears quite comfortable going all in for Clinton.
And a July 26 People’s World (their website) editorial bears witness to their desire to get Clinton elected. As they wrote:
Donald Trump steals wages. He'd pick your pocket in a New York minute. He lies and spreads hate. He's a racist and a bully.
… While the establishment GOP was surprised by the successful insurgency of so-called outsider Trump, they are united in purpose: delivering more inequality, more misery, more instability and violence against working-class people of all races, genders, religions and sexual orientations. They are united with giant corporations and the billionaire class in their drive to lower wages and living conditions and increase their profits and power.
As opposed to the CPUSA, of course, which has purely altruistic motives.
Many, no doubt, will scoff at the notion that Americans could elevate in government a Marxist in shepherd’s clothing. But it has already happened. New York City mayor “Bolshevik” Bill de Blasio used to raise money for the Sandinistas (Nicaraguan Marxists), subscribed to their newsletter, and honeymooned in Cuba. Barack Obama’s former “green jobs czar” Van Jones proclaimed himself to be a communist, and the president’s former communications director Anita Dunn called Mao Tse-tung one of her “two favorite political philosophers” (perhaps his philosophy on how to kill 60 million people impressed her). Obama himself was mentored as a boy by the notorious Frank Marshall Davis, a card-carrying member of the CPUSA. And the teaching apparently stuck. Note here that ex-Marxist Dr. John Drew maintains that when he met Obama at Occidental College in 1980, Obama was "in 100-percent total agreement" with his communist professors and was a flat-out "Marxist-Leninist" who believed in old-style communist revolution.
Given the above, it’s not surprising that David Kupelian, managing editor of WND.com, had the following to say about the Democrat Party’s devolution. Writes WND.com:
“Amazing as it may seem, Barack Obama has dragged the entire Democratic Party so far leftward over the past seven-plus years that today’s Democratic Party has become almost indistinguishable from the Communist Party.
“If that sounds hyperbolic to you, just stop reading right now and pull up the CPUSA’s website,” he added. “Spend some time reading and digesting it. Try to discern any major differences between the Communist Party’s concerns, sensibilities and solutions — on issues from ‘gay’ rights, to unfettered immigration, to renewable energy, to wealth redistribution, to condemning cops as racist, to universal health care — and those of today’s Democratic Party.”
This all brings to mind the somewhat famous quotation about how “under the name of 'liberalism,'” Americans “will adopt every fragment of the socialist program, until one day America will be a socialist nation, without knowing how it happened." This has been, apparently, incorrectly attributed to socialist Norman Thomas. Yet the sentiment certainly was expressed to Thomas by socialist author Upton Sinclair, who stated, “The American People will take Socialism, but they won't take the label.…There is no use attacking it [our enemies] by a front attack, [sic] it is much better to out-flank them.”
And whoever said it first, it now certainly seems prophetic. So much so, that some patriots might lament: Where is Joe McCarthy when you really need him?
Source: Communist Party Goes All In for Hillary
LINK: www.octoldit.info/communism
