Obama Linked To Socialist Party

By fitsnews • on October 27, 2008
Comment Print

Ordinarily we view the reporting over at World Net Daily with a healthy dose of skepticism. They’re a lot like the National Enquirer, except without all the three-headed calves and alien babies. Oh, and no hot chicks.

Having said that, the notion that Democratic Presidential nominee Barack Obama has previous ties to a socialist political party shouldn’t surprise anybody, particularly in light of his recent “spread the wealth around” comments.

Anyway, from WND:

Evidence has emerged that Sen. Barack Obama belonged to a socialist political party that sought to elect members to public office with the aim of moving the Democratic Party
far leftward to ultimately form a new political party with a socialist agenda.

Obama’s campaign has denied that he ever belonged to the “New Party,” but the organization’s official newsletter (circa 1996) identifies him as member, shows him posing with its slate of candidates, quotes him as advancing the party’s electoral strategy and says that members of the party were part of his “voter education” and “voter registration” efforts – along with ACORN, the naughty left-wing nuts at the heart of a massive, nationwide voter fraud investigation.

Oh, and they’ve also got pictures …

At first blush (like everything else involving Obama’s shady past), the truth in this case would appear to fall somewhere between the right-wing assaults and the left-wing denials – but viewed in the context of Obama’s own overtly-socialist statements during this election cycle the gray areas begin to evaporate.

Since Obama has openly-embraced socialist principles as recently as two weeks ago, is it really implausible to believe that he was affiliated with a socialist party 12 years ago?

Here’s the other thing – how in the world did Obama get to October without all of this stuff coming out?

How did Hillary Clinton’s machine not nail him to the wall with it during the Democratic primary? Or did the Clintonistas try … and the MSM just ignored them?

Since we’re so close to the election now, all of these revelations about Obama undoubtedly strike many voters as dirty campaigning – desperate attacks launched by a GOP presidential campaign that is trailing badly in battleground state polling.

Again, that’s McCain’s … and Clinton’s … and the media’s failure.

And as a result, what should be one of the most significant revelations of this campaign will end up being viewed through the prism of partisan parting shots, just another last-ditch effort to derail the “Obamable” inevitability.

Which is sad …

Comments

By Moley on October 27th, 2008 at 1:26 pm

Funny picture………. Communism is not the same as socialism?!
BTW…….. we are becoming a socialist country because we can’t trust all the greedy bastards that have sold this country and capitalism down the road for strickly, personal gain! Blame yourselves!

By Ben on October 27th, 2008 at 2:13 pm

Wasn’t it W that has championed bailing out the country by socializing the banking system? Wasn’t it Joe the Plumber that told McCain that Obama said “spread the wealth around?” Has Obama actually said that or is it just McCain quoting a plumber?

By rick on October 27th, 2008 at 3:03 pm

Ben, Hussein said it…Joe just asked him a question and Hussein didn’t know a mike was on. There are also tapes from shows he did in the early 90’s where he used this same term when discussing the constitution and it’s failure to provide for distribution of wealth. Hussein fails to understand the constitution provides opportunity, it’s up to the individual to succeed or fail due to their individual abilities. To take the assets of one group to support another circumvents this belief. The wealthy, since we now live in global economy with the present day technology, can conduct business anywhere….and with Husseins punitive taxes, it won’t be here. Part of our strength as a nation has been the opportunity afforded everyone, with distibution of wealth, once you reach a certain point in the economic structure, punishment commences in the form of increased taxes. Hussein is a socialist, he just doesn’t have the balls to admit it to the american people.

By NobCity on October 27th, 2008 at 3:24 pm

It is the ignorant like Ben who are the “Useful Idiots” that Lenin warned us about.

By rick on October 27th, 2008 at 4:32 pm

Perhaps NobCity, or perhaps he’s repeating what he’s heard. Unless he’s being sarcastic, maybe the question is honest. The amount of disinformation out there is about the only growth industry functioning today.

By Crooner on October 28th, 2008 at 10:35 am

Spreading the wealth around is a Democratic principle, not socialism. Face it, we are a consumer society, our economy is based on consumerism, and the more people out there spending money the better off we all are. Me, I’m hoping like hell for an Obama tax increase. I’d rather make over $250K and be taxed a little more than make less and get a tax break.

By Ben on October 28th, 2008 at 10:39 am

It WAS just an honest question. And who quotes Lenin? Seriously. Get over yourself, dicktown.

By Mitch on October 29th, 2008 at 1:06 am

You never know where you’ll find the Socialist among us. Where is McCarthy when you need him.

“We’re set up, unlike other states in the union, where it’s collectively Alaskans own the resources. So we share in the wealth when the development of these resources occurs.”
– Gov. Sarah Palin, July 2008

There’s one big difference between me and the others — I won’t take every last dime of the surplus and spend it on tax cuts that mostly benefit the wealthy. I’ll use the bulk of the surplus to secure Social Security far into the future to keep our promise to the greatest generation.”

–McCain campaign commercial, January 2000.

Sixty percent of the benefits from his tax cuts go to the wealthiest 10% of Americans — and that’s not the kind of tax relief that Americans need. … Gov. Bush wants to spend the entire surplus on tax cuts. I don’t believe the wealthiest 10% of Americans should get 60% of the tax breaks. I think the lowest 10% should get the breaks. …

“I’m not giving tax cuts for the rich.”

–John McCain, Jan. 5, 2000.

“We give the millionaire a $2,000 refund. Gov. Bush gives him $50,000.”
–Quoted in “John McCain: How Straight a Shooter?” by Jeff Jacoby, Boston Globe, Jan. 27, 2000.

“I have never engaged in class warfare. I am very much in favor of tax cuts for middle-income and lower-income Americans. I’m deeply concerned about a kind of class warfare that’s going on right now. It’s unfortunate. There’s a growing gap between the haves and have-nots in America, and that gap is growing, and it’s unfortunately divided up along ethnic lines.

I feel very strongly that we ought to have middle-income and lower-income tax cuts, and we’ll be getting into it, I’m sure, later on in this program. Mine are basically comparable to Gov. Bush’s, in some cases far better. But I’m not sure we need to give two-thirds of that tax cut, of that money, to the wealthiest 10% of America.”

John McCain – Michigan Republican Debate, Jan. 11, 2000.

Leave a Comment