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.
Several blogs, including Powerline, previously documented that while running for the Illinois state Senate in 1996 as a Democrat, Obama actively sought and received the endorsement of the socialist-oriented New Party, with some blogs claiming Obama was a member of the controversial party. The New Party, formed by members of the Democratic Socialists for America and leaders of an offshoot of the Community Party USA, was an electoral alliance that worked alongside the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, or ACORN. The New Party's aim was to help elect politicians to office who espouse its policies. Among New Party members was linguist and radical activist Noam Chomsky. On Oct 25, 10:12 am, "\"Lone Wolf\"" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > For the past month, a long-demonized word has been increasingly > injected into political discussion in the United States—socialism. The > Treasury bailout of Wall Street was initially defeated in the House of > Representatives, largely through the votes of the ultra-right faction > of the Republican Party, which declared the massive government > intervention into the financial markets to be ... "socialism." > > This language was reflected in the media, with descriptions of the > bailout, by both opponents and defenders, as "socialism for the rich," > or "Wall Street socialism." ABC News commentator Sam Donaldson > declared, "Socialism has now washed over free-market capitalism." The > Washington Post's financial columnist, Steven Pearlstein, commented > sarcastically, "A little bit of well-timed, well-crafted socialism is > just the thing to save capitalism from itself." > > Over the past week, denunciations of socialism have become a staple of > the presidential campaign, with Republican John McCain engaging in > right-wing diatribes against the Democratic frontrunner, Barack Obama, > claiming that his support for modest tax increases on the wealthy is > an example of "class warfare." > > In the minds of the McCain campaign strategists, this may be nothing > more than the thousand and first instance of McCarthy-style red- > baiting, a staple of the Republican right for more than half a > century. But there are deeper factors at work. > > The financial crisis which has swept the globe over the past month, > centered in the US banking system, has dealt an enormous blow to the > official ideology of the American ruling class, which more than any > other has elevated worship of the "free market" to the status of a > state religion. > > The Bush administration and the Federal Reserve, with the backing of > the Democratic-controlled Congress, have mounted an unprecedented > series of government interventions into the financial markets--the > $700 billion bailout of mortgage-backed securities, a $250 billion > government purchase of shares in private banks, sweeping federal > guarantees of commercial paper, interbank loans and money-market > mutual funds—pledging trillions of dollars. > > Bush, Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson, Fed chief Ben Bernanke and > other spokesmen have acknowledged that the financial markets have > failed, and warned that without this government intervention the > United States would plunge into a deep recession, and the rest of the > world with it. They admit that the profit system faces its greatest > crisis since the 1930s. > > The federal bailout of Wall Street—despite the hysteria of the House > Republicans—has nothing to do with socialism. The measures could be > more correctly characterized, not as nationalization of the banks, but > as privatization of the US Treasury, turning over its vast resources > to billionaires and speculators. > > The charges of "socialism" demonstrate the degree to which the > eruption of financial crisis has confused and frightened the political > representatives of the ruling elite. They recognize that the near- > breakdown of the credit markets has discredited the capitalist system > in the eyes of the working people, the vast majority of the > population, and they react nervously to anything that might provide an > opening for the expression of anti-capitalist sentiment. > > This political disorientation underlies the latest denunciations of > Obama for his endorsement of marginally higher taxes on the rich to > "spread the wealth around." In his radio address Saturday, McCain > quoted this comment and then declared that it "sounded a lot like > socialism." Obama has replied defensively, citing his support from > paragons of big business like billionaire Warren Buffett, the richest > man in America, former Federal Reserve Board chairman Paul Volcker, > and a host of corporate chieftains. > > Obama's denial of any connection to socialism is the truest statement > he has made in the course of the campaign. He is, like McCain, a > defender of the profit system and, if anything, the preferred > candidate of Wall Street and finance capital. According to a report > Wednesday in the Washington Post, some three quarters of the record > $600 million raised by the Obama campaign has come from the wealthy > and corporate interests. > > It is remarkable that a presidential candidate should stand so > brazenly in favor of maintaining the vastly unequal distribution of > wealth in America—a country characterized by growing poverty, enormous > unmet social needs, declining wages, and rising unemployment. It is > equally noteworthy that Obama has sought to dispute the charge that he > favors any significant redistribution of the wealth, as though that > were a political sin. > > Since it has been given such a prominent place in political discourse > over the past week, it is incumbent on the actual proponents of > socialism, whose voice is the World Socialist Web Site, to address the > question. > > All the campaign talk and media chatter about "socialism" obscures the > most fundamental issue: Socialism is not merely a set of technical > measures involving state intervention into the economy. All capitalist > nations engage in this to one degree or another, depending on > circumstances. State ownership does not in any sense define a society > as socialist, when the state itself is an organ of class rule > controlled by the financial aristocracy. > > Socialism means the reorganization of economic life under the > democratic control of the actual producers, the working people whose > labor creates all wealth. It can come about only through the > independent political mobilization of the working class, led by a > revolutionary party, which establishes a new and far more democratic > form of state, a workers' state, which exercises ownership and control > over the means of production. Socialism cannot be engineered through > backroom deals between Wall Street bankers and Washington politicians, > or through the policies of any Democratic or Republican politician. > > Some 160 years ago, Karl Marx wrote, "A specter is haunting Europe, > the specter of communism." He was describing the mood of fear and > trepidation in the European ruling classes on the eve of the great > revolutionary wave of 1848, even though the number of conscious > revolutionary socialists was still a relative handful. If the specter > of socialism today haunts the American ruling class, despite decades > in which socialism has been subjected to an unrelenting campaign of > slander and vilification, it is likewise because the profit system > faces a new period of revolutionary upheaval. > > Patrick Martin --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
