Obama’s Governance is Right out of the Communists’ Plan to Destroy America

Susan Eovaldi, CoachIsRight.com

The Communist plan of 45 declared goals for taking over America without waging a messy war contains several items that are eerily similar to Barack Obama’s criticism of our U.S. Constitution. Obama has said our sacred Constitution is “fundamentally flawed” because it lacks a mechanism for redistribution of wealth from those who create it to those who merely consume it.

“The Constitution is a charter of negative liberties,” Obama told a Black radio station audience about seven years before he ran for president.  Perhaps our president isn’t familiar with the words of William Bradford, the leader of Pilgrims.

Bradford characterized redistribution of wealth as a total failure because “men didn’t like having to share the fruits of their hard labor with other men who wouldn’t work.”

The plan for taking over America was read into our Congressional record in 1963 by Florida Democrat  A.S.  Herlong, Jr. It contains the following point:  “Discredit the American Constitution by calling it inadequate, old fashioned, out of step with modern needs.”  This chilling goal is so similar to the stated criticism Obama made of our founding document that we need to constantly be aware of how he and his crew are trying to, in his own words, “fundamentally transform America.”

Did he have these Communist goals at the ready when he framed his speech just five days before his victory?

Read more

Obama’s Socialist History Revealed

Stanley Kurtz, National Review

On the afternoon of April 1, 1983, Barack Obama, then a senior at Columbia University, made his way into the Great Hall of Manhattan’s Cooper Union to attend a “Socialist Scholars Conference.” There Obama discovered his vocation as a community organizer, as well as a political program to guide him throughout his life.

The conference itself was not a secret, but it held a secret, for it was there that a demoralized and frustrated socialist movement largely set aside strategies of nationalization and turned increasingly to local organizing as a way around the Reagan presidency — and its own spotty reputation. In the early 1980s, America’s socialists discovered what Saul Alinsky had always known: “Community organizing” is a euphemism behind which advocates of a radical vision of America could advance their cause without the bothersome label “socialist” drawing adverse attention to their efforts.

A loose accusation of his being a socialist has trailed Obama for years, but without real evidence that he saw himself as part of this radical tradition. But the evidence exists, if not in plain sight then in the archives — for example, the archived files of the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA), which include Obama’s name on a conference registration list. That, along with some misleading admissions in the president’s memoir, Dreams from My Father, makes it clear that Obama attended the 1983 and 1984 Socialist Scholars conferences, and quite possibly the 1985 conclave as well. A detailed account of these conferences (along with many other events from Obama’s radical past) and the evidence for Obama’s attendance at them can be found in my new book, Radical-in-Chief: Barack Obama and the Untold Story of American Socialism.

The 1983 Cooper Union Conference, billed as a tribute to Marx, was precisely when Obama discovered his vocation for community organizing. Obama’s account of his turn to community organizing doesn’t add up. He portrays it as a mere impulse based on little actual knowledge. But that impulse saw Obama through two years of failed job searches. Clearly he had a deeper motivation. The evidence suggests he found it at the Socialist Scholars conferences, where he encountered the entrancing double idea that America could be transformed by a kind of undercover socialism, and that African Americans would be the key figures in advancing community organizing.

Read more.

Obama’s UN Apology is a Blueprint for Socialism

Ben Johnson, Floyd Reports

Much has been said about the first-ever report on U.S. human rights to the UN Human Rights Council, which the Obama administration released to the public this week. Most commentators have focused on how our least patriotic president apologized for America’s shortcomings. But there is a more important facet to the report: it establishes a host of new socialist “rights” the administration hopes globalist bureaucrats will help enforce.

Ditching the Constitution: Obama’s shift away from our Constitution and God-given liberty is startling. The 26-page report uses the word “progress” 18 times. After mentioning  “the original flaw” of the U.S. Constitution, he makes this pivot: “Our commitment to the rights protected in our Constitution is matched by a parallel commitment to foster a society characterized by shared prosperity.” In other words, our desire to maintain the barriers our Founding Fathers wisely established in our form of government is equal to our commitment to “spread the wealth around.”

Obama affirms that he accepts “all kinds of obligations – both positive and negative – that governments have with regard to their citizens.” The reference to “positive obligations” is significant to Obama’s view of the Constitution and its “flaw.” In a 2001 interview with Chicago’s public radio station WBEZ-FM, he complained:

[A]t least as it’s been interpreted…the Constitution is a charter of negative liberties. It says what the states can’t do to you, says what the federal government can’t do to you, but it doesn’t say what the federal government or the state government must do on your behalf.

He groused the Supreme Court only offered “formal rights” — for instance, after desegregation, “I would now be able to sit at a lunch counter and order, and as long as I could pay for it, I’d be O.K.” A government pursuing “positive” obligations means the government has to provide everyone a certain amount of money, wealth, or status by redistributing other people’s money. Maggie Gallagher in her column today notes that the report treats ObamaCare as a basic human right. The rest of the report lists a host of other, unheard of “rights.”

Card check: a Fundamental Human Right. Obama goes on to say freedom of organization “protects workers and their right to organize.” But some labor organizers have spoken about “the challenges they face in organizing effectively” – like the fact that no one outside the federal government wants to join a union. “Currently there are several bills in Congress that seek to strengthen workers’ rights – assuring that workers can continue to associate freely.” This is a reference to card check, the system of forming unions that does away with a private ballot and leaves employees vulnerable to intimidation.

Voting six times, a UN Right. The document recounts the history of minority and women voting, claiming there is an ongoing problem (even though the most recent racial voting incident featured Black Panthers threatening to club whitey.) It continues, “The Department [of Justice] recently obtained consent decrees against some jurisdictions” to make sure minorities are not unfairly excluded. One of those decrees was against Port Chester, New York, “designed to cure vote dilution for Hispanic voters.” Port Chester’s had never elected an Hispanic politician, and its population was 46 percent Hispanic; however, in the words of the New York Times, “many are not citizens.” Although these non-citizens are not entitled to any representation, the DoJ forced a remedy: allowing Hispanic residents of Port Chester to vote six times. It did the trick; the village elected its first Hispanic — coincidentally, a Democrat.

Bilingual Ballots and Registering Democratic Voters. The report trumpets securing “meaningful access to the franchise for non-English speaking citizens” (and, undoubtedly, non-citizens, convicts, the mentally insane, and the deceased). Obama believes those who cannot read the English language should vote for the nation’s representatives — in higher numbers than they are now. The document reaffirms America’s commitment “to increase historically low [voter] registration rates of minorities and persons with disabilities.”

Gay Marriage and Gays in the Military. The “LGBT” community made up this report’s preferred victim group, saying its “experience of discrimination illustrates the continuing debate among citizens about how we can build a far more fair society.” Obama enthused that Congress passed the Hate Crimes law that pastors fear will silence their ability to preach traditional Christian values. He highlights the Supreme Court decision overturning state anti-sodomy laws in 2003, and his decision to extend some benefits to the same-sex partners of certain federal employees. Then he looks to the future:

President Obama is committed to repeal the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” statute…The President [sic.] has also supported passage of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act…Debate continues over equal rights to marriage for LGBT Americans at the federal and state levels

The reference to “equal rights” is important language in a “human rights” document aimed at curbing discrimination. The document states “At this point” Obama merely “supports repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act.” But its inclusion marks gay marriage as a “human right” in the eyes of the United Nations.

Equality of Outcome. The discussion of “discrimination” focuses on the fact that minority groups have not attained as much as white Americans. This, Obama insists, must stem from bigotry. “We are not satisfied that whites are twice as likely as Native Americans to have a college degree. The United States continues to address such disparities by working to ensure that equal opportunity is not only guaranteed in law but experienced in fact by all Americans.” What he promises is not “equality of opportunity” but equality of outcome — that every ethnic group, and every person, has the “right” to an equal amount of wealth. Every American — smart or dumb, ambitious or lazy, gifted or talentless — will receive the same result as everyone else.

The name for that system is socialism, and Obama regards it as a basic human right.

Feminism. Obama points to his passage of the Fair Pay Act and support for the “Paycheck Fairness Act.” He also claims, “Our recent health care reform bill also lowers costs and offers greater choices for women.”

Affirmative Action. Obama pledges racial redistribution of wealth through reverse discrimination. He promises enhanced Affirmative Action programs “in the workplace when [minorities] are underrepresented.” But he does not confine this to employment. The section on American public education begins: “The United States is committed to providing equal educational opportunities to all children, regardless of their individual circumstances, race, national origin, ethnicity, gender [sic.] or disability.” Yet it makes clear that Obama foresees a world in which all education is administered according to race and sex.  It “promotes educational equity for women” – who are vastly overrepresented on college campuses – “and students of color,” as well as seeking to “strengthen historically Black [sic.] colleges and universities.” And he vows federal, state, and local governments will move heaven and earth to “address the factors that contribute to the education ‘achievement gap’…particularly African American and Hispanic children.” Latinos in particular “find linguistic discrimination a barrier to full participation.” This means they have a right to taxpayer-funded bilingual education. Obama is very concerned about discrimination “in the areas of capital punishment, juvenile justice, racial profiling, and racial disparities in sentencing.”

Universal Preschool. The document states the Dept. of Education will “provide low-income students and students of color with increased access to early learning and education” — that is, taxpayer-funded daycare. In fact, this has already begun. The report notes that stimulus funds “are being used to promote high-quality early childhood education.”

The Right to Illegal Immigration. As I reported yesterday, the human rights report singles out Arizona’s immigration law as a violation of illegal aliens’ rights.

“Freedom from Want.The report undergirds its commitment to socialism by citing FDR’s “Four Freedoms” speech. One of the new freedoms he sought was “freedom from want.” This “right” is listed under the section, “A commitment to foster a society where citizens are empowered to exercise their rights” — making clear Obama’s commitment to “positive obligations” and the federal government’s need to redistribute wealth.

So far, this is the standard, far-Left platform — although expressed more honestly than he ever manages in front of an American audience. The significance of ensconcing all these new “rights” in this UN document is that it creates international legal precedent. In the inaugural report before the UN Human Rights Council, the United States has declared it supports all these as the basic entitlements of every citizen. As the Human Rights Council process continues, a “troika” of three nations will review our report, other international reports, and the testimony of NGOs, then make a series of recommendations to implement these goals. Every four years, the council will grade our “progress.” And this world body reserves the right to “decide on the measures it would need to take in case of persistent non-cooperation.”

That means if future administrations object to the plan the UN draws up in cooperation with the most anti-American administration in history, they could conceivably be deemed guilty of “persistent non-cooperation.” If their lack of cooperation were sufficiently strong — and we were sufficiently weak — it could impose this agenda on the American people against their will. At a minimum, Obama has reduced our standing in the eyes of the world if we reject any piece of his far-Left agenda. This report guarantees we will endure decades of international propaganda that the United States is “not meeting its human rights commitments to the United Nations” — putting us on the same level as China, North Korea, or Iran.

The Obama administration has made its campaign platform the internationally recognized standard of conduct for future generations, all without winning a single vote for much of it.

Gingrich: Obama’s Socialist Agenda Threatens US

By: Dan Weil, Newsmax

President Obama’s socialist agenda threatens our way of life, says former House Speaker Newt Gingrich.

“We have two mortal threats,” he told FT.com in a video interview. “First is radical Islam. The other is a secular socialist model of government dominating and defining life that would be fundamentally alien to historical American experience.”

In the last 10-15 years secular socialism has strengthened in universities, courts, the bureaucracy and the media, says Gingrich, author of the new book, “To Save America: Stopping Obama’s Secular Socialist Machine.”

Obama’s commitment to a combination of Chicago machine politics and radicalism presents grave danger, Gingrich says – “comparable” to Hitler and Stalin.

“Had the Nazis won, the American system would have died,” Gingrich said. “If the Soviet Union had won, the American system would have died.”

Read More: