Tag Archives: community organizing

The Brown Shirts Are Coming!

minute-man-2-lithoFor the past two weeks we have witnessed the greatest political sleight-of-hand display in modern history, or as magicians call it, “misdirection”.  While the media has kept our attention on the super-hyped bonuses of AIG and other financial executives, other events have been taking place virtually unnoticed by the MSM.

Before I get to those, however, there is something else I noticed as I searched for information.  While surfing the web for details of some of Obama’s new initiatives I noticed a pattern that is somewhat disturbing.  “Official” Obama propaganda is everywhere on the web, Facebook, YouTube, Twitter, Flicker, numerous websites and blogs—some hold-overs from the campaign, others new.  The thing that struck me is the emphasis on Obama as a personality, not as the President of the United States.

For example, most Presidents have been content to use the “Seal of the Office of President of the United States” as their “logo.”  Obama, on the other hand, has his own personal seal, the all too familiar red and blue “O” with the stylized flag across the bottom, and it is everywhere.  Another thing I noticed is that on many of the official sites the references are to “Obama”, not to President Obama.  As I browsed around, I kept getting a mental image of the smiling face of Obama staring down from huge posters on the side of buildings in the fashion of Mao, Stalin, Hussein, et al.

Yeah, Okay…so I am becoming paranoid. Sue me.  Anyway, back to what’s been happening while AIG is monopolizing our attention.  First, last week the House overwhelmingly passed H.R. 1388, the “Generations Invigorating Volunteerism and Education Act” (G.I.V.E.).   Yesterday the Senate voted to move their version of the same bill to the floor on a vote of 74-14.  A vote is expected on the Senate Bill sometime this week.

Since these bills enjoy bi-partisan congressional support, they are likely to pass with little opposition.  When passed into law they will consolidate the Domestic Volunteer Service Act of 1973 and the National Community Service Act of 1990 bringing the Peace Corps of President Kennedy and AmeriCorps of President Clinton into the twenty first century and putting them on steroids as the National Civilian Security Corps promised by Obama during the campaign.

Starting with a mere $6 billion in “seed” money the programs are expected to reach their full size by 2014.  All total, the combined programs will employ up to 250,000 paid “volunteers” nationwide. Up to 2,500 uniformed security corps personnel (troops) will be deployed in each state.  From what I can gather by sifting through the sparse information available, most of the “grunt” work will be carried on by Community Organizers, elevating that occupation to the top of the heap.

Billions of dollars in grants and “partnership” arrangements will be made available to faith based  community organizing groups and ACORN affiliates to carry out “approved” programs in local communities.  Meanwhile, steps are being taken to establish a year round, ongoing political campaign to insure Democrat control of Congress and the White House.

David Plouffe, former head of Obama’s campaign for President now heads a group called “Organizing For America”  working out of the Democratic National Committee.  The purpose of this group is to carry out “grassroots” efforts to promote Obama’s agenda, utilizing the millions strong e-mail network and volunteer canvassers  used during the campaign.

On this past Saturday, thousands of volunteers spread out across the county “button-holing” citizens and getting them to sign pledge cards promising to support Obama’s agenda and lobby their representatives for passage of his $3.5 billion budget. Thus far, however, Congress has not felt the effects, according to McClatchy newspapers.

These, and similar initiatives by Obama are much more dangerous to the future welfare of America than the bonuses earned by financial executives or the use of corporate jets a fraction of the size of “Pelosi One” or Air Force One.  They undermine the federalist nature of our Constitution by nationalizing major portions of our private charities and strengthening control of our state run social services by the federal government.  Many of the goals proposed by these bills are certainly worthwhile, but THEY ARE NOT THE PROPER FUNCTION OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT.

The Socialist States of America

communist-symbolIt’ Official! We are now the
The Socialist States of America

On Friday, after holding voting open for more than five hours and sending a government plane, at the behest of the President, to pick up an absent Senator, Democrats finally rammed through the “stimulus bill.”  In spite of the urgency expressed by the President before the legislation was passed, Obama took a long Valentine weekend with his family in Chicago.

Finally, on Tuesday afternoon, at a special signing ceremony in Colorado, the president signed the legislation marking the end of a hundred year struggle by socialists to gain control of the American Government.  It also marks the beginning of the end of capitalism as it has been practiced in America for the past four hundred years.  On average, it takes three to five years to bring about major changes in any large organization.  In the case of the American government, because of its size it will take decades, if not generations to make the change over complete.  Its cost in wealth and liberty will be astronomical.

The “stimulus plan” was sold to the American People as the solution to America’s current recession.  However, a close look at the plan seems to indicate that its real purpose is to provide financing for the first stages of the transition from capitalism to socialism.  Most of the expenditures go to projects and organizations that make up the socialist movement in America, environmentalists, unions, public education, universities, and the underachievers of society who make up the core of its “grassroots” supporters.

The $787 compromise bill finally signed by the President today is a down payment on many of the items that have been on the socialist agenda for generations.  The drive toward socialized health care first proposed by President Theodore Roosevelt in the early twentieth century gets a big boost with additional spending in Medicare, Medicaid, and SCHIP.  In addition, it provides funds for computerizing health care records for millions of Americans.  This will help when it becomes necessary to ration healthcare, especially for the elderly.

Education and the Teacher’s Unions are other big winners.  $90 billion will go to public education from pre-school through high school.  $44.5 billions go to prevent cutbacks and layoffs by local school districts.  Another $15 for special education and No Child Left Behind programs with $2 billion earmarked for head start.

An estimated $32 billion will go to higher education, including increasing Pell Grants, and other student aid.  The stimulus package also makes a $2,500 tuition tax credit forty percent refundable allowing families who do not earn enough income to pay taxes to receive up to an additional $1,000 in tuition aid.

The “greenies” also come in for a share of the booty.  From alternative energy development to energy-efficient visitor’s centers in National Parks and wildlife refuges and $7.2 billion to the EPA to protect drinking water supplies and clean up national park lands.  Community Organizing groups like ACORN will also be big benefactors of Obama’s largess.

The worst aspect of Obama’s plan to end capitalism is not that it will burden future generations with unsustainable debt, or that it will balloon the hidden tax of inflation, but that to implement it requires the suspension of the Constitution.   There is nothing in the bill that can be said to be constitutional, in spite of the fact that every Congressman and Senator who voted for it has sworn multiple oaths to protect an defend the Constitution against all enemies, both foreign and domestic.

Obama’s Campaign of Corruption

Barack Obama and the Democrats are running one of the most corrupt campaigns in history.  They are getting away with it through the complicity of the media and the hesitation of public figures to speak candidly concerning this election.  Many of us have been writing for years about socialism in the Democratic Party.  However, few nationally known personalities, political or otherwise, have been willing to risk the criticism from the media that follows.  Accusations of “McCarthyism”, “racism”, “gutter politics” and “the politics of personal destruction” are just a few of the terms used to silence those who would speak out.

Only within the past few days has John McCain and Sarah Palin tentatively raised the issue of socialism in their campaign rallies.  Even then it is used only to describe Obama’s plans to “spread the wealth around”.  As democrats like Barney Frank, Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi, and others become more open about their socialist philosophies, the obvious facts are becoming harder to overlook or deny.  Barack Obama is a socialist in the mold of Saul Alinsky.  He has been tutored and groomed since childhood for the position he now enjoys.

Evidence of these facts is becoming more available daily.  Internet publications such as World Net Daily, Newsmax.com,  CNS News, Right Bias.Com, and Discover the Networks.Org are all well respected sources that publish articles almost daily on the subject.  In my last post, “Getting the Government We Deserve”, I pointed out the fact that corruption is always a basic ingredient in socialism.  In this election it is showing up particularly in fund raising and voter fraud.  In both instances it seems to be either denied, overlooked, or glossed over, even by those who ordinarily are thought of as conservative opinion makers and leaders in the conservative movement.

Voter Fraud

For years socialists have been advocating innovations in voting rules to make it easier for those who have the least inclination and the least understanding of the issues to vote.  It has been universally accepted that the more people who vote, regardless of their level of understanding, the better it is for our democracy.  Millions are spent by campaigns and community organizations to “get out the vote”.  Innovations such as “motor voter registration”, absentee ballots, same day registration and early voting have become commonplace.  Any attempts to establish voting standards to insure that voters are legally qualified to vote are met with accusations of racism or charges of “suppressing the vote”.

The most threatening innovations in voting are “same day registration” and “early voting“.  These almost beg to be abused.  Invariably, these lax voting rules are instigated by the Democratic Party.  They sound so reasonable that they are accepted by most people with little thought.  We are beginning to see the results now, as more reports of fraudulent registrations and fraudulent voting begin to surface.

Spearheading the Democrat’s voter registration drives is the socialist front group, Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN).  ACORN is partially funded with millions of taxpayer dollars from earmarks and amendments added to legislation by Democrats in Congress.  During the last several voting cycles the group has come under scrutiny by state and federal prosecutors for election fraud.  They are now under investigation in twelve states, mostly the so-called battleground states.

Barack Obama is no stranger to ACORN.  During the summer of 1992 he was director of Illinois’ Project Vote.  Working in cooperation with ACORN, Project Vote registered 150,000 voters on Chicago’s South Side for the ‘92 election.  His prior relationship with ACORN was from 1985 to 1988 when he worked as director of Developing Communities Project, an affiliate of ACORN.  As Director of DCP he also served as a consultant and instructor for the Gamaliel Foundation, an organization that trains Community Organizers.  As a lawyer he represented ACORN in a lawsuit against the State of Illinois to force it to implement “motor voter” registration.

Obama’s experience as a Community Organizer and in voter registration drives has served him well in his presidential campaign.  He has patterned his campaign after the tactics advocated by Saul Alinsky in his book “Rules for Radicals” published in 1972.   Alinsky is known as the father of Community Organizing and his book has become the “Bible” for Community Organizers.  Most of the affiliates that make up the organization of ACORN use the same handbook as the Obama campaign.

Fund Raising

The Obama campaign has raised more than $600 million in donations for the 2008 election, breaking all previous records.   His unprecedented ability to raise funds is regarded with awe by the main stream media as well as many Republicans and conservatives.  The reasons behind his phenomenal success as a fund raiser are mostly overlooked.

Obama represents the best opportunity in the past hundred years for the socialist movement to realize its long sough goal of taking over the government of the United States.  As a result, socialists from all over the world are tempted to contribute to his candidacy.  The Internet not only makes this possible but also makes it easy to hide illegal foreign donations as well as “over the limit” donations from within the United States.

Newsmax.com has published two very informative articles on the subject.  One article deals with foreign contributions and the other with credit card fraud.  While they do not offer conclusive proof, it is hard to come up with alternative explanations for the unorthodox examples they give.  According to Newsmax some 37,000 Obama donations appear to be conversions of foreign currency.

One of the clues they give is the number of donations for odd amounts, like $876.09, $388.67, etc.  Donors making contributions to a political campaign invariably make those donations in even amounts: $400, $1,000, or $10 for example.  However if they are making the donations by credit card from a country with currency different than our own, those contributions would show up in the recipients account in odd amounts like the ones above, after being converted to U.S. dollars.

Another gimmick documented by Newsmax for getting around the requirement to report all donations over $200 is the use of “gift cards”.  Gift cards are not linked to any specific name and Obama’s web site is not set up to weed out suspicious donors.  Therefore, a donor wishing to make a $1,000 donation anonymously would only need to purchase ten gift cards for a hundred dollars each and then use those cards to make contributions under the name of Donald Duck, Mickey Mouse or any other name.  Since the campaign does not have to report the name of the donor for donations less than $200 there is no way to trace them back to their origin.  Nice gimmick, huh?

There is a good chance that not only will the election be stolen but the government as well.  Unfortunately, if that happens there is very little recourse, since the foxes will be in charge of the entire chicken coop.


Jesus, Obama and Community Organizing

Obama has made his experience as a community organizer on Chicago’s South Side the centerpiece of his campaign for President. Backers of his campaign expressed offense in response to Sarah Palin’s remark in her speech at the Republican Convention, “I guess a small-town mayor is sort of like a community organizer, except that you have actual responsibilities.”

The morning after Palin’s speech, Obama’s campaign manager, David Plouffe sent out a fund-raising e-mail.  In it he said, “They insulted the very idea that ordinary people have a role to play in our political process.  Let’s clarify something for them right now. Community organizing is how ordinary people respond to out-of-touch politicians and their failed policies.”

That may be effective campaign rhetoric but it sheds little light on the activities or goals of the professional “community organizer”.  In fact, it is somewhat misleading.  When a citizen gets fed up with conditions in his or her community, whether caused by the local school board or neighborhood gangs, or when they get enough of the neglect by their local governments and decide to join with their neighbors in demanding action on the problems from their elected officials, that is legitimate “community organizing”.  This type of organizing is American to the core and is protected by our Constitution.

However, that is not the type of community organizing Barack Obama was engaged in.  The professional community organizer is not so concerned with problem solving as with the act of organizing.  In fact, many times the organizer has no prior connection to the community being organized and has no idea what the problems are that need solving before canvassing the neighborhood to see what they can stir up.  So it was with the organizing career of Obama.

Community organizing as a profession originated from the settlement houses made popular in the early part of the twentieth century to aid immigrants in their acclimation to the American culture.  Jane Addams, (1860-1935) is credited with being the founder of the settlement house movement.  Counselors for these centers came to be known as “social workers” and provided a recognized and valuable service to their communities.

Community organizing is an offshoot of the original profession of social worker.  From the beginning, it has been closely associated with the socialist movement in America. The Democratic Socialists of America lists community organizing, along with feminism, environmentalists and the Congressional Progressive Caucus as being among the groups making up the socialist coalition.

Saul Alinsky of Chicago is credited with being the originator of the term “community organizer”.  His 1971 handbook, “Rules for Radicals” has become the “bible” for organizers who apply his methods to their work.  Most professional organizers today are part of a national network of groups carrying out various “community organizing” activities.  Some of the best-known groups making up this network are the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN), Direct Action and Research Training Center (DART) and the Industrial Areas Foundation.

Obama worked for a group affiliated with the Industrial Areas Foundation, a direct outgrowth of Saul Alinsky’s Chicago efforts.  After graduating from Columbia, Obama set his sights on becoming a community organizer.  He was eventually hired by Jerry Kellman of the Developing Communities Group in Chicago.  When Kellman left the group a year later, Obama became the director.

After two years as director, Obama decided that the most effective means for reaching his goals was through politics and law.  Consequently, he enrolled in Harvard Law School.  After earning his degree, he returned to Chicago and entered politics through a “get out the vote” drive while working for a law firm representing community organizing groups.

You will notice that whenever mentioning Obama’s work as a community organizer he is said to have worked for a “church based group”.  This is common with community organizers.  Among the first task a community organizer undertakes is to organize the local churches and business establishments as a part of their efforts.  In Obama’s case, the church organizational structure already existed from the efforts of Saul Alinsky and those who came after him.

The association between churches and community organizers serve two purposes.  It opens up doors to the community at large and provides a spiritual element to their work. Often organizers who may or may not be religious in their own lives will join a leading church in the community to add legitimacy to their efforts.  That is what brought Obama to be a member of Trinity Church.

It is common for left wing groups to use Christian jargon to promote their agenda, while at the same time, condemning any expression of the Judeo-Christian tradition in the public square.  They routinely appeal to Christian principles for promoting their socialist programs, implying that to oppose them is non-Christian.  In the past couple of weeks a new mantra has gained currency among Obama supporters; “Jesus was a community organizer”.

I do not presume to know the mind of Jesus although I have been a Christian since the age of twenty, fifty-four years ago.  However, based on the biographies written by Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, the early history of the Christian Church written by Luke in the Book of Acts, and the epistles of Paul, Mark, Peter, John and Jude, I can safely say without fear of contradiction, Jesus was no socialist and certainly was no community organizer.

There is no record of Jesus or any of the Apostles ever asking anything from government. Great crowds followed Jesus wherever he went, but he never encouraged them to petition Caesar to solve their problems.  The ministry of Jesus was directed toward turning men and women to God and the acceptance of himself as personal savior and messiah.

He did teach the Christian duty of helping those less fortunate, giving to the poor and coming to the aid of those in need.  However, this was taught as the personal duty of Christians as individuals, or collectively of the Church.  Never did he suggest taking from “rich” non-believers and distributing to the poor, or taking from Christians and distributing to non-believers.  The concept of “wealth redistribution” is a socialist concept not Christian.

Christians in the early church did practice a form of wealth sharing for a short time.  In Acts 2:44 Luke records “And all that believed were together, and had all things common; and sold their possessions and goods, and parted them to all men, as every man had need.”  Again in Acts 4:32 we read, “And the multitude of them that believed were of one heart and one soul: neither said any of them that ought of the things which he possessed were his own; but they had all things common.”

This arrangement, however, due to the fallen nature of man, did not work out too well and had to be eventually abandoned.  There were too many who took advantage of the largess and instead of working depended on others for their sustenance.

By the time Paul penned his second epistle to the Thessalonians the practice had been abandoned and Paul wrote to the Church, “For even when we were with you, this we commanded you, that if any would not work, neither should he eat. For we hear that there are some which walk among you disorderly, working not at all, but are busybodies. Now them that are such we command and exhort by our Lord Jesus Christ, that with quietness they work, and eat their own bread.”  ~II Thess. 3:10-12.

In addition to not being a Christian principle, socialism and “community organizing” as practiced by the professional organizers is not sanctioned by the Hebrew Bible either.  It is a direct violation of the Tenth Commandment:  “Neither shalt thou desire thy neighbor’s wife, neither shalt thou covet thy neighbor’s house, his field, or his manservant, or his maidservant, his ox, or his ass, or any thing that is thy neighbor’s.”  ~ Deuteronomy 5:21

Socialism and community organizing depends on the envy and resentment of the success of others in order to succeed.  The primary goal of the community organizer is to agitate this resentment to the point where members of the target community are ready to take action.  In the words of Saul Alinsky in his Rules for Radicals, the objective is to “rub raw the sores of discontent”.  By the way, Alinsky dedicated his book to “Lucifer, the First Radical”.


Obama’s America

Barack Obama continued his tirade against America on Friday before “carbon-footing” across the Pacific to Hawaii for a short vacation. A new poll indicates that about 70% of Americans are getting tired of Obama‘s constant presence in the media. After a year of 24/7 praise from the media coupled with a year of 24/7 condemnation of America by Obama the message is beginning to wear a little thin.

In his speech, Obama continued his most recent theme, bemoaning America’s addiction to oil and promising to break that addiction by giving us a substitute: an energy “methadone cocktail”, consisting of wind, sun, ethanol and electricity. What strikes me most about Obama’s campaign as I look over the transcripts of his various speeches are the similarities of the America Obama sees in 2008 and the America his predecessor, Saul Alinsky saw forty years ago.

In his Friday speech in Elkhart, Indiana Obama started with,

“We meet at a moment when this country is facing a set of challenges unlike any we’ve ever known. Right now, our brave men and women in uniform are fighting two different wars while terrorists plot their next attack. Our changing climate is putting our planet in peril and our security at risk. And our economy is in turmoil, with more and more of our families struggling with rising costs, falling incomes, and lost jobs.”

Shortly before his death in 1972, Saul Alinsky granted an extensive interview to a writer from Playboy Magazine. In discussing his upcoming plans for organizing America’s middle class Alinsky had this to say:

“They’re oppressed by taxation and inflation, poisoned by pollution, terrorized by urban crime, frightened by the new youth culture, baffled by the computerized world around them. They’ve worked all their lives to get their own little house in the suburbs, their color TV, their two cars, and now the good life seems to have turned to ashes in their mouths. Their personal lives are generally unfulfilling, their jobs unsatisfying, they’ve succumbed to tranquilizers and pep pills, they drown their anxieties in alcohol, they feel trapped in long-term endurance marriages or escape into guilt-ridden divorces. They’re losing their kids and they’re losing their dreams. They’re alienated, depersonalized, without any feeling of participation in the political process, and they feel rejected and hopeless. Their utopia of status and security has become a tacky-tacky suburb, their split-levels have sprouted prison bars and their disillusionment is becoming terminal.”

Obama’s descriptions of America are not as elaborate or detailed as Alinsky’s, but the premise has not changed. Obama’s evaluation has been updated to accommodate the intervening forty years of agitation by environmentalists but the idea is still the same. “America stinks, and it’s up to us to set it right”.

“The despair is there; now it’s up to us to go in and rub raw the sores of discontent, galvanize them for radical social change. We’ll give them a way to participate in the democratic process, a way to exercise their rights as citizens and strike back at the establishment that oppresses them, instead of giving in to apathy. We’ll start with specific issues — taxes, jobs, consumer problems, pollution — and from there move on to the larger issues: pollution in the Pentagon and the Congress and the boardrooms of the megacorporations. Once you organize people, they’ll keep advancing from issue to issue toward the ultimate objective: people power.” —Alinsky

The entire Presidential campaign of Obama seems to be a twenty-first century continuation of the organizing work of Saul Alinsky on a national scale. The tactics are the same; trash the dominant institutions and agitate his followers to demand change. To both Alinsky and Obama the great American experiment in self-government is a failure. Instead of seeing a nation of unlimited opportunity and freedom, they see an America of despair and oppression.

They would have us believe that their solutions would result in a nation of equality, justice, security and prosperity for all. Instead, the closer they come to success in implementing their remedies the closer we come to becoming the nation of despair and oppression they seek to change.

Copy and e-mail this link to a friend: illinoisconservative.com/Obama’s America


Obama and the "Alinsky Model"

The career accomplishment by Barack Obama of which he is most proud seems to be his three-year stint as a community organizer on the South Side of Chicago. It is mentioned in his speeches and interviews more than his lectureship at the University of Chicago or his service in the Illinois Senate. For most Americans that part of his career is of little significance. To the audience he is attempting to reach it is highly important, however.

Most of us have little knowledge of community organizing other than watching clips of their protests in TV news reports. Political protests have been going on for as long as there have been governments to protest. However, structured community organizing did not start in America until the end of the nineteenth century. The emphasis in early community organizing was to provide community support for new immigrants arriving from Europe.

Its function was primarily social work carried on around community centers such as the Jane Addams center or Hull House. In the early twentieth century, community organizing began to lose its “social work” emphasis and took on a more activist revolutionary aspect heavily influenced by European immigrants from countries caught up in that continent’s various Marxist movements.

During the first half of the twentieth century organizing mostly centered around union activity and improving the lives of workers as a counter measure to the excesses of the rapidly expanding manufacturing and mining industries. Community organizing took on its modern form under the leadership of Saul Alinsky (1909 – 1972) in Chicago. He is by far, the best-known and most influential community organizer in American history.

Alinsky began his work in the Chicago neighborhood surrounding the stockyards, known as the “back of the yards”. From the early thirties until his death in 1972 Chicago was his home and base of operations. In 1971, the more famous of his two books was published. Titled “Rules for Radicals”, the book outlined his views on organizing and became the handbook for a generation of 1960s radicals.

During his career, he also took on the task of training other organizers. His Industrial Areas Foundation Training Institute has turned out hundreds of professional organizers over the years, and thousands of leaders from labor unions and communities across America have attended workshops at the Institute. The “Alinsky Method” has become the model for most community organizing groups in the United States and in other countries as well.

Two of these groups were the Developing Communities Project where Barack Obama served as director during his organizing career, and the Gamaliel Foundation, a community organizing institute, where he served as an instructor and consultant.

Alinsky’s influence extends, not only to community organizing, but to the Democratic Party as well. Hillary Clinton’s College thesis was written on the organizing work of Saul Alinsky and the political tactics of the Democratic Party over the past decade could have been taken directly from his book “Rules for Radicals”. You can also see the influence of the Alinsky method in the campaign rhetoric of Barack Obama. In “Rules for Radicals” Alinsky gives this advice for working inside the political system.

“There’s another reason for working inside the system. Dostoevsky said that taking a new step is what people fear most. Any revolutionary change must be preceded by a passive, affirmative, non-challenging attitude toward change among the mass of our people. They must feel so frustrated, so defeated, so lost, so futureless in the prevailing system that they are willing to let go of the past and change the future. This acceptance is the reformation essential to any revolution.”

It is this “attitude toward change” that Obama and the Democratic Party is attempting to bring about through their constant trashing of George W. Bush, the Republican Party, our economy, foreign policy, conduct of the War on Terror, Homeland Security, and every other action of the Bush administration.

The community organizing movement is not a monolithic group. It is made up of a number of independent groups tied loosely together by common ideals and goals. Among the best known are Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN) and Direct Action and Research Training Center (DART).

What almost all community organizations have in common is their adherence to socialist principles and their promotion of victimhood. In laying the groundwork for a new community organization, organizers are trained to canvass the community to identify its most prevalent problems. After identifying the problems, they then hold community meetings where they convince attendees the root cause of their problems are in some way connected to the inherent unfairness of capitalism.

Whatever the problem, it is always caused by someone or some group other than the group experiencing the difficulty. Slums, drugs, poverty, crime and so forth are all caused by unscrupulous financial institutions, uncaring property owners, local politicians, or greedy corporate profiteers. The final steps in the process is to convince participants it is the responsibility of someone else to fix the problem—usually government—and then organize demonstrations, strikes, protests, boycotts, etc. to coerce businesses, governments and/or individuals to comply with their demands.

Community organizing is often credited with teaching communities how to do for themselves. Sometimes they do, but more often than not, they actually teach them how to coerce society to do it for them. When Obama speaks of his community organizing experiences, he is appealing to the tendencies of his audience to cheer when “Robin Hood” takes from the rich and gives to the poor. Somehow, I cannot see how this experience particularly qualifies him to be President. Perhaps, there is something I am missing?


Obama and the “Alinsky Model”

The career accomplishment by Barack Obama of which he is most proud seems to be his three-year stint as a community organizer on the South Side of Chicago. It is mentioned in his speeches and interviews more than his lectureship at the University of Chicago or his service in the Illinois Senate. For most Americans that part of his career is of little significance. To the audience he is attempting to reach it is highly important, however.

Most of us have little knowledge of community organizing other than watching clips of their protests in TV news reports. Political protests have been going on for as long as there have been governments to protest. However, structured community organizing did not start in America until the end of the nineteenth century. The emphasis in early community organizing was to provide community support for new immigrants arriving from Europe.

Its function was primarily social work carried on around community centers such as the Jane Addams center or Hull House. In the early twentieth century, community organizing began to lose its “social work” emphasis and took on a more activist revolutionary aspect heavily influenced by European immigrants from countries caught up in that continent’s various Marxist movements.

During the first half of the twentieth century organizing mostly centered around union activity and improving the lives of workers as a counter measure to the excesses of the rapidly expanding manufacturing and mining industries. Community organizing took on its modern form under the leadership of Saul Alinsky (1909 – 1972) in Chicago. He is by far, the best-known and most influential community organizer in American history.

Alinsky began his work in the Chicago neighborhood surrounding the stockyards, known as the “back of the yards”. From the early thirties until his death in 1972 Chicago was his home and base of operations. In 1971, the more famous of his two books was published. Titled “Rules for Radicals”, the book outlined his views on organizing and became the handbook for a generation of 1960s radicals.

During his career, he also took on the task of training other organizers. His Industrial Areas Foundation Training Institute has turned out hundreds of professional organizers over the years, and thousands of leaders from labor unions and communities across America have attended workshops at the Institute. The “Alinsky Method” has become the model for most community organizing groups in the United States and in other countries as well.

Two of these groups were the Developing Communities Project where Barack Obama served as director during his organizing career, and the Gamaliel Foundation, a community organizing institute, where he served as an instructor and consultant.

Alinsky’s influence extends, not only to community organizing, but to the Democratic Party as well. Hillary Clinton’s College thesis was written on the organizing work of Saul Alinsky and the political tactics of the Democratic Party over the past decade could have been taken directly from his book “Rules for Radicals”. You can also see the influence of the Alinsky method in the campaign rhetoric of Barack Obama. In “Rules for Radicals” Alinsky gives this advice for working inside the political system.

“There’s another reason for working inside the system. Dostoevsky said that taking a new step is what people fear most. Any revolutionary change must be preceded by a passive, affirmative, non-challenging attitude toward change among the mass of our people. They must feel so frustrated, so defeated, so lost, so futureless in the prevailing system that they are willing to let go of the past and change the future. This acceptance is the reformation essential to any revolution.”

It is this “attitude toward change” that Obama and the Democratic Party is attempting to bring about through their constant trashing of George W. Bush, the Republican Party, our economy, foreign policy, conduct of the War on Terror, Homeland Security, and every other action of the Bush administration.

The community organizing movement is not a monolithic group. It is made up of a number of independent groups tied loosely together by common ideals and goals. Among the best known are Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN) and Direct Action and Research Training Center (DART).

What almost all community organizations have in common is their adherence to socialist principles and their promotion of victimhood. In laying the groundwork for a new community organization, organizers are trained to canvass the community to identify its most prevalent problems. After identifying the problems, they then hold community meetings where they convince attendees the root cause of their problems are in some way connected to the inherent unfairness of capitalism.

Whatever the problem, it is always caused by someone or some group other than the group experiencing the difficulty. Slums, drugs, poverty, crime and so forth are all caused by unscrupulous financial institutions, uncaring property owners, local politicians, or greedy corporate profiteers. The final steps in the process is to convince participants it is the responsibility of someone else to fix the problem—usually government—and then organize demonstrations, strikes, protests, boycotts, etc. to coerce businesses, governments and/or individuals to comply with their demands.

Community organizing is often credited with teaching communities how to do for themselves. Sometimes they do, but more often than not, they actually teach them how to coerce society to do it for them. When Obama speaks of his community organizing experiences, he is appealing to the tendencies of his audience to cheer when “Robin Hood” takes from the rich and gives to the poor. Somehow, I cannot see how this experience particularly qualifies him to be President. Perhaps, there is something I am missing?


Obama’s Dual Citizenship

On Thursday, Barack Obama gave perhaps the most revealing speech of his campaign, even though the content of the speech was unexceptional and the delivery could only be described as professional and competent. A comparison of the speech with recordings of his impromptu remarks during the earlier part of his trip highlights the gap between his reading ability and his thinking ability. It is obvious that Obama was not picked for the role of President because of his intellect, his judgment, or his knowledge of history. He was picked because of his ideology.

He wasted no time setting the theme of the speech early on when he introduced himself to the crowd with, “Tonight, I speak to you not as a candidate for President, but as a citizen — a proud citizen of the United States, and a fellow citizen of the world.” The balance of the speech was mostly an elaboration on that theme. The phrase “citizen of the world” got a lot of play on conservative radio, but very little in the mainstream press. For most journalists and probably for most of his American audience the phrase was nothing more than “politically correct” pandering to his audience.

Taken in the context of Obama’s ideology and personal background, however, the phrase has a much deeper meaning and portends the type of presidency we can expect from Obama if he is elected.

Political observers continue to be impressed and sometimes puzzled by three aspects of the Obama campaign; the crowds he attracts, the large amounts of money he is able to raise, and his popular support in spite of his lack of government experience and the vacuousness of his message. It should not be that much of a mystery.

Obama is a dedicated international socialist and polling data indicates that at least 40% of the American public is in agreement with socialist’s principles. On specific elements of the socialist agenda, the percentage of agreement by Americans goes into the seventies.

For the past hundred years, the socialist movement in America has been working toward dominance of the government. Obama represents their first real opportunity to realize their long sought after goal. The number of hard-core socialists and their enthusiastic “dupes” probably amount to somewhere around 30% of the population. Add to that the number of Americans sympathetic to various elements of their agenda such as environmentalism, feminism, abortion, health care, and the gay agenda and you have the answer to the Obama phenomena.

If this sounds like the ravings of a “conspiracy theorist” consider this: The Hyde Park area of Chicago, home of the University of Chicago and the area represented by Obama in the Illinois Senate, is the Midwest hub of socialist activity. His introduction into state politics was backed by Hyde Park socialists and endorsed by the Democratic Socialist of America, the largest socialist organization in America and a close affiliate of Socialist International.

In addition to the DSA, Chicago also has active chapters of the Communist Party of America and the Socialist Party USA. The DSA website is a wealth of information on the socialist agenda. The Platform of the SPUSA for 2008 reflects almost all of the various agendas of Obama and the Democratic Party. Here are some quotes from the two websites.

Democratic Socialist of America

“The Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) is the largest socialist organization in the United States, and the principal U.S. affiliate of the Socialist International. DSA’s members are building progressive movements for social change while establishing an openly socialist presence in American communities and politics.”

“In the United States, we must fight for a humane public policies that will provide quality health care, education, and job training and that redirect public investment from the military to much-neglected urban housing and infrastructure. Such policies require the support of a majoritarian coalition of trade unionists, people of color, feminists, gays and lesbians and all other peoples committed to democratic change. Our greatest contribution as American socialists to global social justice is to build that coalition, which is key to transforming the power relations of global capitalism.”

“…Many socialists have seen the Democratic Party, since at least the New Deal, as the key political arena in which to consolidate this coalition, because the Democratic Party held the allegiance of our natural allies. Through control of the government by the Democratic Party coalition, led by anti-corporate forces, a progressive program regulating the corporations, redistributing income, fostering economic growth and expanding social programs could be realized.”

“…we are not a separate party. Like our friends and allies in the feminist, labor, civil rights, religious, and community organizing movements, many of us have been active in the Democratic Party. We work with those movements to strengthen the party’s left wing, represented by the Congressional Progressive Caucus.”

Socialist Party USA, from Party Platform

“We call for the United States to immediately and unconditionally withdraw its forces from Iraq and Afghanistan.”

“We call for an end to the U.S. occupation of the province of Guantanamo, Cuba.”

“We call for an end to the Israeli occupation of the West Bank-East Jerusalem and Gaza, and an end to all U.S. aid to Israel, as a precondition for peace.”

“We demand the immediate withdrawal of the United States from the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and the Central American Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA), and oppose the creation of a widened Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA).”

“We call for a steeply graduated income tax and a steeply graduated estate tax, and a maximum income of no more than ten times the minimum. We oppose regressive taxes such as payroll tax, sales tax, and property taxes.”

“We call for the restoration of the capital gains tax and luxury tax on a progressive, graduated scale.”

“We call for the end of all anti-gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender (GLBTQ) restrictions in law and the work place, the repeal of all sodomy laws, and the legalization of same-sex marriage.”

“We oppose all efforts to declare English an official language, and call for an end to all language discrimination. We demand that all public and private institutions provide services and materials in the languages of their communities.”

“We demand full support for every woman’s right to choose when, if, and how to have children, including the right to free abortion on demand at any stage of pregnancy, without interference or coercion.”

“We support public child care starting from infancy, and public education starting at age three, with caregivers and teachers of young children receiving training, wages, and benefits comparable to that of teachers at every other level of the educational system.”

Barack Obama has been closely associated with the socialist movement all his life. He was born in Hawaii to two University of Hawaii students and spent his formative years in the radical university climate of the sixties. After his mother’s divorce from his father when Barack was two, he moved to Indonesia with his mother and her new husband in 1967. He returned to Hawaii in 1971 where he lived with his maternal grandparents until he graduated from high school.

His first real contact with mainland America was when he moved to Los Angeles and later to New York to attend college. During his childhood in Hawaii, he became close with a family friend, the communist poet, Frank Davis. Davis is referred to in Obama’s book “Dreams from My Father” only as “Frank” who he describes as a close friend and mentor.

After graduating from Columbia University in New York in 1983, he sought employment as a Community Organizer, the backbone of the socialist movement in America. He was eventually employed by a church group in Chicago where he worked as a community organizer for three years until he enrolled in Harvard Law School in 1988. While working as a community organizer he also served as a consultant and instructor for the Gamaliel Foundation, a community organizing institute.

In his run for the Illinois Senate in 1994, he sought and received the endorsement of William Ayers, a former domestic terrorist and leader of the Weather Underground, an offshoot of SDS, a communist student front group of the sixties. He also received the endorsement and financial support from the Democratic Socialist of America. In his bid for the U.S. Senate in 2004, he ran practically unopposed, supported by the Chicago Democratic machine and the Chicago socialists.

In 2003 when he was considering running for President, he made the obligatory pilgrimage to the office of George Soros just as he had to William Ayers before running for the Illinois Senate. Soros, an international financier and founder of the Open Society Institute, withdrew his support for Hillary Clinton and focused his multiple political organizations on supporting Obama for President.

With this background in mind when reading Obama’s Berlin speech it is easy to see that he takes his “citizen of the world” statement much more seriously than a mere platitude to his European audience.

Home Page


The Obama Legacy

As street violence continues to escalate authorities consider beefing up police presence and possible sending in the military. Baghdad? Kabul? Nope. Chicago, Illinois. Chicago is on track to experience some 500 homicides in 2008. According to police spokesperson, Monique Bond, that would make ‘08 one of the least deadly of the past 40 years. However, when compared to the loss of life among our military in Iraq over the last seven years, Baghdad seems to be the safer of the two cities.

According to an article in the Chicago Tribune Wednesday, Governor Rod Blagojevich met with state police and National Guard officials to discuss the possibility of offering Mayor Richard Daley assistance in curbing the spike in violence that has surged during the spring months. In one weekend Chicago police responded to 36 shootings with nine deaths. More than two dozen Chicago Public School students have been killed in violent incidents since the start of the school year in September. Much of the violence is connected with an increase in gang activity.

The majority of the violence has occurred on Chicago’s South Side where Barack Obama worked from 1985 to 1988 as a Community Organizer and director of the Developing Communities Project. It is also the area he represented in the Illinois Senate from 1997 to 2004. One would think that based on the promises he makes as a candidate for President, he would have solved the problems on Chicago’s south side during his seven years as Community Organizer and Senator.

Granted, Chicago had a high level of violence before Obama arrived on the scene, and the level of violence would probably be just as great had he chosen another city as his home base, but that is just the point. In his campaign speeches he referrers back to his experience in Community organizing and his time in the Illinois Senate as the accomplishments qualifying him to be President of the United States. In fact, from some of his speeches you would think he is running for President of the world.

He has promised to cut poverty in half in Africa, bring peace to the Middle East, reinvigorate the United Nations, end International terrorism, stop nuclear proliferation and reverse global warming. He also promises to expand socialist programs to include Pakistan, Africa and other countries struggling with poverty, disease and oppression. These are indeed lofty goals for someone whose efforts to bring about change during seven years of public service in his home state proved to be practically non-existent.

Home Page