That will be the Obama legacy.
In the years immediately following World War II in America, although our country didn’t face quite so direct a confrontation with our socialist-communist enemies as did Great Britain, the process leading to the totalitarian-wannabe regime that is now in power in the White House was nonetheless steadily advanced. The gradual implementation of socialist policies in the United States was furthered by the efforts of a pair of radical socialist Columbia University professors, Richard Andrew Cloward (rhymes with “coward”) and Frances Fox Piven (rhymes with “driven”). This husband and wife duo were lifelong members of the Democratic Socialists of America. The Cloward-Piven strategy they advanced in their writings and teachings centered on leveraging a manufactured crisis to advance the socialist agenda in America along with the redistribution of wealth.
Remember what Obama’s radical Chief of Staff, Rahm Emanuel, said? “You never want a serious crisis to go to waste.”62 That’s right out of the Cloward-Piven playbook. That’s why Team Obama thrives on creating or leveraging crises by demanding quick action, which is a vehicle for socialist change. That is what the Cloward-Piven strategy is all about. In short, in order to usher in socialist change, Cloward-Piven taught:
Make a crisis
Make it publicly visible
Make sure it involves disrupting some institutional or societal sector
Capitalize on the social unrest it produces
Here’s a perfect example. In the middle of the healthcare cyclone, when the national debate had reached a fevered pitch, Obama started talking about the illegal immigration issue. Why? He wanted to create a thunderstorm to go along with the healthcare cyclone in order to really rock the boat and knock the opponents of his socialist healthcare plan off their feet. What did Obama propose? The granting of amnesty to twenty million illegal aliens. He did that to overwhelm the system along the lines of the Piven strategy—flood the system with more unrest in order to break it down.
Let me remind you that Columbia University, Obama’s alma mater, is where Cloward taught! I think it’s very likely Obama took his courses, given his leftist background at Occidental. If you recall, Obama said he sought out the Marxist professors. Of course, we don’t know who his professors were at Occidental, Columbia, or Harvard because, as a WorldNetDaily columnist quipped, “The Obama camp guards those scores, like his SAT scores, more tightly than Iran does its nuclear secrets.”63
What’s more, there’s a virtual blackout on all of Obama’s personal records—from his adoption, baptism, and passport information to his files when he was a senator of Illinois. Tell me why we are not permitted to see his kindergarten school records? What could possibly be so explosive from seeing his grades during his time at Punahou elementary school? If he’s as brilliant as some have claimed, why aren’t we permitted to read any of his scholarly writings at Harvard Law or the University of Chicago? Is there a reason why his Columbia thesis is being kept from the public eye? Why are we not allowed to see his Occidental College or Columbia University grades? Most presidents release that information.
Why the secrecy? Might it reveal something about the roots of his pan-Leninism?
While we don’t know with certainty if Obama studied under Cloward at Columbia, we do know that Obama’s childhood mentor, Frank Marshall Davis, was a member of the Communist party. We know that Obama admits attending socialist conferences. We know that Obama admits reading Marxist literature. We know that Obama became a “community organizer” and came into contact with the Democratic Socialists of America, who endorsed his campaign for Illinois state Senate seat. And we know that Obama became friends with William Ayers, a member of the Socialist Group “Students for a Democratic Society.” And yet, in spite of these facts about his radical associations and Marxist mentoring, Barack Obama has infiltrated government bureaucracy at the highest level of all!
We now know that Barack Obama, in his days as a community organizer, employed tactics espoused by these leftist enemies of America. We also know he’s using them to define and implement his legislative agenda today. In fact, one of the ways to understand how insidious the leftist agenda is to look at its priorities:
Confiscating money from taxpayers and consumers, as has been done with the passage of stimulus and healthcare legislation;
Making a killing in financial dealings by taking advantage of the so-called “priority,” as John Paulson and Goldman Sachs did in taking advantage of the 2008 financial meltdown; and
Distracting the public from a real or important issue that they don’t want to deal with for fear of hurting the cause of an enemy of America, as the Obama administration has done by, among other things, soft-pedaling the federal government’s refusal to enforce existing immigration laws.
Make no mistake about it: The primary reason for the existence of the left, including Obama and all the principal players in his administration, is to bring about the downfall of western capitalist democracies. Remember, our Socialist-in-Chief Obama has said that he’s committed to “fundamentally transforming the United States of America.”64 Just look below the glossy surface of every one of Obama’s legislative initiatives. In each case, you’ll find evidence that he either wants to overwhelm the capitalist system and bring it to its knees, or he wants to take direct control of a significant segment of the American economy in order to weaken our country and advance the cause of our totalitarian enemies.
Unfortunately, those totalitarian enemies now include—along with such rogue nations as Iran, Venezuela, and North Korea—the United States itself. If we allow the Obama administration to continue to advance its nefarious agenda, America will continue on the path toward becoming an enemy of free speech and religious choice, of individual initiative and the creation of wealth. Under this president, we’re on the way to becoming our own worst enemy.
Barack Obama and his radical czars are out to do nothing less than reduce
America to second-rate nation status. Which explains their delusional desire to leverage the nonissue of global warming to control businesses, their intentional subversion of our national defense, while both causing and then taking advantage of the recent financial crisis, and their unlawful support of encouraging aliens to enter this country illegally—as you’ll see in the coming pages.
If Obama and his czars are allowed to succeed, they will cause global economic and military chaos the like of which we have not witnessed since Winston Churchill led Britons in the war against totalitarianism at the middle of the last century. What’s more, if Obama succeeds, we’ll go from the USSR to the USSA—the United Socialist States of America—in one generation. America’s last hope can be found in the true conservative patriots working with the Tea Party movement to stop this socialist revolution in its tracks.
I, for one, am committed to that fight.
You Say You Want a Revolution
You may wonder why Barack Obama’s associations are such a big deal. You know, what’s so bad about Marxism? Was communism such a bad thing? What’s wrong with socialism? Let’s start there. After all, according to a January, 2010, Gallup poll, more than half (53 percent) of Democrats and a third (36 percent) of all Americans have a favorable view of socialism.65 Do these people hold a wrong understanding of this political and economic theory? Or, are they correct in their belief that socialism is praiseworthy?
What’s more, if there’s nothing fundamentally wrong with socialism, Marxism, Leninism, and all the other “isms,” if they’re just another acceptable approach to governing a nation, then the fact that Barack Obama is an ardent follower of Lenin and Marx, and pals around with avowed communists, would be of little consequence. If he’s right that redistributive change really does benefit the American middle class (as he has claimed, saying, “I think when you spread the wealth around it’s good for everybody”66), then shouldn’t we welcome socialism along with the horde of Obamanics who have already bought into it? Or, if the worst thing that could be said of socialism is th
at it’s benign, we might just agree to disagree and move on.
No harm, no foul, right?
If, however, socialism in its various forms has a long track record of enslaving the hearts, minds, and souls of the people subjected to it, then we sure as hell had better wake up and put the brakes on this man before he does any more damage to the country. So which is it? Is socialism a friend or foe of the people? Should we embrace it or erase it?
As you’ll see in chapter three, the despotic Soviet Union enslaved the people and killed tens of millions in slave labor camps—all in the name of economic freedom under a very different economic system than ours. What you may not understand is that Leninism, Marxism, and Trotskyism—all the “isms” of the Soviet Union—are not quite dead. In fact, their followers have taken center stage. Take President Obama. He’s not a “NEO-CON,” but what I call a “NEO-COM.” He’s a neo-communist.
What do I mean by that?
Traditionally, in communist countries such as Cuba, North Korea, and the former Soviet Union, communism brought with it complete state control of the culture and the economy. Today, however, communist nations such as China are operating a little differently. They have hybridized their state control of the economy, for example, by permitting limited levels of capitalistic freedom.
That’s why you can go to McDonald’s on the mainland.
But don’t let the presence of a few Big Macs fool you.
The People’s Republic of China is still ruled by the Communist Party of China and not the people, in spite of what notions “People’s Republic” may bring to mind. As such, there’s zero tolerance for freedom of speech. You say or write the wrong thing—boom—you’re suddenly locked away in a hellhole for years. Likewise, there’s no freedom of religion, no freedom of thought. So while their brand of communism isn’t identical to the iron heel of Lenin, it’s still a form of communism, thus, neo-communism.
Like its cousin in China, Obama is pursuing more of a neo-communism or “soft” socialist-communist approach. In a way, he’s using a “tri-brid” revolutionary plan: some Marxism, some Leninism, and some Trotskyism. While we don’t have commissars in America as are found in communist countries, we do have czars and czarinas. This cadre of like-minded companions shapes the direction of the government without congressional oversight or approval and is only accountable to Comrade Obama.
Any European with reasonable political knowledge knows what’s going on here in America. I’m afraid, however, that the American voter is terminally naïve. How else can we explain 64.6 million sheeple voting him into office? They were willing to give Obama the benefit of the doubt in spite of the evidence, that’s how. I bet they’d refuse to believe what I’m saying about Barack Obama even if they were to see him with their own two eyes marching around the White House under a Lenin banner wearing a Che Guevara shirt and red beret.
If you care about your future, if you love your country as much as I do, you owe it to yourself to listen carefully as Doc Savage lays this out for you in plain English. Better brace yourself. The next chapter provides the crash course on socialism they never taught you in school. And, in the end, I promise the scales of liberalism will fall from your eyes. You’ll see I’m right when I say that Barack Obama is a naked Marxist. You’ll understand how and why Obama intends to use trickle up poverty in order to garner even more power and control for the multicultural, ruling elite.
Are you ready for the Savage truth?
Then read on.
CHAPTER 3
Spending Other People’s Money
Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.
—George Santayana1
The other day I was watching a movie on television about Rocky Graziano, a great middleweight Italian boxer from New York. You might say he was the original Rocky. This guy was one of the greatest knockout fighters in the history of boxing. I think he ranked in the top twenty or so. Doesn’t matter. What really caught my eye were the street scenes from New York City. It was a different time. I was fascinated to see kids gliding down the sidewalks on homemade scooters because I had one.
As I watched, I remembered making a wooden scooter with my father out of scraps of wood. Since we couldn’t afford to buy one, we took whatever was lying around, and made it work. About all I could scrounge up was a six-foot length of a 2×4, one roller skate, an orange cart, some handles from who knows what, and a few rusty nails. If you were creative, it was enough.
Dad took the board and, on one end, we attached the front wheels of the roller skate. On the opposite end, we hammered on the back set of wheels from the skate. We nailed those wheels on as you put a horseshoe on a horse. With that done, we took the wooden orange crate and fastened it to the front end of the board. We nailed two handles on top of the orange crate.
Presto! I had an instant scooter.
Some kids would build a go-cart out of wood using the wheels from a baby carriage. They were inventive and, while these toys weren’t necessarily beautiful in the traditional sense of the word, we loved them because we had made them ourselves. The point of the story is that I come from a time in America when kids made toys because they didn’t have the money to buy them. They made them out of scraps of wood, nails, a hammer, and sweat. What a different time it was.
If we wanted something but couldn’t afford it, we knew we had to make it ourselves, work to buy it, or learn to do without it. Which is why I have serious problems with Barack Obama’s entitlement and redistributing of wealth scheme. I don’t care what Marx the Slacker preached. No man, woman, or child is entitled to benefit from the fruit of another man’s labor—unless that worker decides to be charitable.
Why do naked Marxist-Leninist politicians like Obama ostensibly take from the middle class to give to the rich and poor? Because they understand the power of a well-placed handout to buy off the people and to further their real socialist agenda—a cycle of dependency on the government from cradle to grave and to diminish the “bourgeoisie,” the middle class. Make no mistake. This Marxist-Leninist president is converting America into a socialist nation step by step, the same way Mao Zedong did it on the Long March in China.
I’ve said this president is a revolutionary socialist.
I’ve said he’s a naked Marxist-Leninist.
I’ve said these things because I know what I’m talking about.
My interest in this topic of Marxism, Leninism, and socialism goes back to my own heritage. I am the son of an immigrant. My grandfather fled Communism, Marxism, and the Red Revolution. He came to New York right after 1917 to find a new life for himself in a free society. Thanks to him, I was steeped in anti-communist philosophy from the earliest age. I was taught to cherish the freedom of the American experience. I was told how sacred and fragile liberty is and how I should always work to protect it.
Taking advantage of his newfound freedom, my grandfather opened a little tailor shop of his own and was proud of the suits he designed and made for his customers. He died young of a heart attack because he worked with a passion seven days a week. Naturally, I wanted to know why this man traveled thousands of miles away from his home, family, and friends to start over here in America. Which is why I’ve studied Marx, Engels, Lenin, Stalin, Mao, and Pol Pot—all of them, since I was eighteen years old.
I didn’t read them because I worshipped them or saw them as possessing the answer. I studied them because I was a college student who didn’t want to repeat the mistakes of history. It’s not as though I just started reading this stuff yesterday so I could be on Fox News with a blackboard lecturing everyone. I’ve studied revolutions for over forty years. I know what’s going on with this president and Americans would, too, if they had not been inculcated with socialism in America’s public schools.
That said, a few questions are in order.
Do the Tea Party movement and the middle class have any basis to be suspicious that President Obama’s true agenda is to spearhead a socialist revolution? Or, are thes
e fears nothing more than unfounded rumors raised by rabble-rousers? Is Barack Obama operating within the grand traditions of America? Or, is he philosophically aligned with the traditions of the European socialist theories of Marxism-Leninism, as many suspect? Is Obama simply an idealist and not an ideologue? Or is he a “Manchurian candidate”?
I think we have to approach these questions almost clinically.
Before we get started, I must warn you of something. I have no gray zone when it comes to this topic of Marxism-Leninism. This discussion is going to disturb the old sixties hippies who still cling to their Leninist illusions. The same goes for the unenlightened leftists who have been in therapy for twenty years, the Woody Allen types hooked on Marx and medical marijuana.
The Head of the Snake
Entire books have been written about Karl Marx, Vladimir Lenin, and Joseph Stalin, the Three Stooges of Communism. These men thought they had invented a better economic and philosophical system upon which to build a nation. All three couldn’t have been more mistaken. Like their TV and film counterparts, Marx, Lenin, and Stalin were always working on a new angle to pull the wool over the sheeple’s eyes—although their results were far from a laughing matter.
My purpose here is not to rehash in detail what we know of these dangerous radicals, whose beliefs led to the enslavement and deaths of tens of millions of people wherever communism has been tried. No, this is a simple crash course in Marxism-Leninism, upon which communist socialism was built. This brief examination will include how it’s being marketed today by our Marxist-Leninist president who, as we established in the last chapter, studied Marxism in college.
Trickle Up Poverty: Stopping Obama’s Attack on Our Borders, Economy, and Security Page 8
