In Obama’s biography “Dreams From My Father,” you will find a name, “Frank,” referred to as a poet. Who is this Frank? We know Obama developed a close relationship, during his eight years stay in Hawaii, with this poet who counseled him and advised him on his career path. This “Frank” is none other than Frank Marshall Davis, a member of the CPUSA (Communist Party of the USA) during the middle of WWII, and accused by the House Un-American Activities Committee (HUAC) of “involvement in several communist-front organizations.

One should not let this association slide by but rather start wondering how Obama raised up from nowhere to become the Democratic Party frontrunner. Let’s remember that “the CPUSA had tens of thousands of members, some of whom penetrated the U.S. Government, [and] who received subsidies from the old Soviet Union.”

Besides Frank M. Davis, Professor Gerald Horne - contributor editor of the Communist Party journal Political Affairs – talked about Davis-Obama relationship during a Communist Party reception “last March at the Tamiment Library, at New York University [stating that Davis became Obama’s mentor,] influencing […] his career moves.”

When Obama became “community organizer” in Chicago, he came in contact with the “Democratic Socialists of America, which maintains close ties to European socialist groups and parties through the Socialist International (SI), and two former members of the Students for a Democratic Society (SDS), William Ayers and Carl Davidson.” Ayers is a now “a college professor and served with Obama on the Committee of Correspondence for Democracy and Socialism (CCDS), an offshoot of the old Moscow-controlled CPUSA, and helped organize the 2002 rally where Obama came out against the Iraq War.”

While several blacks left the CPUSA, there is no record to prove whether Davis left the party or not. One thing is sure, Davis seemed to have remained “as radical as ever reminding Obama, when he left for college, that it will only be ‘An advanced degree in compromise’ and warned Obama not to forget his ‘people’ and not to ‘start believing what they tell you about equal opportunity and the American way and all that shit.’”

There is little doubt that Obama is a socialist. Just check his personal and political track record. And it goes back to 1996 when he got the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) backing him for the state senate seat. He campaigned for openly socialist Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont, who in turn recognized him as “one of the great leaders of the United States Senate,” ‘even though Obama had only been in the body for about two years.’ In 2007, the National Journal [lauded] Obama as “the most liberal Senator.” Did it mean more socialist?

DSA is the largest socialist organization in the U.S. and the principal affiliate of the U.S. SI, which “has a “consultative status” with the United Nations. This connection is extremely important because of the Obama bill, “The Global Poverty Act,” that has been presented to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. The gist of it is a request for additional hundreds of billions of dollars in foreign aid to the rest of the world. It sure looks like a grand philanthropic gesture, but the truth is far from it. Let’s dig further and see where the socialist arm is developing tentacles to spread out at the expense of the American people.

We must never give in to our instant fear of unemployment, gas prices, foreclosure, in one word, our economic turmoil and allow socialists to move in and surreptitiously change our great country into a communist one. What made the United States of America the greatest and strongest state in the world is our economic strength, our willingness to self-sacrifice for our country, not only military speaking but also economically. Remember, “Unity makes Power.” Remember how we all united during and after WWII to make our country the “Great and Beautiful,” a role model for the rest of the world. So must we get ready and do the same today and prevent any foreign ideology – the socialist Marxist leading to the infamous communist – take over ours.

IS OBAMA A TRUE DEMOCRAT OR A MARXIST MOLE?
By Cliff Kincaid
Abstract by Johana Nadler

click here to view original article

For a sharp politician, Obama seems to lack basic math knowledge. If you do the math for his health care plan, it simply doesn’t add up. So, let’s do some simple math and let you be the judge.

Obama offers a 50% tax credit to employers for health insurance coverage. Let’s look at this based on the scenario of a family of four with a $6.55 per hour/minimum wage. In 2007, the health insurance premium came to $12,100 (itself up by 6.1% from 2006). A 40 hours/week times 50 weeks/year and the total comes to $13,100. Based on the minimum wage of 6.55/hour, it “would immediately become $13/hour. And that’s something most businesses can’t afford.”

“Even if your salary is twice the minimum, health insurance is a 50% bump on your pay. Give the employer a 50% tax credit and it’s still a 25% bump, so you’re costing your employer $30,000 in real dollars, for salary and health care.”

A majority of employers cannot afford this and it weakens them in the international market. Bottom line: renegotiate a more basic solution on health care.

OBAMA’S HEALTH PLAN DOESN’T ADD UP!
By Dana Blankenhorn (7/14/08)
Abstract By Johana Nadler

click here to view original article

Our government is mainly divided between these parallel lines. And so, it got me thinking of my student years in geometry: parallel lines, verticals and horizontals, all the various triangles: the isosceles, the equilateral, the scalene and those classified by their internal angle: the acute triangle, the obtuse and of course the right triangle, and then all the polygons and the quadrilaterals and so on, the list is endless. What happens if all lines remain parallel? You cannot create anything with just parallel lines. A square needs two pairs of intersecting parallel lines. A triangle needs intersecting lines, so does a square or a rectangle. Pyramids, which are tetrahedrons, would never have been built if their structure didn’t meet at their locus point, and so, I started looking around me. Every living matter is made of intersections creating angles of various degrees; there are indeed some parallelism but never left on their own, they are always crossed or joined by other lines otherwise they couldn’t function.

So is our government. Indeed, we have the Republican Party, which is the right (with those on the extreme right called the conservatives), and the Democratic Party, which is on the left (with those extremists bordering on socialism). But thank God for the Congress and House of Representatives which allow at times a crisscrossing of these lines. However, and that is the uncertainty of political elections, the Congress oftentimes ends up with a majority republican or democrat and that is when the foundation of the edifice (our government) starts to be out of balance. One of the parallel line (be it left or right) starts extending upward at a greater speed than the other one jeopardizing the whole structure (our country) and leaving an open gap which ends up being our Achilles tendon.

Presently, we are exceptionally lucky to witness a historical presidential campaign where a woman almost won a contender nomination and a black man might win the White House. We couldn’t have created a more distinct historical mark in this new century if we had planned it, for it is an extraordinary event that heralds a new beginning in our American history, hopefully a positive one.

Now to get back to the more concrete aspects of this election, pundits and media are constantly debating, satirizing, mocking and sometimes applauding John McCain’s and Barack Obama’s actions. The newspapers and TV media, though vaunting their fairness and objectivity are far from it. We all know which cable or TV station is democrat or republican and that goes for the newspaper as well, so I suggest they stop lauding themselves for what they are not and start reporting facts as they are without inputting their own slant unless it is on their own show, and even then stop trying to convince us that they are right and those who differ are wrong. One good example of their inequity is the case of Hillary Clinton, who was bashed on and on by all sources of media, making one conclude that American men would rather see a black man in the White House than a woman, any woman. They are constantly mocking McCain for his advanced age, forgetting that today men and women are aging better than before and a seventy-year old man is yesterday’s fifty-year old. Additionally, age does not necessarily bring senility but wisdom and life experience, which can not be learned from books.

As for Obama’s flip-flopping on various issues, it shouldn’t surprise anyone. Flip-flopping is a very derogatory word where in actuality what Obama did, along with McCain on some issues, is just change his position because of changes in the mechanics of the issue. McCain has also been attacked for changing his view on oil drilling. Well, he too is trying to ease the economy and the constant rising gas price. McCain must find a solution pleasing to all concerns on the immigrant issue, but the bottom line is that unless we build a “Berlin Wall” along our border with Mexico, this problem will not be resolved unless we come up with some very clear and sustainable law. Regarding the free trade, McCain knows that we are living in a globalized world and the economy in one country is often dependent on the economy of another. With the Iraq war issue, Obama should not have promised a complete withdraw prior to visiting the country in question. He previously voted against the war and against monetary support for our troops, and against the surge without having a face-to-face feedback from the men and women fighting over there, and the Iraqi civilians. And McCain on the other hand should not have stated that we are there for a long long time. Fortunately, both presidential candidates have seen their mistakes and both are slowly moving to more central views.

We are facing two groups of people who are scared of one another. The Republicans see Obama as a socialist who will end capitalism as we know it. Entrepreneurs foresee being penalized for their business acumen and ambition by having their taxes raised as never seen before. Employers fear the increase in payroll taxes and being forced to carry the economic burden of those with a lower income. Where does Obama expect to get the money to help pay for universal health care, for senior citizens, for social reforms and so on? He says it will come from the money we will be saving from withdrawing from the Iraq war, but then what about the Afghanistan war? Where will he be getting the money from? Will there be enough for his social reforms and keep fighting the Taliban in Afghanistan and Pakistan? Won’t the money come from those making more than $250,000/year? How will small business owners manage to survive when their taxes are raised? Won’t it make them drop into the lower income status? Is Obama’s economic goal one that will even out income ending in a predominantly low to middle-income class and a small higher-income class? Won’t this reverse the economic progress made so far?

No, respond the Democrats. They don’t want another Republican government; a government that lied to them and manipulated their fear and pride (9/11); a government that favored big businesses but especially their own businesses (Bush’s and Cheney’s). They went into the Iraq war under false pretenses that even I believed, when all along what Bush and Cheney saw was an opportunity to manipulate the oil industry and fill up their purses. And what is the end result? Thousands of young lives killed for greed and power of a few; corporate banks and pension funds that speculate on oil demands and supply and bought more than needed leading to such a sky-rocketing gas price.

The bottom line of all this, as I see it, is that a meeting of both would be the ideal plan for rebuilding our fallen economy, reviewing social issues, especially health care, redressing the mortgage fiasco preventing nefarious consequences to home owners, finding a solution to the energy problem (fuel and others) while keeping in mind to safeguard our fauna and flora (environment), which are much needed for a perfect atmospheric equilibrium, and lowering the unemployment rate and restoring pride in the American worker who will know that his contribution to the economy of our country is recognized as a valuable asset. Democrats should not knock down free enterprises and penalized those with higher income, because the truth is corporations, of all sizes, are needed to supply employment, which in turn allows people to spend money and the circle of economy keeps turning on and on. However, one problem exists with large industries that increase their profit by outsourcing.
Where did it led to? Obviously to high rate of unemployment and lack of quality control leading to a recall of many products manufactured in China, as seen in the last months. Another consequence of outsourcing is customers’ frustration when calling customer service and being unable to understand the person on the recipient line because of their heavy accent (from India, Bangladesh or other outsourced countries).

Eight years of Republican government resulted into a wider gap between the rich and the poor where the rich got richer, the middle-income went down to poor level and the poor to poorer. Republicans are afraid of what they call Obama’s socialistic views, even though we all know that socialism will never exist in the U.S.A., but let’s face it, it is outrageous that in a country that prides itself on being the greatest and wealthiest (which unfortunately no longer is) force and role model for the rest of the Western world, one can find poverty to the level of the Victorian age, with people without health coverage, and those who had no other recourse but to join an HMO see some of their treatments and procedures rejected because of cost to the insurance companies ending into the death of the patient. I am not saying that we should have socialize medicine (though I think it works better for the majority of the people) – and by the way the U.S.A. is the only country that still hasn’t caught up with the metric system nor with health coverage for all – but our government should somehow monitor the private health insurance companies to prevent death by treatment refusal. And that applies to senior citizens who should be treated with equal concern as their younger counterpart.

So, all in all, being in the center is the optimum; a meeting of both Republican and Democrat values will benefit all concerned. Free trade should go on while providing work for our own; large industries and corporations should not be penalized but rewarded with lower taxes IF they employ Americans and reduce their outsourcing. Programs for improving our children’s education, even if it might mean re-educating their teachers – by regular re-testing to ascertain their continuous ability -, should be developed and enforced federally if states refuse or neglect to follow the rules. Redesign income tax laws and regulations to prevent the richer to get away with too many write-offs but still be fair to them, and the middle to low-income earners to overpay; the latter deserve a break. Go to Afghanistan and get rid once and for all of the Taliban in order to show to the world that the U.S.A. is still the strongest armed forces and will not put up with coward acts of terrorism. Stop corruption via lobbyism in Washington, and demand the truth from our officials. And lastly, renew foreign communication and restore a positive view of the U.S. government.

November 2008 presidential election will decide whether the country will remain Republican but with a more central solution to economy and health care reform, or Democrat with a more realistic and fair tax policy toward those large industries and corporations who are still needed to make our economy run. Therefore, a meeting of both sides might heal our country’s illness.

LEFT, RIGHT OR CENTER?
By Johana Nadler