The grooming of socialist Obama

An Interview with Stanley Kurtz, Author of “Radical-in-Chief”…

Ruth King

In 1983, authors Rael Jean and Erich Isaac published “The Coercive Utopians” (Regnery). They demonstrated how, after the end of the Vietnam War and the abrogation of the draft, the radicals of the New Left of the sixties turned their attention to careers in academia, law, journalism, and “community action” projects in religious, environmental, anti-nuclear energy, and social service institutions.

On April one of that year, a twenty one year old senior at Columbia University named Barack Obama attended the “Socialist Scholars Conference” in New York City’s Cooper Union, which had been touted as a meeting “In honor of Karl Marx’s centennial (1818-1883).” This conference became the catalyst for Obama’s future political agenda.

Thus begins Stanley Kurtz’s dazzling and meticulously researched book “Radical- In- Chief-Barack Obama and the Untold Story of American Socialism.” The opening remarks of the 1983 Conference were tellingly delivered by City University’s radical professor Frances Fox Piven, described by the author as “…..preeminent theorist, strategist, and historian of community organizing, with a keen sense of the roots of community organizing in America’s early communist and socialist movements.”

While the Reagan years were presented as a major realignment of American voters, the left realigned with the Democratic party and civil rights twinned with economic justice and the black liberation theology teamed with socialists. Kurtz reminds us that the buzz in “progressive” circles was that Blacks would become the leaders of the revived American socialist movement, and this was the path that would appeal to a young Obama, inspired by the panels, literature and radical participants in the conference.

Time had not dispelled the radicals’ view of America as militarist, evil, greedy, racist and in need of “fundamental transformation” through “stealth” socialism and their foot soldiers became the community organizers. Once, they proposed policy through organizations which they infiltrated to reshape agenda and goals. Now they implement policy in the Obama government. The author traces those post sixties radicals and the associations which shaped the political mindset and socialist agenda of the President of the United States.

Kurtz argues that the ultimate goal is a socialist welfare state and he proves his case with impressive and convincing detail and evidence. While most Americans recognize groups like ACORN, and names like Saul Alinsky, groups like the Midwest Academy, UNO (United Neighborhood Associations) and names like Alice Palmer and Robert Creamer and Ken Rolling are fairly obscure, but they played a significant role in the grooming of Barack Hussein Obama. Kurtz’s painstaking effort in connecting the dots to prove his case is simply breathtaking.

As the growth of the tea party and conservative blogs and media have demonstrated, exposure leads to an informed electorate and to public protest and determination to halt policies that are inimical to American democracy.

“Radical-In-Chief” provides this essential exposure and deserves the highest praise and widest circulation.

We are honored to interview Stanley Kurtz for Family Security Matters.

December 9, 2010 | 2 Comments »

Subscribe to Israpundit Daily Digest

Leave a Reply

2 Comments / 2 Comments

  1. People throw around this term “socialist” like it has some meaning. There are, and there have been, all kinds of “socialists.” Some are good (when it comes to Israel), some are not so good, some are downright evil.

    It seems Obama hung out with the worst, those on the extreme left, anti-American, soft-on-totalitarianism, side of socialism.

    In the post WWII era, there were some socialists who were very pro-Israel, anti-communist, and anti-totalitarian. Some supported the Viet Nam War because it was a war against Stalinists and totalitarians.

    The successor party to Norman Thomas’ Socialist Party, the now-defunct Social Democrats, USA, was led by the likes of Al Shanker, Bayard Rustin and others, who were strong supporters of Israel, and staunch anti-communists who supported a strong national defense. Many were strong supporters of Scoop Jackson. This movement included the likes of Josh Muravchik, Linda Chavez, and others now associated with the right. The fact that one has been involved with “socialists” says nothing. One must look at the philosophy, positions and people involved. Obviously, Obama was running with a very bad crowd.

  2. The idea was to grab hold of the economy “from below,” through grassroots activism, rather than “from above,” through formal nationalization.

    Then the question arises: Once you have grabbed hold of the economy, what next? Like grabbing the tail of the tiger. And of course, from my experience growing up in the well-nationalized UK, Government control is at best an oxymoron and at worst a nightmare.

    But one has to admit that the strategies outlined by Kurtz are pretty clever, so clever in fact, that they were effective in duping over 50% of the American population; that portion of the population that prided itself in being “intellectual” and “open minded” – and of course “anti-corruption”. Meanwhile the others – the “Rednecks” and “Rubes” – had Obama all figured out, but couldn’t be heard above the din of the new form of corruption that was put into place; the kinder and gentler type of corruption.

    I urge everyone who reads this blog to read at least the first of a multi-part series called From Meccania to Atlantis by Takuan Seiyo. Well worth reading; it holds back on nothing. The linked version is in the Brussels Journal where it first appeared. It’s on several sites now.