07/1/15

Walmart, Comcast Celebrate Gay Pride

By: Cliff Kincaid
Accuracy in Media

“Homo is Healthy” was one of the signs on the official gay pride website for the big march celebrating the Supreme Court’s ruling on same-sex marriage on Sunday, June 28, in New York City. It was brought to you, in part, by Walmart, a high-level Platinum sponsor that happens to be America’s largest private sector employer. The giant retailer was among a “Who’s Who” of corporate America that also included sponsors Coke, Netflix, Hilton, PBS, Macy’s and Comcast Universal (NBC).

Pete Leather Bar

Peter LaBarbera of Americans for Truth covered the event, publishing photos of nearly naked men and a “leather” contingent on a truck, among other scenes of debauchery. He said hundreds of children could be seen either marching in or watching the parade. “This is the evidence of why gay marriage and gay parenting are wrong,” LaBarbera told Accuracy in Media.

One photo showed a big rainbow flag being unfurled as the Walmart logo could be seen in the background.

LaBarbera said the scenes of nudity and vulgarity that he photographed at the pride march in New York City provided evidence of how the homosexual lifestyle is something America should not celebrate or make into protected status under law.

For its part, Comcast celebrated June as gay pride month with short films targeting “LGBTQ youth” and “LGBTQ teens.”

Comcast boasted, “In 2013, 2014, and 2015, the company earned a perfect score on the Human Rights Campaign’s Corporate Equality Index and was named a Best Place to Work for the LGBT community.”

Nowhere is homosexual influence more pronounced than Hollywood. However, a new film on homosexual influence in Hollywood, “An Open Secret,” is having a hard time getting distributed, with those involved with the film saying that financial interests in Hollywood have been trying to suppress it. This film, however, does not celebrate “gay pride.” Rather, it exposes victims of sexual abuse in the entertainment industry. The homosexual pedophiles exposed in the film include Marc Collins-Rector, a major figure in the entertainment business who is a convicted child abuser and now a registered sex offender. The film is directed by Amy Berg, who also directed the 2006 American documentary film about a pedophile Catholic priest, Oliver O’Grady, called “Deliver Us From Evil.”

The decision by Walmart to embrace the homosexual rights movement is a case study of how the powerful interests who run the movement have worked their will on corporate America.

Quartz, a digital native news outlet, noted that “When Sam Walton started the company [Walmart] in 1962 in Rogers, Arkansas, he imbued the chain with a certain small-town conservatism. For instance, it long drew ire for its reluctance to sell music with explicit lyrics.”

Although Walmart still portrays itself as family-friendly, LaBarbera points out that the company is now publicly pro-homosexual and has been giving major grants to homosexual/transgender events and organizations, including $25,000 – $50,000 in 2014 to the Gay & Lesbian Victory Fund, a group that helps elect “out” homosexuals to political office. (Most of them are Democrats.)

The group’s 2011 annual report reveals that openly gay Obama ally, Terry Bean, co-founder of the major homosexual lobby, the Human Rights Campaign, has been a major supporter of the Gay & Lesbian Victory Fund as well. Bean took a leave of absence from the Human Rights Campaign after he was arrested on sexual abuse charges involving sex with a minor.

Corporate supporters of the Gay & Lesbian Victory Fund in 2011 included Pacific Gas & Electric Company, Bank of America, Southwest Airlines, AT&T, Shell Oil Company, Microsoft, Wells Fargo and the Nuclear Energy Institute.

Wells Fargo achieved notoriety this year by becoming the nation’s first bank to run a national ad including a homosexual couple.

Labor union sponsors of the Gay & Lesbian Victory Fund included the Service Employees International Union, the National Education Association, and the AFL-CIO.

Meanwhile, open homosexuals in the media, such as Edward Snowden mouthpiece Glenn Greenwald, have opened fire on Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia for exposing the Court’s gay marriage ruling as a “judicial Putsch” that stole the democratic system away from the American people.

Writing on the website of First Look Media, financed by billionaire French-born Iranian-American Pierre Omidyar, Greenwald hailed the ruling and noted that “Harry Hay created the Mattachine Society,” the first homosexual rights organization in the U.S. However, Greenwald failed to point out Hay’s membership in the Communist Party and support for the North American Man-Boy Love Association. Greenwald is one of several media figures on Out Magazine’s list of “most influential LGBT people in American culture.” Others include Anderson Cooper of CNN, Shepard Smith of Fox News, Robin Roberts of ABC, Don Lemon of CNN, Harvey Levin of TMZ, Rachel Maddow and Thomas Roberts of MSNBC, and Kara Swisher of CNBC.

On the conservative side, support for homosexual marriage seems to be growing—or at least coming out of the closet. Mary Katharine Ham, a Fox News commentator and editor-at-large of HotAir.com, has declared herself in favor of same-sex marriage. She has written a book with homosexual political commentator Guy Benson, a Fox News contributor who serves as political editor of the TownHall.com website.

HotAir and TownHall are owned by Salem Media Group, a Christian firm. Salem has refused to respond to questions about its employees becoming advocates for or activists in the homosexual movement.

06/30/15

Scholar Speaks on Obama’s Red Mentor

By: Cliff Kincaid
Accuracy in Media

The black scholar who previously revealed Obama’s personal relationship with Communist Party operative Frank Marshall Davis is now speaking in detail on the record. Professor Gerald Horne says that while the relationship is noteworthy and should have been uncovered by the press, there is no evidence that Davis turned Obama “into some sort of Manchurian candidate.”

However, Professor Paul Kengor’s book about Davis, The Communist, argues that Davis had a significant influence on the formation of Obama’s Marxist views and policies as President.

Horne, who holds the John J. and Rebecca Moores Chair of History and African American Studies at the University of Houston, is a contributor to Communist Party USA publications such as Political Affairs magazine. He spoke at a March 23, 2007, event at New York University’s Tamiment Library to celebrate the donation of Communist Party materials to the library.

It was at that event that Horne, speaking before an audience that included Communist Party leaders, discussed then-Senator Barack Obama’s relationship with a Communist Party figure in Hawaii, Davis, who died in 1987.

The revelation that a U.S. senator preparing to run for president was linked to a high-level official of the Communist Party, a party which had been funded by Moscow and used to infiltrate the U.S. government, seemed like big news. Yet, despite coverage of Horne’s remarks by blogger Trevor Loudon and Accuracy in Media before Obama won his first presidential term in 2008, the major U.S. media ignored the relationship and the matter of whether Davis had influenced Obama’s politics, and even had recruited him to the Marxist cause. It was apparent that the media did not want to publicize anything that might inhibit the election of the first black president in the U.S.

In my interview, Horne said he came across the activities of Davis while researching his book on labor unions in Hawaii, Fighting in Paradise: Labor Unions, Racism and Communists in the Making of Modern Hawaii, 2011.

“So as I was reading about Frank Marshall Davis there was the simultaneous ascension to influence of then-Senator Barack Obama and I read his memoir [Dreams from My Father], where he talks about a character by the name of Frank and I just put two and two together,” Horne told me. “I don’t think it took a great logical leap.” He added, “The press should have uncovered this, not some obscure professor in Houston.”

In that 2007 speech at Tamiment Library, entitled, “Rethinking the History and Future of the Communist Party,” Horne had referred to Davis as “an African-American poet and journalist” who was “certainly in the orbit of the CP—if not a member …” and had become a friend to Barack Obama and his family in Hawaii.

Horne also noted that Obama, in his memoir, spoke “warmly of an older black poet, he identifies simply as ‘Frank’ as being a decisive influence in helping him to find his present identity as an African-American…”

The Horne speech was subsequently published in the Communist Party newspaper People’s World.

New Zealand researcher Trevor Loudon, who has written two books on Marxist influence in the Obama administration and Congress, discovered the Horne speech identifying “Frank” as Frank Marshall Davis and treated the revelation as a significant fact regarding Obama’s presidential run. We confirmed the information in a February 18, 2008, column, “Obama’s Communist Mentor.” Later that year we obtained the 600-page FBI file on Davis, confirming his actual membership in the CPUSA and raising suspicions that Davis was a Soviet espionage agent.

But the major media refused to treat the information as a serious impediment to Obama’s fitness for office. The Obama campaign lied about Davis, portraying him as just a civil rights activist.

I argued in the interview with Horne that the failure of the press to uncover or publicize the evidence of the Obama-Davis connection was the result of liberals or “progressives” thinking that the relationship would hurt Obama’s chances to be president.

Horne said he wasn’t convinced that was the case, at least in terms of how the black community would react, since Davis had a reputation as a noted black literary figure who had been an associate of the prominent black novelist Richard Wright, a former CPUSA member. Horne said membership in the CPUSA did not “carry as much opprobrium” in the black community “as it might carry in other communities.” In addition, he argued, “if you start digging deep in terms of the public and published record about Obama and Davis, you quickly find there’s not much there. I mean we know that Obama mentioned him. We know that Davis was a radical. But we’re not able to make the link that Davis turned Obama into some sort of Manchurian candidate.”

In fact, however, Obama makes at least 22 explicit references to “Frank” in his memoir, talks about how Davis influenced his thinking on race and other matters during eight years in Hawaii, and in a recently discovered 1995 speech promoting his book acknowledged that Davis had “schooled” him on the subject of white racism.

Horne countered, “Some of my friends on the left who are quite hostile to Obama would say that if Davis schooled Obama, he didn’t do a very good job.”

Back in 2007, however, Horne had predicted that Obama, then a somewhat obscure political figure, would go down in history.

Horne said, “At some point in the future, a teacher will add to her syllabus Barack’s memoir and instruct her students to read it alongside Frank Marshall Davis’ equally affecting memoir, ‘Living the Blues’ and when that day comes, I’m sure a future student will not only examine critically the Frankenstein monsters that U.S. imperialism created in order to subdue Communist parties but will also be moved to come to this historic and wonderful archive in order to gain insight on what has befallen this complex and intriguing planet on which we reside.”

The role of Communist parties here and abroad is a favorite subject of Horne, who has written more than 30 books. These books include:

  • Counter-Revolution of 1776: Slave Resistance and the Origins of the United States of America (2014).
  • Black Revolutionary: William Patterson and the Globalization of the African-American Freedom Struggle (2014).
  • From the Barrel of a Gun: The U.S. and the War Against Zimbabwe (2001).
  • The Final Victim of the Blacklist: John Howard Lawson, Dean of the Hollywood Ten (2005).

The Communist Party USA backed Obama for president in 2008, and in 2012 said his re-election was “absolutely essential.”

Current policies and programs of the CPUSA include support for Obamacare, rights for homosexuals, and Pope Francis’ encyclical on climate change.

05/20/15

De Blasio’s “Contract for Communism”

By: Terresa Monroe-Hamilton

Red Bill de Blasio just unveiled a 13-point national “Progressive Agenda” that is being touted as the liberal “Contract with America.” It more closely resembles a “Contract for Communism.”

And a majority of Democrats wholeheartedly approve this as the basis for the “Progressive Agenda” – the bedrock for their primary economic policies and the running platform for their anointed 2016 presidential candidate. The mask is coming off… they are going full bore Marxist/Communist and are proud of it. Members of Congress are praising de Blasio for uniting Progressives.

Rev. Al Sharpton stated that the shared goals of Progressives are more important than each individual leader’s specific opinions – how very communist of the Reverend:

“We don’t agree on everything but we agree that we have to deal with income inequality and wages and how we get there,” he said. “We can’t debate that America has to be fair for everybody. We can’t debate that the billionaires are playing games with us and treating us like hamsters on a treadmill rather than people that are focused on the goal line. We will change the debate starting today.”

Comrade Sharpton waxes poetic for the communist agenda. Is anyone surprised that the weasel who is vocally advocating for the nationalization of our police forces stands on a communist perch worthy of Lenin?

De Blasio comparing this to the Republican Party’s 1994 “Contract with America” only holds up if you consider it the very antithesis to such a political platform. But it certainly does lay bare their wealth redistribution and class realignment goals.

Aaron Klein at WND has documented that most of the 13 points in de Blasio’s “Progressive Agenda” can also be found in the manifestos and literature of the Communist Party USA and the Socialist Party USA:

Here is a comparison of the Agenda’s plan with literature from the manifestos and writings of the Community Party USA, or CPUSA, and the Socialist Party USA, or SPUSA.

Progressive Agenda: “Raise the federal minimum wage, so that it reaches $15/hour, while indexing it to inflation.”

SPUSA: “We call for a minimum wage of $15 per hour, indexed to the cost of living.”

CPUSA: Calls for “struggles for peace, equality for the racially and nationally oppressed, equality for women job creation programs, increased minimum wage. … Even with ultra-right control of the Federal government, peoples legislative victories, such as increasing the minimum wage, can be won on an issue-by-issue basis locally, statewide, and even nationally.”

Progressive Agenda: “Reform the National Labor Relations Act, to enhance workers’ right to organize and rebuild the middle class.”

SPUSA: “The Socialist Party stands for the right of all workers to organize, for worker control of industry through the democratic organization of the workplace.”

CPUSA: “One of the most crucial ways of increasing the strength and unity of the working class as a whole is organizing the unorganized. Working-class unity depends on uniting all the diverse sectors of the multiracial, multinational working class in the U.S. … Speeding up the organization of unorganized workers is one of the most important challenges to labor and all progressive forces.”

Progressive Agenda: “Pass comprehensive immigration reform to grow the economy and protect against exploitation of low-wage workers.”

SPUSA: “We defend the rights of all immigrants to education, health care, and full civil and legal rights and call for an unconditional amnesty program for all undocumented people. We oppose the imposition of any fees on those receiving amnesty. We call for full citizenship rights upon demonstrating residency for six months.”

CPUSA: Declares the “struggle for immigrant rights is a key component of the struggle for working class unity in our country today.”

Progressive Agenda: Pass national paid sick leave. Pass national paid family leave.

CPUSA: In October 2014, hails that “women are fighting back to defend their jobs and their families against candidates who want to destroy women’s reproductive rights, health care, family leave and paid sick days. Women’s voices and votes can make the difference in this election in the U.S. Senate and House, for Governors and State Legislatures, and in the movement going forward for full equality.”

Progressive Agenda: “Make Pre-K, after-school programs and childcare universal.”

SPUSA: “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.”

Progressive Agenda: “Earned Income Tax Credit.” “Implement the ‘Buffett Rule’ so millionaires pay their fair share.”

SPUSA: “We call for a steeply graduated income tax and a steeply graduated estate tax. …”

CPUSA: “No taxes for workers and low and middle income people; progressive taxation of the wealthy and private corporations. …”

Eerily similar, huh? Getting a little hot in our comrade’s kitchen – in fact, hot damn!

De Blasio considers Obama “too conservative” to implement a progressive economic vision and “too afraid to take the bold kind of action that President Roosevelt took” during the Great Depression. It is widely rumored that de Blasio is considering running for president in 2016. At the very least, his agenda for New York is very clear. No way would I live in New York these days – did you know 46% of the population there lives in poverty? Of course, de Blasio blames it all on the Bloomberg administration. Bloomberg deserves a lot of blame, but if he pulled the city into ghettosville, de Blasio is tripling down on it. He wants to raise the minimum wage to $15 an hour, just like Seattle. That was disastrous for Seattle by the way. And now LA has decided that they are copying this suicidal move. Looks like both coasts just can’t get enough Marxism going on. Both are racing to see who can go third-world first.

Speaking at the “Progressive Agenda” launch event, de Blasio said “something is changing in America.” Yeah and not for the better. “It’s time to take that energy and crystallize it into an agenda that will make a difference,” he said. “We’ll be calling on leaders and candidates to address these issues, to stiffen their backbones, to be clear and to champion these progressive policies.” It’s an all-you-can-eat Marxist buffet. In attendance were politicians, union leaders and of course, race monger, Al Sharpton. In other words, the who’s who of America’s communists.

The Hill quoted Rep. Charles Rangel, D-N.Y., saying de Blasio’s plan “could be the beginning of a revolution.”

Rep. Mark Pocan, D-Wis., commented the mayor’s plan represents “the meat on the bones of a progressive agenda.”

Rep. Yvette Clarke, D-N.Y., said, “The cavalry has arrived.”

Either de Blasio is taking his communist agenda on the election trail, or he is trying to force the Hildebeast even further to the left. But honestly, it’s hard to see how she could go much further left these days.

The Atlantic reported the coalition supporting de Blasio’s plan includes Dan Cantor, executive director of the Working Families Party. Cantor was also a founder of the socialist-oriented New Party. Did you know de Blasio once served as executive director of the New York branch of the New Party? Trevor Loudon has done massive research on Obama, who was also listed in New Party literature as a member. WND did as well.

De Blasio’s plan is based on a plan crafted by a George Soros-connected professor. De Blasio’s “Progressive Agenda” was formed around a 112-page policy report at the liberal Roosevelt Institute titled, “Rewriting the Rules of the American Economy.” The author is Joseph Stiglitz… the Columbia University economist who was an integral part of Occupy Wall Street. De Blasio is a big fan, which should tell you all you need to know. Stiglitz wants more government regulation of the economy.

Stiglitz previously chaired the Commission on Global Financial Issues of Socialists International, the world’s largest socialist organization. He’s also an economic adviser to Obama. His Keynesian economics are pure Marxist pablum.

Gavin Wright, chairman of Stanford’s economics department, summarized Stiglitz’s work:

“Broadly speaking, Joe’s theoretical work has had to do with the shortcomings and imperfections of market economy, not from the standpoint of a thorough-going rejection of the market economy but from the perspective that holds out hope for improvement through government regulation or use of the tax system,” Wright said.

From WND:

Stiglitz was a member of President Bill Clinton’s administration, serving both in Clinton’s cabinet and as chairman of the White House Council of Economic Advisers.

Stiglitz’s most important contribution during his time in the Clinton administration was helping to define a new economic philosophy called a “third way,” which called for business and government to join hands as “partners,” while recognizing government intervention could not always correct the limitations of markets.

“Third Way” is an ideology first promoted as an alternative to free markets by Mikhail Gorbachev after the collapse of the Soviet Union. The “Third Way” of governing would be neither capitalist nor communist, but something in between.

In his 1998 “State of the Union” address, President Clinton outlined the “Third Way”: “We have moved past the sterile debate between those who say government is the enemy and those who say government is the answer. My fellow Americans, we have found a Third Way.”

The “Third Way” calls for business and government to join hands as “partners.”

Discover the Networks criticized the theory: “In short, Big Business would own the economy (as under capitalism), while Big Government would run it (as under socialism). Corporations would be persuaded to comply with government directives through subsidies, tax breaks, customized legislation, and other special privileges.”

Soros himself has been a vocal proponent of the “Third Way” economic policy.

Stiglitz, meanwhile, also became involved in “global warming” issues, including serving on the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, helping to draft a new law for toxic wastes and serving on the boards of numerous environmental groups, such as the Alliance for Climate Protection.

Stiglitz is calling for a “New Global Economic Order” in which the world is “no longer dominated by one ‘superpower.’”

So you see, the communist ideals are endemic to de Blasio and his “Contract with America.”

In closing, here is the Progressive Agenda he is pushing:

Lift the Floor for Working People »

  • Raise the federal minimum wage, so that it reaches $15/hour, while indexing it to inflation.
  • Reform the National Labor Relations Act, to enhance workers’ right to organize and rebuild the middle class.
  • Pass comprehensive immigration reform to grow the economy and protect against exploitation of low-wage workers.
  • Oppose trade deals that hand more power to corporations at the expense of American jobs, workers’ rights, and the environment.
  • Invest in schools, not jails– and give a second chance to those coming home from prison.

Support Working Families »

  • Pass national paid sick leave.
  • Pass national paid family leave.
  • Make Pre-K, after-school programs and childcare universal.
  • Expand the Earned Income Tax Credit and protect and expand Social Security.
  • Allow students to refinance student loan debt to take advantage of lower interest rates, and support debt-free college.

Tax Fairness »

  • Close the carried interest loophole.
  • End tax breaks for companies that ship jobs overseas.
  • Implement the “Buffett Rule” so millionaires pay their fair share.
  • Close the CEO tax loophole that allows corporations to take advantage of “performance pay” write-offs.

There are many on the right pushing some of this crap too – especially Van Jones‘ ’empty the prisons’ mantra. This is a blueprint for solid communism – just say no to Red Bill de Blasio and his commie policies. His “Contract for Communism” is a road map to tyranny and the fall of the Republic.

03/31/15

The Progressive Transformation of Our Federal Government

By: Frank Salvato

Unionize Illegal Immigrants

Protesters participate in a display of civil disobedience as labor organizers escalate their campaign to unionize the industry’s workers. (AP Photo/M. Spencer Green)

With the addition of Ecuador and the Philippines as signatories to “memorandums of understanding,” the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) – effectively acting on behalf of the US federal government – has agreed to engage three foreign countries in international outreach programs designed to teach immigrants how to participate in labor organizing in the United States. Ecuador and the Philippines join Mexico as signatories to the memorandums. The agreements – which do not distinguish between those who have entered the US legally and those who have not, present several questions, including those of jurisdiction, treaty making and purpose.

The NLRB, by charter, is an independent agency of the United States government. Its members are all appointed by the President of the United States with the consent of the US Senate. It is divided into two authoritative entities: the General Counsel and the Board. The General Counsel is tasked with investigating and prosecuting unfair labor practice claims; the Board is the adjudicative body that rules on the cases brought to it.

The NLRB’s authority is legislatively limited to private sector employees (excluding governmental, railroad and airline employees covered by the Adamson Railway Labor Act, and agricultural employees) and the US Postal Service. Yet over the years, many court decisions have allowed for the board’s jurisdictional standards to become so low that almost all employers whose businesses have any appreciable impact on interstate commerce have been absorbed into the its purview, rightly or not.

What is missing from the board’s legislated organizational purview is the authority to extend its power outside the United States. Further, when it comes to agreements between the United States and foreign governments, the exclusive right to create and execute treaties in the name of the United States and/or the American people rests with the Executive Branch, pursuant to the consent of the US Senate, codified by Article II, Section 2, of the United States Constitution. By entering into agreements with foreign nations – agreements that possess the full legal weight of the United States government, the NLRB has essentially circumvented the constitutional process for entering into treaties and usurped the authorities of both the Executive Branch and the Legislative Branch of the federal government.

Additionally, the basic functions of the NLRB are meant to be centered on non-partisan arbitration and enforcement. Nowhere in the board’s legislated authority is there a proviso to advance the causes of either employers or organized labor, let alone a provision that grants them the power to teach labor organization to any demographic or faction, nationally or internationally; legally or illegally present in the United States. By entering into an agreement to provide instruction on labor organization, the NLRB has not only abdicated its mandate to be non-partisan, it has demonstrated a decided bias supporting organized labor.

Ronald J. Pestritto, Graduate Dean and Professor of Politics at Hillsdale College, writes in Woodrow Wilson: Godfather of Liberalism,

“Policymaking today, in many areas of national concern such as the environment, health care, and financial regulation, is done primarily by agencies within the bureaucracy to which Congress has delegated broad swaths of legislative authority. Recent battles ranging from rules for greenhouse gas emissions to benefits that must be covered by private health insurance plans have been fought not primarily in Congress, but in or against administrative agencies that are exercising the power given to them by Congress.”

The NLRB is certainly part of the Progressive Movement’s installed bureaucracy; a bureaucracy that functions parallel to the authority of elected government; a bureaucracy that functions even when our elected government does not. By entering into ipso facto treaties with foreign nations, the NLRB has permanently opened the Pandora’s box of transformative bureaucracy, and it is a direct threat to our original form of government.

Frank Salvato is the Executive Director of BasicsProject.org a grassroots, non-partisan, research and education initiative focusing on Constitutional Literacy, and internal and external threats facing Western Civilization. His writing has been recognized by the US House International Relations Committee and the Japan Center for Conflict Prevention. His opinion and analysis have been published by The American Enterprise Institute, The Washington Times, The Jewish World Review, Accuracy in Media, Human Events, Townhall.com and are syndicated nationally. Mr. Salvato has appeared on The O’Reilly Factor on FOX News Channel, and is the author of six books examining Islamofascism and Progressivism, including “Understanding the Threat of Radical Islam”. Mr. Salvato’s personal writing can be found at FrankJSalvato.com.

01/28/15

Carol O’Cleireacain: Why is a Marxist Running Detroit’s Economic Recovery?

By: Trevor Loudon
New Zeal

In October of 2014, new Detroit Mayor Mike Duggan appointed Dr. Carol O’Cleireacain as Deputy Mayor for Economic Policy, Planning & Strategy.

 Carol O'Cleireacain‎

Carol O’Cleireacain‎

According to Mayor Duggan, O’Cleireacain would be responsible for identifying “outside sources of funding” for the city so that it becomes financially stable outside of bankruptcy.

“Our ability to live within the Plan of Adjustment once it is approved can’t rely solely on traditional revenue sources because they can fluctuate based on conditions we can’t control,” Duggan said in a statement. “I’ve charged Dr. O’Cleireacain with identifying new funding sources to help insulate ourselves against these unknowns so the city can provide a consistent level of service.”

Detroit Emergency Manager Kevyn Orr had hired O’Cleireacain before the Mayor and Detroit City Council legally revoked his powers. Duggan, however, continued the appointment when he retook full control of the city.

“Mayor Duggan is setting a strong tone of fiscal accountability with his administration and I’m thrilled to have been asked to play a role,” O’Cleireacain said in a statement. “The mayor is building a great team that is going to transform the way Detroit meets the needs of its residents for years to come.”

Sounds great – except that Carol O’Cleireacain has been a card-carrying Marxist, who presided over New York City’s finances during one of the Big Apple’s most depressed periods, the 1990-93 Dinkins’ mayoralty.

O’Cleireacain came to Detroit from New York City, where she is a nonresident senior fellow at the leftist Brookings Institute, a think tank that is based in Washington, DC and an adjunct faculty in management and urban policy at the even more leftist New School. She is also a member of the “nonprofit, nonpartisan” Council on Foreign Relations.

O’Cleireacain moved to New York City in 1976 at the height of that city’s fiscal crisis and served 13 years as chief economist at District Council 37 AFSCME, a union notoriously controlled by Marxists led by the Democratic Socialist Organizing Committee. DSOC, would in 1982, merge with the New American Movement (an amalgam of mainly former Students for a Democratic Society and Communist Party USA members) to form Democratic Socialists of America.

O’Cleireacain was first identified as a Democratic Socialists of America member in DSA’s Democratic Left, Sep./Oct. 1987, page 9, while she was serving as assistant to the executive director of AFSCME, District Council 37, Stanley Hill – another DSAer.

In 1990, another DSA comrade, David Dinkins, was elected mayor of New York on the back of a big campaign mounted by DSA, organized labor and the Communist Party.

Dinkins immediately appointed several Marxists to key positions in his administration (including current Mayor Bill de Blasio and Carol O’Cleireacain.

DSA’s Democratic Left, May/June 1990, page 8, proudly noted that their member, Carol O’Cleireacain, had been appointed Commissioner of Finance for New York City.

The same year, Democratic Socialists of America sent a delegation to the October 1990 Socialist International meeting in New York, which included DSA’s permanent representative to the SI, Bogdan Denitch; DSA Honorary Chair, Cornel West; Pat Belcon, a DSA NPC member; Motl Zelmanowicz, a “DSAer active in the Jewish Labor Bund;” Jo-Ann Mort, a DSA NPC member; Jack Sheinkman, president of ACTWU; Terri Burgess, chair of the DSA youth Section; Skip Roberts, Chair of DSA’s Socialist International Committee; and NYC Commissioner of Finance, Carol O’Cleireacain. She had briefly became NYC budget director in the last days of the Dinkins’ administration.

The Center for Democratic Values, a “progressive think-tank” developed with Democratic Socialists of America sponsorship, made its first public appearance at the Socialist Scholars Conference in New York, on April 12-14. 1996. CDV cosponsored two panels at the conference and held a reception to introduce the Center to the assembled socialist scholars and activists.

The first panel dealt with rethinking the role of government. The discussion centered around a paper authored by DSA member and CDV organizer David Belkin (a policy and budget analyst in the office of the Manhattan Borough President), which “challenged the left to seriously reopen the issue of the role of government in a democratic society.” Carol O’Cleireacain, former New York City Budget Director, another member of the panel, “stressed the need for the left to pay more attention to organization and management as well as policy and structure, the traditional focuses of socialist theories.”

Here is a photo from the late 1980s of Carol O’Cleireacain wearing the badge of DSA’s Institute for Democratic Socialism. DSA’s “rose and fist” symbol can be clearly seen.

carolo'cleraicannn

Carolo

As late as 2009, O’Cleireacain was still serving on the Editorial Board of Dissent Magazine, alongside well known DSA comrades Joanne Barkan, Paul Berman, Mitchell Cohen, Bogdan Denitch, Cynthia Fuchs Epstein, Todd Gitlin, Michael Kazin, Deborah Meier, Harold Meyerson, Jo-Ann Mort, Patricia Cayo Sexton and Cornel West.

Detroiters are wise to remember that DSA played a big role in wrecking Detroit in the first place. After socialists seized control of the United Auto Workers, they used union muscle and money to elect Marxist politicians all over the state – including to the Detroit City Council.

One of their greatest victories was the election in 1973 of Coleman Young, a bona fide Communist Party member posing as a Democrat, to the Detroit mayoralty.

Young presided over a Council, stacked with socialists, whose cronyism, corruption and over-regulation drove an already teetering city off the financial cliff. Socialist influence on the Council continued until recent times under DSA aligned Councillors Maryann Mahaffey, and JoAnn Watson, revolutionary Marxist Ken Cockrel, Sr., and Communist Party supporters Erma Henderson and Clyde Cleveland.

While in charge of New York City’s finances, Carol O’Cleireacain computerized the city’s tax system, massively increasing revenues. Sound fiscal policy perhaps, but not the kind of shock Detroit’s very fragile business community could easily handle today.

But Carol O’Cleireacain may not actually care that much about private businesses anyway.

In an article in DSA’s Democratic Left, Spring 2007, DSA National Political Committee member and Greater Detroit Democratic Socialists of America Chairman David Green, wrote in support of the Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA) – or “card check”.

What distinguishes socialists from other progressives is the theory of surplus value. According to Marx, the secret of surplus value is that workers are a source of more value than they receive in wages. The capitalist is able to capture surplus value through his ownership of the means of production, his right to purchase labor as a commodity, his control over the production process, and his ownership of the final product. Surplus value is the measure of capital’s exploitation of labor…

Green went on to write:

Our goal as socialists is to abolish private ownership of the means of production. Our immediate task is to limit the capitalist class’s prerogatives in the workplace…

In the short run we must at least minimize the degree of exploitation of workers by capitalists. We can accomplish this by promoting full employment policies, passing local living wage laws, but most of all by increasing the union movement’s power…

Will this be Carol O’Cleireacain’s strategy for “saving” Detroit? More taxes, more regulations, stronger unions? Where will the “outsourced” revenue come from? What happens when American businesses and taxpayers are bled dry? Chinese interests?

Hasn’t America’s once greatest city suffered enough from socialists?

Trevor Loudon is an author, activist and political researcher from Christchurch New Zealand.

He is best known for exposing the ties between a young Barack Obama and Hawaiian Communist Party member Frank Marshall Davis, as well as exposing the communist background of former Obama “Green Jobs Czar” Van Jones. Loudon’s latest book, The Enemies Within: Communists, Socialists and Progressives in the U.S. Congress, is designed to expose the comprehensive communist, socialist and extreme progressive infiltration of the U.S. House of Representatives and the Senate.

01/14/15

Ignore Shoemaker: Frazier’s appointment a win for Maryland

By: James Simpson
DC Independent Examiner

Well, Maryland delegate Haven Shoemaker has treated us to yet another demonstration of his incisive wit, engaging personality and stunning political wisdom with his measured, wise and gracious remarks about Robin Frazier’s appointment to Joe Getty’s Maryland state senate seat.

Not.

Shoemaker called the Carroll County GOP “nuttier than outhouse rats,” for choosing her, adding, “To make this decision represents a nullification of the will of the people.” (Robin Bartlett Frazier nominated to State Senate seat, Carroll County Times, January 10, 2015). Shoemaker’s disrespectful remarks reflect Shoemaker’s poor character and lack of integrity more than anything else.

In fact, Shoemaker has it exactly backwards. When union sanctioned, pro-government, pro-spending candidates took over the Republican primary elections across the county last year, they truly did nullify the peoples’ will. All Marylanders should be concerned by this development. You can read more about that institutional vote fraud disgrace, here. To suggest the “will of the people” had anything to do with it, reveals a profound, perhaps willful ignorance.

Democrats switched sides en masse in the primary; then switched right back after voting. Meanwhile government unions provided money, muscle and materiel to defeat conservatives. Remember all those yard signs saturating the County? Your tax dollars – through the government unions – paid for that. It was the most unethical election in recent history, and for Maryland, that is quite an accomplishment. Robin Frazier was an unfortunate casualty.

But for Haven it was all good. Moral compass swinging like a windsock in a tornado, Mr. Shoemaker now deigns to enlighten us all with his gratuitous smearing of the Carroll County Republican Central Committee. If you need further proof of Shoemaker’s true loyalties, look no further.

Haven said Frazier can’t “reach across the aisle.” Be confident that as a newly-minted delegate, Mr. Shoemaker will reach across, risking your hard-earned tax dollars in the process. In fact, he proves yet again that he is already there. And there he will stay, because as a pandering, big government statist in Republican clothing, Mr. Shoemaker is much more comfortable retreating to safe, go-along-to-get-along politics than standing on principle.

Robin Frazier stood on principle every single day as commissioner. I saw that firsthand during my time working for the commissioners. That is why Carroll County’s RINOs conspired with the state’s Democrats and unions to defeat her in last year’s election. They are not interested in saving taxpayer dollars, lifting onerous regulations, or reducing the size and scope of government. These are the things she did.

Instead, RINOs like Haven find common cause with tax and spend Democrats to explode government, smother us with regulation, and spend money when they don’t even have to. I challenge Haven to name even one thing he did as commissioner that reduced spending or regulation – which he himself, rather than Frazier or Rothschild thought of. He did, however, vote their ideas many times.

Robin would be the first legislator to reach across the aisle if she believed it would genuinely serve Maryland citizens’ best interests. And she would do so from a position of strength, knowing full well the principles she stands on. Unlike Shoemaker, she is willing to go to jail to defend them. Robin will fight. Haven is content to manage the decline. For a long time, RINOs have been compromising whatever principles they have just to claim “bipartisanship.” The disastrous results are self-evident.

And about that lawsuit over prayer? The Carroll County Times somehow forgot that the U.S. Supreme Court sided with Robin (see Greece v Galloway). They also forgot to mention that a non-profit law firm dedicated to protecting First Amendment rights donated all their legal services on behalf of the County. That battle is mostly over; won by Frazier and like-minded patriots, even if the Humanist Association and the Times can’t admit it. Haven voted with Frazier on that one too.

The Carroll County GOP Central Committee based its decision on Frazier’s extensive experience in both public life and private industry. This included her four years service in the Ehrlich Administration as the Intergovernmental Affairs Coordinator for the Governor’s Office on Service and Volunteerism and Community Initiatives, and her appointment by Governor O’Malley to the Board of the Maryland Association of Counties. The Committee noted: “In this position she worked closely with legislators and other county leadership to improve, modify or eliminate legislation of concern to the counties and consistently lobbied for smaller government.”

Following are some of the things Frazier advocated and voted for as Carroll County Commissioner over the past four years:

  • for tax cuts every year she was in office;
  • for smaller county government with more efficient use of tax dollars;
  • for controlled spending on education in correlation with the continuing decline in enrollments;
  • for less regulations in both county government and from the state;
  • to educate county residents on the problems with common core and to return control to teachers and parents;
  • to stop palm scanning of Carroll County public school students;
  • to protect Carroll County residents’ 2nd Amendment rights;
  • to prevent the rain tax from being mandated in Carroll County;
  • to provide resources for the 20-25% of the student aged population in the county who aren’t in the public school system;
  • to get out of the incinerator contract that promised to bankrupt the county;
  • to increase the CATS bus system efficiency and reduce its costs to taxpayers;
  • to keep mass transit out of the county;
  • to protect the Commissioners’ right to pray before open session if they want to, as guaranteed in Article 36 of the Maryland State Constitution.

Pity there aren’t more people like Robin in public office. Never mind his gratuitous insults, Haven Shoemaker’s assertions are entirely off base. Haven is the kind of person who hangs on his every word. It’s a good thing that others don’t. The Carroll County GOP made a great choice in appointing Frazier. It will at least partially rectify the results of the election that was stolen from her, and assuredly blunt some of the idiocy Haven is sure to bring to the Maryland legislature – which already has more than enough.

01/12/15

Weekly Featured Profile – KeyWiki – Karen Kubby

KeyWiki

Karen Kubby

Karen Kubby has been a prominent Iowa City, Iowa activist since the 1970s. She has been a three term Iowa City Councillor and Executive Director of the Emma Goldman Clinic for Women, an abortion clinic named after famous anarchist Emma Goldman.

Kubby has been heavily involved in activism including standing on “picket lines with local labor unions and advocating for environmental protection, affordable housing, supporting the public library and a variety of other human rights issues.”

Kubby has served on the Socialist Party USA National Committee since 1980. In 2001, David McReynolds‘ 2000 campaign team organized a “Draft Kubby” effort for the 2004 campaign for presidency of the Socialist Party USA. However, Kubby declined to run for the presidency of the Party, stating that she did not want to do anything that would interfere with the plans of her then husband, prominent Iowa State Senator Joe Bolkcom ‘s plans to eventually run for Congress on the Democrat ticket.

Kubby is also very close to America’s largest Marxist group, Democratic Socialists of America. Iowa City Democratic Socialists of America leader, Jeff Cox, was Treasurer for Kubby for Council in 1988. She has also contributed to the group’s magazine, The Prairie Progressive.

Democratic Socialists of America is also supporting their member, Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders, in a bid for the U.S. Presidency in 2016.

During the summer and fall of 2006, Democratic Socialists of America Political Action Committee helped DSA activists around the country, “from San Diego up to Maine” to host house parties to raise funds that helped Bernie Sanders become the sole open socialist in the U.S. Senate.

On October 8, Jeff Cox of DSA and Karen Kubby of the Socialist Party USA teamed up to hold a house party in Iowa City for Sanders’ campaign.

In 2016, an Iowa group says it wants Senator Sanders to run for President as a Democrat in the 2016 Iowa caucuses.

The steering committee members include Karen Kubby and DSAer Jeff Cox.

(more…)

01/6/15

Who Are the Covert Marxists in Congress? Pre-order Loudon’s “The Enemies Within” Today!

By: Trevor Loudon
New Zeal

loudon.JPGnnn

If you liked my 2013-15 edition of “The Enemies Within: Communists, Socialists and Progressives in the U.S. Congress,” you’ll love the upcoming 2015-17 update.

  • “Obamacare” is destroying the world’s greatest healthcare system, and dragging the economy down.
  • “Amnesty” will flood the country with millions of new Democratic voters, eventually ensuring a “one party state.”
  • The U.S. military is being gutted, while America’s enemies are growing stronger and more aggressive by the day.
  • Rioting and violence are breaking out on America’s streets in levels not seen for 40 years.
  • American voters have seldom felt so alienated and public confidence in the U.S. government is at rock bottom levels.

All of this is being orchestrated by the U.S. Marxist movement working through the unions under their control, and their leverage over Congress. In the last fifteen years, the Marxists have infiltrated the House of Representatives and the Senate, with several dozen covert socialists and radicals, who are working to bring down the U.S. Constitution, and the very United States itself.

The country is at war – and the main enemy is internal. At least 20% of members of both Houses would fail an FBI security check to clean the toilets at any military base in the country. Yet these people are serving on sensitive committees like Science & Technology, Homeland Security, Armed Services, even Intelligence, with zero security checks.

Many of these “Representatives” are closely allied with radical groups who support China, Iran, North Korea, Cuba or other enemy nations. Is it conceivable that America’s enemies would not use these “friends” in the U.S. Government to try and further their own interests?

There is an old rule of war – “know thine enemy.” This book will help you do just that. In more than 700 well-referenced pages, “The Enemies Within” details the internal campaign against your liberty, including 77 no punches pulled, profiles of radical Congress members and Senators.

The Enemies Within” will be released on April 11, 2015.

You may pre-order a personally signed copy below.


Buy 1 or more




Thank you,

Trevor Loudon
Christchurch, New Zealand

01/3/15

One Republican With White Supremacists? Try 15 Democrats Mixing With Anti-American Communists

By: Trevor Loudon
New Zeal

The “mainstream media” is excited over revelations that House Majority Whip Rep. Steve Scalise (R-LA) addressed a white supremacist group in 2002.

scalise

And so they should be. The voting public has every right to know the associations of those they elect and pay to serve.

None of us want covert racists or extremists anywhere near public policy. We can all agree on that right?

So, to help the media to do the job they’re obviously so committed to, I’ve compiled a list of very troubling associations for their fearless journalists to investigate and expose.

Did you know that many leading Democrat politicians have close ties to the Communist Party USA? You know… the Party that supports China, Cuba, Venezuela and even Iran.

The evidence below only scratches the surface (for more complete information you can find my books here), but it should be enough to get the ball rolling.

Here’s senior Democratic Rep. Rosa DeLauro with Joelle Fishman, head of the Connecticut Communist Party, in the Party HQ, 37 Howe Street New Haven, August of 2010.

Rosa DeLauro, Joelle Fishman

Rosa DeLauro, Joelle Fishman

Here’s Minnesota Governor Mark Dayton with leading Minnesota/Dakotas Communist Party leader Mark Froemke, January 14, 2010.

Governor Dayton, Mark Froemke

Mark Froemke, Governor Dayton

Here’s comrade Froemke with Minnesota Senator Amy Klobuchar at a July 1, 2009, Al Franken rally.

Lavonne Froemke left, Amy Klobuchar second to right, Mark Froemke right

Klobuchar second to right, Froemke right

Here’s Mark Froemke chatting with Senator Franken on January 11, 2012.

Al Franken, Mark Froemke

Al Franken, Mark Froemke

Here’s a screen shot of the minutes of a December 1999, secret Communist Party USA meeting that was held at the May Day Bookstore in Minneapolis, Minnesota.

ritchie

Note Mark Froemke’s name. Also note below that Mark Ritchie, a “non party friend,” was a guest speaker.

This is the same Mark Ritchie who later became Minnesota Secretary of State. The one who kept finding votes until Al Franken had JUST ENOUGH TO GET ELECTED in 2008.

And here’s Minnesota Rep. Keith Ellison, writing for the Communist Party’s Peoples World in August of 2014.

ellisonnn

Over in Illinois, it’s pretty much the same.

Here’s a 2009 shot of Senator Dick Durbin with leading Chicago Communist Party member Bea Lumpkin.

Bea Lumpkin, Dick Durbin

Bea Lumpkin, Dick Durbin

Here’s Bea Lumpkin with Rep. Jan Shakowsky in 2012 at a Chicago Dinner in Comrade Lumpkin’s honor.

Bea Lumpkin, Jan Schakowsky

Bea Lumpkin, Jan Schakowsky

Here’s two Chicago Reps, Bobby Rush and Danny Davis, addressing the Chicago Communist party’s annual banquet in September of 1997. Davis was also at the 1989, 1990, 1998, 2000 and 2011 banquets.

rushie

Now for Red State Arizona.

Here’s an article written by Arizona Rep. Raul Grijalva for the Communist Party paper back in 1993.

raulie

Here’s Arizona Rep. Kyrsten Sinema endorsing a Communist Party May Day Appeal back in 2002. She did it again in 2003.

People's World, may 4, 2002

People’s World, May 4, 2002

Down in even redder Texas, we have a similar situation.

Here’s Rep. Eddie Bernice Johnson writing for the People’s World in December of 2001.

eddie

Here’s Democratic party Golden Boy Joaquin Castro with San Antonio Communist Party supporter Patti Radle in March of 2013.

Patti Radle, Joaquin Castro

Patti Radle, Joaquin Castro

And here’s Fort Worth based Rep. Mark Veasey with his self described “friend,” Texas Communist Party leader Gene Lantz, February 20, 2013.

Lantz , left, Veasey second left

Lantz, left, Veasey second left

Here’s Comrade Lantz again. This time with Houston based Rep. Al Green.

Lantz second from left, Green, second from right

Lantz second from left, Green, second from right

And that’s not even looking at Florida, Wisconsin, Michigan, Oregon, Washington State or the Communist Party strongholds of New York and California!!!!

Could there be an issue here?

Communist Party activists don’t hang around senior Democrats to talk about the NFL. They associate with them to discuss matters of mutual concern, to coordinate messaging and campaigns, and to pass on instructions.

Since the Marxists took over the AFL-CIO in 1994-96, the left has been able to effectively write Democratic Party policy. That is why the Democrats have gone so far left in the last 15 years – they are following the Communist agenda.

Will the mainstream media now start falling over themselves in the rush to investigate the VERY EXTENSIVE Communist Party influence in the Democratic Party?

If you want to know more, you can pre-order the 2015-2017 edition of my book: “The Enemies Within: Communists, Socialists and Progressives in the US Congress.”

It contains more than seven hundred pages on the Communist infiltration of the US government. Not just old history – right here, right now! Learn about the Communist origins of Obamacare, “Amnesty” and the gutting of the US military. Read the profiles of more than 75 untrustworthy US Congress members – all documented.

The book is due for release on April 11th. Click on the button below to re-order your own personally autographed copy, or copies.


Buy 1 or more




“Trevor Loudon does the job that few in the media ever attempt” – Glenn Beck

New Zealander Trevor Loudon has addressed more than 400 events, in the United States of America.

He is an internationally known blogger and researcher, noted among other things for exposing the communist background of Obama “Green Jobs Czar” Van Jones, which led to his eventual resignation from his White House position. Loudon was also the first to publicize Barack Obama’s ties to Hawaiian Communist Party member Frank Marshall Davis.

Loudon’s research has been cited by Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh, in many articles, blog posts and in books by well known authors Paul Kengor, Aaron Klein and Jerome Corsi. He has given hundreds of radio interviews and addressed audiences in more than 40 states in several tours of the United States.

Update: Slate Discovers Scalise Did Not Attend White Supremacist Event

01/1/15

Obama, Hitler, And Exploding The Biggest Lie In History

By: Bill Flax
Forbes (published with permission)

Image via Wikipedia

Image via Wikipedia

“The line between fascism and Fabian socialism is very thin. Fabian socialism is the dream. Fascism is Fabian socialism plus the inevitable dictator.” John T. Flynn

Numerous commentators have raised alarming comparisons between America’s recent economic foibles and Argentina’s fall “from breadbasket to basket case.” The U.S. pursues a similar path with her economy increasingly ensnared under the growing nexus of government control. Resources are redistributed for vote-buying welfare schemes, patronage style earmarks, and graft by unelected bureaucrats, quid pro quo with unions, issue groups and legions of lobbyists.

In Argentina, everyone acknowledges that fascism, state capitalism, corporatism – whatever – reflects very leftwing ideology. Eva Peron remains a liberal icon. President Obama’s Fabian policies (Keynesian economics) promise similar ends. His proposed infrastructure bank is just the latest gyration of corporatism. Why then are fascists consistently portrayed as conservatives?

In the Thirties, intellectuals smitten by progressivism considered limited, constitutional governance anachronistic. The Great Depression had apparently proven capitalism defunct. The remaining choice had narrowed between communism and fascism. Hitler was about an inch to the right of Stalin. Western intellectuals infatuated with Marxism thus associated fascism with the Right.

Later, Marxists from the Frankfurt School popularized this prevailing sentiment. Theodor Adorno in The Authoritarian Personality devised the “F” scale to demean conservatives as latent fascists. The label “fascist” has subsequently meant anyone liberals seek to ostracize or discredit.

Fascism is an amorphous ideology mobilizing an entire nation (Mussolini, Franco and Peron) or race (Hitler) for a common purpose. Leaders of industry, science, education, the arts and politics combine to shepherd society in an all encompassing quest. Hitler’s premise was a pure Aryan Germany capable of dominating Europe.

While he feinted right, Hitler and Stalin were natural bedfellows. Hitler mimicked Lenin’s path to totalitarian tyranny, parlaying crises into power. Nazis despised Marxists not over ideology, but because they had betrayed Germany in World War I and Nazis found it unconscionable that German communists yielded fealty to Slavs in Moscow.

The National Socialist German Workers Party staged elaborate marches with uniformed workers calling one another “comrade” while toting tools the way soldiers shoulder rifles. The bright red Nazi flag symbolized socialism in a “classless, casteless” Germany (white represents Aryanism). Fascist central planning was not egalitarian, but it divvied up economic rewards very similarly to communism: party membership and partnering with the state.

Where communists generally focused on class, Nazis fixated on race. Communists view life through the prism of a perpetual workers’ revolution. National Socialists used race as a metaphor to justify their nation’s engagement in an existential struggle.

As many have observed, substituting “Jews” for “capitalists” exposes strikingly similar thinking. But communists frequently hated Jews too and Hitler also abhorred capitalists, or “plutocrats” in Nazi speak. From afar, Soviet Russia and Nazi Germany each reeked of plutocratic oligarchy. Both were false utilitarian Utopias that in practice merely empowered dictators.

The National Socialist German Workers Party is only Right if you are hopelessly Left. Or, ascribe to Marxist eschatology perceiving that history marches relentlessly towards the final implementation of socialist Utopia. Marx predicted state capitalism as the last desperate redoubt against the inevitable rise of the proletariat. The Soviets thus saw Nazis as segues to communism.

Interestingly, almost everywhere Marxism triumphed: Russia, China, Cuba, Vietnam, etc., all skipped the capitalist phase Marx thought pivotal. Instead, they slid straight from pre-industrial feudal conditions into communism; which essentially entailed reversion back to feudalism supplanting the traditional aristocracy with party cronyism – before dissolving into corrupted variants of state capitalism economically similar to fascism.

As usual, Marx got it backwards.

It’s also ironic that even as orthodox Marxism collapsed due to economic paralysis, cultural Marxism predicated on race, sex and identity politics thrives in “Capitalist” America. The multiculturalists substituted race where the Soviets and Maoists saw only class. America’s civic crusade has become political correctness, aka cultural Marxism, preoccupied with race. Socialism wheels around again.

While political correctness as manifest in the West is very anti-Nazi and those opposing multiculturalism primarily populate the Right, it’s false to confuse fascism with conservatism. Coupling negatives is not necessarily positive. Because the Nazis would likely detest something that conservatives also dislike indicates little harmony. Ohio State hates Michigan. Notre Dame does too, but Irish fans rarely root for the Buckeyes.

America’s most fascistic elements are ultra leftwing organizations like La Raza or the Congressional Black Caucus. These racial nationalists seek gain not through merit, but through the attainment of government privileges. What’s the difference between segregation and affirmative action? They are identical phenomena harnessing state auspices to impose racialist dogma.

The Nation of Islam and other Afrocentric movements, like the Nazis, even celebrate their own perverse racist mythology. Are Louis Farrakhan and Jeremiah Wright conservatives? Is Obama?

Racism does not exclusively plague the Right. Many American bigots manned the Left: ex-Klansman Hugo Black had an extremely left wing Supreme Court record, George Wallace was a New Deal style liberal – he just wanted welfare and social programs controlled by states. Communists always persecute minorities whenever in power.

The Nazis’ anti-Semitism derived indirectly from Karl Marx, who despite Jewish ancestry was deeply anti-Semitic. Bankers and other capitalists were disproportionately Jewish. Elsewhere, Jews played prominent roles. Before falling under Hitler’s sway, Mussolini’s inner circle was overly Jewish. Peron was the first leader to let Jews hold public office in Argentina. Franco, a Marana, welcomed Jews back into Spain for the first time since 1492 and famously thwarted Hitler by harboring Jewish refugees.

Very little of Hitler’s domestic activity was even remotely right wing. Europe views Left and Right differently, but here, free markets, limited constitutional government, family, church and tradition are the bedrocks of conservatism. The Nazis had a planned economy; eradicated federalism in favor of centralized government; considered church and family as competitors; and disavowed tradition wishing to restore Germany’s pre-Christian roots.

Despite Democrats’ pretensions every election, patriotism is clearly a conservative trait so Nazi foreign policy could be vaguely right wing, but how did Hitler’s aggression differ from Stalin’s? The peace movement evidenced liberals being duped as “useful idiots” more than pacifistic purity. Note the Left’s insistence on neutrality during the Hitler/Stalin pact and their urgent switch to militarism once Germany attacked.

After assuming power, Nazis strongly advocated “law and order.” Previously, they were antagonistic thugs, which mirrored the communists’ ascension. The Nazis outlawed unions perceiving them as competitors for labor’s loyalties, i.e. for precisely the same reason workers’ paradises like Communist China and Soviet Russia disallowed unions. To Nazis, the state sustained workers’ needs.

Even issues revealing similarity to American conservatism could also describe Stalin, Mao and many communists. This is not to suggest liberals and fascists are indistinguishable, but a fair assessment clearly shows if any similarities appear with American politics they reside more on the Left than Right.

On many issues the Nazis align quite agreeably with liberals. The Nazis enforced strict gun control, which made their agenda possible and highlights the necessity of an armed populace.

The Nazis separated church and state to marginalize religion’s influence. Hitler despised biblical morality and bourgeois (middle class) values. Crosses were ripped from the public square in favor of swastikas. Prayer in school was abolished and worship confined to churches. Church youth groups were forcibly absorbed into the Hitler Youth.

Hitler extolled public education, even banning private schools and instituting “a fundamental reconstruction of our whole national education program” controlled by Berlin. Similar to liberals’ cradle to career ideal, the Nazis established state administered early childhood development programs; “The comprehension of the concept of the State must be striven for by the school as early as the beginning of understanding.”

Foreshadowing Michelle Obama, “The State is to care for elevating national health.” Nanny State intrusions reflect that persons are not sovereign, but belong to the state. Hitler even sought to outlaw meat after the war; blaming Germany’s health problems on the capitalist (i.e. Jewish) food industry. The Nazis idealized public service and smothered private charity with public programs.

Hitler’s election platform included “an expansion on a large scale of old age welfare.” Nazi propaganda proclaimed, “No one shall go hungry! No one shall be cold!” Germany had universal healthcare and demanded that “the state be charged first with providing the opportunity for a livelihood.” Obama would relish such a “jobs” program.

Nazi Germany was the fullest culmination of Margaret Sanger’s eugenic vision. She was the founder of Planned Parenthood, which changed its name from the American Birth Control Society after the holocaust surfaced. Although Nazi eugenics clearly differed from liberals’ abortion arguments today, that wasn’t necessarily true for their progressive forbears.

Germany was first to enact environmentalist economic policies promoting sustainable development and regulating pollution. The Nazis bought into Rousseau’s romanticized primitive man fantasies. Living “authentically” in environs unspoiled by capitalist industry was almost as cherished as pure Aryan lineage.

National Socialist economics were socialist, obviously, imposing top-down economic planning and social engineering. It was predicated on volkisch populism combining a Malthusian struggle for existence with a fetish for the “organic.” Like most socialists, wealth was thought static and “the common good supersede[d] the private good” in a Darwinist search for “applied biology” to boost greater Germany.

The Nazis distrusted markets and abused property rights, even advocating “confiscation of war profits” and “nationalization of associated industries.” Their platform demanded, “Communalization of the great warehouses” (department stores) and presaging modern set aside quotas on account of race or politics, “utmost consideration of all small firms in contracts with the State.”

Nazi Germany progressively dominated her economy. Although many businesses were nominally private, the state determined what was produced in what quantities and at what prices. First, they unleashed massive inflation to finance their prolific spending on public works, welfare and military rearmament. They then enforced price and wage controls to mask currency debasement’s harmful impact. This spawned shortages as it must, so Berlin imposed rationing. When that failed, Albert Speer assumed complete power over production schedules, distribution channels and allowable profits.

Working for personal ends instead of the collective was as criminal in Nazi Germany as Soviet Russia. Norman Thomas, quadrennial Socialist Party presidential candidate, saw the correlation clearly, “both the communist and fascist revolutions definitely abolished laissez-faire capitalism in favor of one or another kind and degree of state capitalism. . . In no way was Hitler the tool of big business. He was its lenient master. So was Mussolini except that he was weaker.”

Mussolini recognized, “Fascism entirely agrees with Mr. Maynard Keynes, despite the latter’s prominent position as a Liberal. In fact, Mr. Keynes’ excellent little book, The End of Laissez-Faire (l926) might, so far as it goes, serve as a useful introduction to fascist economics.” Keynes saw the similarities too, admitting his theories, “can be much easier adapted to the conditions of a totalitarian state than . . . a large degree of laissez-faire.” Hitler built the autobahn, FDR the TVA. Propaganda notwithstanding, neither rejuvenated their economies.

FDR admired Mussolini because “the trains ran on time” and Stalin’s five year plans, but was jealous of Hitler whose economic tinkering appeared more successful than the New Deal. America wasn’t ready for FDR’s blatantly fascist Blue Eagle business model and the Supreme Court overturned several other socialist designs. The greatest dissimilarity between FDR and fascists was he enjoyed less success transforming society because the Constitution obstructed him.

Even using Republicans as proxies, there was little remotely conservative about fascism. Hitler and Mussolini were probably to the right of our left-leaning media and education establishments, but labeling Tea Partiers as fascists doesn’t indict the Right. It indicts those declaring so as radically Left.