Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

OBAMA CAUGHT LYING AGAIN: HE WAS MEMBER OF SOCIALIST 'NEW PARTY,' SAYS KURTZ
Breitbart ^ | 06/07/2012 | Joel B. Pollak

Posted on 06/07/2012 5:02:35 AM PDT by speelurker

Barack Obama was, in fact, a member of the socialist New Party in the 1990s and sought its endorsement for the Illinois senate--contrary to the misrepresentations of Obama's presidential campaign in 2008, and in spite of the efforts of Politico's Ben Smith to quash the story. Stanley Kurtz, author of Radical-in-Chief: Barack Obama and the Untold Story of American Socialism (2010), has released new "smoking gun" evidence at National Review Online. It is evidence that the mainstream media can no longer ignore--and Obama can no longer deny.

When the story of Obama's association with the New Party first broke in 2008, Obama campaign spokesman Ben LaBolt claimed that Obama had never been a member. (LaBolt likewise told the New York Times that Obama had "not spoken by phone or exchanged e-mail messages since Mr. Obama began serving in the United States Senate in January 2005"--a statement that carefully concealed the truth that Obama had spent time in Ayers' home after he began serving in the Senate.) The Obama campaign took up the issue at its "Fight the Smears" website, smearing Kurtz and willfully distorting the truth about Barack Obama's radical past:

Right-wing hatchet man and conspiracy theorist, Stanley Kurtz is pushing a new crackpot smear against Barack falsely claiming he was a member of something called the New Party.

But the truth is Barack has been a member of only one political party, the Democratic Party. In all six primary campaigns of his career, Barack has has run as a Democrat. The New Party did support Barack once in 1996, but he was the only candidate on the ballot in his race and never solicited the endorsement.


(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...


TOPICS: News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; US: Illinois
KEYWORDS: kurtz; newparty; obamarecord; obamasocialist; stanleykurtz; thirdparty
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-61 next last
Obama lying again. Man bites dog.
1 posted on 06/07/2012 5:02:49 AM PDT by speelurker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: speelurker
The evidence:
Kurtz writes:
Minutes of the meeting on January 11, 1996, of the New Party’s Chicago chapter read as follows:
Barack Obama, candidate for State Senate in the 13th Legislative District, gave a statement to the membership and answered questions. He signed the New Party “Candidate Contract” and requested an endorsement from the New Party. He also joined the New Party.
Consistent with this, a roster of the Chicago chapter of the New Party from early 1997 lists Obama as a member, with January 11, 1996, indicated as the date he joined... The revelation in 2008 that Obama had joined an ACORN-controlled, leftist third party could have been damaging indeed, and coming clean about his broader work with ACORN might easily have exposed these New Party ties. Because the work of ACORN and the New Party often intersected with Obama’s other alliances, honesty about his ties to either could have laid bare the entire network of his leftist political partnerships.

2 posted on 06/07/2012 5:05:56 AM PDT by speelurker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: speelurker

Obama's Army


3 posted on 06/07/2012 5:06:39 AM PDT by Travis McGee (www.EnemiesForeignAndDomestic.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: speelurker
It is evidence that the mainstream media can no longer ignore--and Obama can no longer deny.

Wanna bet?

4 posted on 06/07/2012 5:09:35 AM PDT by Raycpa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: speelurker
"It is evidence that the mainstream media can no longer ignore"

Want to bet??

5 posted on 06/07/2012 5:10:11 AM PDT by ~Vor~ (Freeper since 10/98)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Raycpa
Ya beat me to it. My thought exactly.
6 posted on 06/07/2012 5:11:52 AM PDT by Roccus (Obama & Holder LLP, Procurers of fine arms for the most discerning drug lords (202) 456-1414)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Raycpa

It is pretty amazing how the left is so brazen about supporting outright communist agenda items, then in the same breath say the don’t support communism.

They say 0bama is not a socialist, according to definition, because he hasn’t had the government take over the means of production and distribution.

I guess they are right, he’s following the fascist model more closely than the socialist model. He’s using government to CONTROL the means of production and distribution without actually OWNING it.


7 posted on 06/07/2012 5:16:45 AM PDT by MrB (The difference between a Humanist and a Satanist - the latter knows whom he's working for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: speelurker

The National Review Article

http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/302031/obamas-third-party-history-stanley-kurtz#

JUNE 7, 2012 4:00 A.M.
Obama’s Third-Party History
New documents shed new light on his ties to a leftist party in the 1990s.
By Stanley Kurtz


8 posted on 06/07/2012 5:17:09 AM PDT by libertarian27 (Check my profile page for the FReeper Online Cookbook 2011)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Roccus

9 posted on 06/07/2012 5:17:44 AM PDT by Raycpa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Raycpa

The Clintons are probably realizing that they’ve waited far too long to make their move.


10 posted on 06/07/2012 5:18:12 AM PDT by treetopsandroofs (Had FDR been GOP, there would have been no World Wars, just "The Great War" and "Roosevelt's Wars".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: MrB

Absolutely right. That’s what I’ve said, he’s actually a facist according to the definition.


11 posted on 06/07/2012 5:19:59 AM PDT by FrdmLvr (culture, language, borders)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: speelurker
How many times have you read something like "so-and-so says" or "an Obama spokesperson said" followed by some denial like the one discussed here or the birther question, or any other tough question? Have you noticed it is never Obozo answering the question. This leads me to two thoughts: 1) the MSM simply don't ask him the questions directly, which is certainly true, and 2) if the lies would ever result in legal action, he can deny it and say that so-and-so never had the right to speak for him.

It's time for the MSM to grow a pair and start asking the guy--to his face--the tough questions that all of us want answered. For my two cents, start with: "Mr. President, why have you spent literally hundreds of thousands of dollars to sequester virtually everything about your past?" And when he responds with: "I have not sequestered my records...which he will...then push further and ask him to produce all of his school records from 1st grade forward and all of his health records. Then sit back and see how much information actually comes forward. You don't spend that kind of money hiding your past unless you don't want something found out.

12 posted on 06/07/2012 5:20:08 AM PDT by econjack
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FrdmLvr

I usually answer “well, yeah, if you want to get technical on the definition, the guy you support is more of a fascist than a socialist.”

In a leftist’s mind, however, they stick with the quote of “fascism is more accurately referred to as corporatism”, implying that corporations and private businesses are corrupting their beloved government, and not the other way around.

I ask them - which one, the government or the corporation, has the legal ability to use force to coerce the other to do its will?


13 posted on 06/07/2012 5:23:53 AM PDT by MrB (The difference between a Humanist and a Satanist - the latter knows whom he's working for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: FrdmLvr

Oh, just noticed your typo :)...

Is a “facist” someone who is discriminatory based on facial appearance?


14 posted on 06/07/2012 5:25:48 AM PDT by MrB (The difference between a Humanist and a Satanist - the latter knows whom he's working for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: MrB
"I guess they are right, he’s following the fascist model more closely than the socialist model. He’s using government to CONTROL the means of production and distribution without actually OWNING it."

He's going for owning the people instead. If you are dependent on government programs for your food,lodging, health care, and most every aspect of your life, he owns you.

15 posted on 06/07/2012 5:26:37 AM PDT by Truth29
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: speelurker
On Monday, June 4th, the AP had an article

"Obama a socialist? Many scoff, but claim persists"

If all here that posted that indeed Barry was/is a socialist on their local comment boards of newspapers, etc. and got shot down - please get back in there and post the National Review article link with the snip from Chicago. Many have moved on from that article but please put it there for future reference....Everywhere.

16 posted on 06/07/2012 5:28:49 AM PDT by libertarian27 (Check my profile page for the FReeper Online Cookbook 2011)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: econjack
It's time for the MSM to grow a pair

Oh, that's rich! Hahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!

17 posted on 06/07/2012 5:31:26 AM PDT by alley cat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: speelurker
‘socialist New Party’ - Sound alot like a communist party to me.
18 posted on 06/07/2012 5:34:35 AM PDT by McGruff (Support your local Republican candidates. They are our last line of defense.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: treetopsandroofs
The Clintons are probably realizing that they’ve waited far too long to make their move.

Maybe not. If it gets bad enough, and the Democratic hierarchy and the wealthy contributors to Obama realize he probably will not win, they could change the Rules at the Convention and nominate Hillary from the floor. Am I right or wrong?
19 posted on 06/07/2012 5:39:26 AM PDT by pistolpackinpapa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: speelurker

I wonder if Rush or Sean will deal with this today?


20 posted on 06/07/2012 5:41:50 AM PDT by pistolpackinpapa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: speelurker

Surprise


21 posted on 06/07/2012 5:42:04 AM PDT by onedoug
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Travis McGee

...but we have a “Hulk”


22 posted on 06/07/2012 5:43:54 AM PDT by epluribus_2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: pistolpackinpapa

With the evidence that Kurtz has, I would imagine everybody on the right is going to pounce.

Get out the popcorn.


23 posted on 06/07/2012 5:44:32 AM PDT by speelurker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: speelurker

...actually, Man Eats Dog.


24 posted on 06/07/2012 5:46:03 AM PDT by Jeff Head (Freedom is not free, never has been, never will be (www.dragonsfuryseries.com))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: epluribus_2

Some please insert proper Christie image...?


25 posted on 06/07/2012 5:46:41 AM PDT by epluribus_2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: pistolpackinpapa

It could happen. I remember how Kennedy made a very serious last minute, behind the scenes attempt to pry the nomination away from Jimmy Carter way back when — and came pretty close to pulling it off.

The Kennedy wing is now pretty much the Clinton wing and the various potshots Bubba has been taking at the Bamster seem to be indicative that there are undercurrents and pieces in motion aimed at weakening Obama’s hand.

If Obama loses too much support, all bets are off. He’s damaged the Democrat brand so badly already that if the Republican win in November, that’s the last they will see of the White House for the next 12 years — at least.


26 posted on 06/07/2012 6:02:06 AM PDT by Ronin (Dumb, dependent and Democrat is no way to go through life - Rep. L. Gohmert, Tex)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: MrB

Fascist, socialist, communist...whatever...Obama is really a d*ckhead............


27 posted on 06/07/2012 6:02:55 AM PDT by Boonie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: speelurker

With the evidence that Kurtz has, I would imagine everybody on the right is going to pounce.
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

I’m not so sure. If John McCain was the “presumptive” nominee at this point he would say: “No, my friends, I don’t believe this accusation against the President and I think we just need to stay on issues that are pertinent to this campaign.....yada, yada, yada.” But, then, John McCain really isn’t “on the right” is he? For that we can thank his Liberal wife and slutty daughter, Megan “I wanna be a Liberal Democrat” McCain.


28 posted on 06/07/2012 6:03:28 AM PDT by pistolpackinpapa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: speelurker

Anyone who read The Obama File knew this years ago:
http://theobamafile.com/_obamunism/NewParty.htm

The best Obama exposure site on the net:

The Obama File
http://theobamafile.com/

The United States Library of Congress has selected
TheObamaFile.com for inclusion in its historic collection
of Internet materials
http://theobamafile.com/LibraryOfCongress.html

http://theobamafile.com/index_next_politics.html

http://www.theobamafile.com/index_next_personal.html

http://www.theobamafile.com/BarackObama.htm

http://www.theobamafile.com/_family/FamilyPage.htm

http://www.theobamafile.com/ObamaEducation.htm

http://www.theobamafile.com/ObamaPsychology.htm

http://www.theobamafile.com/ObamaReligion.htm

http://www.theobamafile.com/ObamaWife.htm

http://www.theobamafile.com/_associates/ObamaAssociates.htm

http://www.theobamafile.com/ObamaIconography.htm

.

.


29 posted on 06/07/2012 6:04:45 AM PDT by patriot08 (TEXAS GAL- born and bred and proud of it!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MrB
In a leftist’s mind, however, they stick with the quote of “fascism is more accurately referred to as corporatism”, implying that corporations and private businesses are corrupting their beloved government, and not the other way around.

I ask them - which one, the government or the corporation, has the legal ability to use force to coerce the other to do its will?

In a world of debt, where the government shows up at the bond window with the lender knowing that the interest rate doesn't cover the inflation - which one calls the shots on what the government regulates and how?

Communism was a creation of some of the richest bankers in Europe. Look at how the manipulators cashed in on the collapse of the Soviet Union. The game is "pump and dump" on a global scale.

30 posted on 06/07/2012 6:06:11 AM PDT by Carry_Okie (The RINOcrat Party is still in charge. There has never been a conservative American government.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Boonie

Obama is really a d*ckhead
_____________________________________________________________

Duckhead??? That’s a men’s clothing line. (/sarc.)


31 posted on 06/07/2012 6:06:44 AM PDT by pistolpackinpapa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: speelurker
While running for the Illinois state Senate in 1996 as a Democrat, Obama actively sought and received the endorsement of the New Party
32 posted on 06/07/2012 6:08:25 AM PDT by smokingfrog ( sleep with one eye open (<o> ---)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pistolpackinpapa
If it gets bad enough, and the Democratic hierarchy and the wealthy contributors to Obama realize he probably will not win, they could change the Rules at the Convention and nominate Hillary from the floor. Am I right or wrong?

See tag line. I've been saying it for about a month.

33 posted on 06/07/2012 6:09:02 AM PDT by Carry_Okie (The Slave Party Switcheroo: Economic crisis! Zero ineligible due to racist birthers! Hillary 2012!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: speelurker
It is evidence that the mainstream media can no longer ignore--and Obama can no longer deny.

Wanna bet?

34 posted on 06/07/2012 6:10:04 AM PDT by Washi (Surviving the Zombie Apocalypse, one head-shot at a time.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Boonie

Oh, but since the “fascist” epithet is reserved for conservatives, it REALLY bugs the crap out of liberals when you show that the guy they support is a fascist by definition.


35 posted on 06/07/2012 6:10:20 AM PDT by MrB (The difference between a Humanist and a Satanist - the latter knows whom he's working for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: speelurker
As for the group's socialist ideology, Kurtz says, the documents he has recovered leave no doubt:

The documents reveal that the New Party’s central aim was to move the United States steadily closer to European social democracy, a goal that Mitt Romney has also attributed to Obama. New Party leaders disdained mainstream Democrats, considering them tools of business, and promised instead to create a partnership between elected officials and local community organizations, with the goal of socializing the American economy to an unprecedented degree.

36 posted on 06/07/2012 6:13:51 AM PDT by kinsman redeemer (The real enemy seeks to devour what is good.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: speelurker; mickie; flaglady47
Well, well, well.....Bill O'Reilly's mouth has never been able to form the word "socialist" when it comes to identifying Obama. Not ONCE since the immaculation has he ever ascribed the word to the Messiah.

In fact, O'Reilly many times has openly STATED he can't describe Obama as a socialist. Instead he uses the words "liberal" and "progressive" to identify the president's ideology.

Maybe now with Breitbart's revelation the Bloviator will be able to spit the PROPER description out of his mouth, as painful as it may be.

Last night's Factor should convince even the most fervent Doubting Thomas of O'Reilly's deftly veiled but always steadfast statist leanings. Behind that leprechaun smile, BO'R is closer to Obama's statist/fascist bent than is suspected or comfortable.

He was again on a rant in favor of big government telling us what to eat.....like his demand that the government tell us "the facts" about the "dangers" of wheat. O'Reilly himself has quit eating wheat. He didn't seem fazed at all when it was suggested to him that the wheat farmers might go the way of the tobacco growers if the government steps in with anti-wheat propaganda.

The man is becoming unhinged in many aspects.

I wonder if he's a vegan now. I have no idea of his diet, but he IS starting to look wan and tired.

Leni

37 posted on 06/07/2012 6:21:34 AM PDT by MinuteGal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: speelurker

The Man who Despises America
http://www.jeffhead.com/obama-time.htm

America at the Crossroads of History
http://www.jeffhead.com/crossroads.htm


38 posted on 06/07/2012 6:21:58 AM PDT by Jeff Head (Freedom is not free, never has been, never will be (www.dragonsfuryseries.com))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

It is evidence that the mainstream media can no longer ignore--and Obama can no longer deny.

Of course they can ignore it. There is NO "mainstream media." While the media has a long history of being biased to the left, in 2008 they dropped all pretenses of trying to report facts, and simply became a part of the Obama election campaign. Today what used to be called the "mainstream media" has morphed into the ministry of propaganda.

And Obama can certainly continue to lie. It's one of his greatest talents, being able to look through the teleprompter, into the camera, and lie directly to the public. After all, who are you going to believe? Obama, or your lying eyes?

Mark

39 posted on 06/07/2012 6:26:55 AM PDT by MarkL (Do I really look like a guy with a plan?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MrB

http://www.wnd.com/2008/10/78945/
new party/chicago...


40 posted on 06/07/2012 6:27:54 AM PDT by biggredd1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: pistolpackinpapa; treetopsandroofs

only the delegates can change the rules.
Obama campaign selected most of the delegates. They are his people.

Clinton’s don’t want the nomination. Hillary would lose.

They want to run against a failed Romney administration in 2016. They cannot do that if Obama is re-elected.


41 posted on 06/07/2012 6:28:50 AM PDT by campaignPete R-CT (and we are still campaigning for local conservatives in central CT.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: MrB
I ask them - which one, the government or the corporation, has the legal ability to use force to coerce the other to do its will?

Good point. CERTAIN businesses do prosper when Government turns to Fascism, but it is Government who still controls the legal strings. Of all reforms that I would make as priority #1 would be a separation of Business and State - Remove the direct line of communication - Heavily regulate or eliminate business sector lobbyists. Legislation is constantly being created to benefit one company or industry at the detriment of another. Businesses want to use the power of the pen to gain an advantage and Government (politicians) ALWAYS likes the extra cash. Win-win for both of them. Lose-lose for us.
42 posted on 06/07/2012 6:30:28 AM PDT by Eagle of Liberty (We the People are coming!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: speelurker

No one of serious thought believes Obama is anything other than a socialist. We all know he grew up on a steady diet of Marx and leftist radicals. It is the job of the media to pretend Obama is a reasoned, moderate, slightly conservative progressive who stands in the center of American politics. They have to pretend that because they know the American people would never accept Obama the communist and fervent devote to liberation politics and the redistribution of Western wealth and property. The media can’t let people see how dangerous Obama really is.


43 posted on 06/07/2012 6:30:31 AM PDT by pallis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Eagle of Liberty

I prefer the simpler

“the only politician that can’t be bought is the one with nothing to sell”
(if anyone knows the source of that quote, I’d appreciate it)

Take away the reasons that businesses have to “play the game”, and there will be no game.


44 posted on 06/07/2012 6:34:28 AM PDT by MrB (The difference between a Humanist and a Satanist - the latter knows whom he's working for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: campaignPete R-CT

“....only the delegates can change the rules.
Obama campaign selected most of the delegates. They are his people.
Clinton’s don’t want the nomination. Hillary would lose.
They want to run against a failed Romney administration in 2016. They cannot do that if Obama is re-elected....”

They may not have a choice:

As posted on two other FR threads......

“...Obama is becoming pathetic....”

We all know liberalism, or whatever name you want to call it, is a chronic deteriorating mental disease. However in zippy’s case, I think what we’re seeing is him slipping off into complete insanity. I think he’s losing it totally and his handlers are beside themselves with what to do with him. I would not be surprised in the least to see zippy with a total mental breakdown before the election and the DNC run Hitlery in his place.


45 posted on 06/07/2012 6:40:00 AM PDT by lgjhn23
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: speelurker
"It is evidence that the mainstream media can no longer ignore--and Obama can no longer deny."

Honestly, Joel...I've got a bridge I'd like to sell you.

46 posted on 06/07/2012 6:59:55 AM PDT by ProtectOurFreedom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: speelurker

So Obama DOES use a Socialist Mop!


47 posted on 06/07/2012 7:03:41 AM PDT by faucetman ( Just the facts, ma'am, Just the facts)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All

48 posted on 06/07/2012 7:07:13 AM PDT by Hotlanta Mike (Resurrect the House Committee on Un-American Activities (HUAC)...before there is no America!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MrB
Take away the reasons that businesses have to “play the game”, and there will be no game.

Now if we can just get a Congress to get more serious about cutting the corporate ties and then actually OVERSEEING their fellow members.
49 posted on 06/07/2012 7:08:51 AM PDT by Eagle of Liberty (We the People are coming!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: pistolpackinpapa

Glenn Beck just did, FWIW.


50 posted on 06/07/2012 7:28:53 AM PDT by PghBaldy (I eagerly await the next news about the struggles of Elizabeth Sacheen Littlefeather Warren.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-61 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson