Skip to comments.The Communist’ Part I: Obama’s Mentor Frank Marshall Davis Exposed
Posted on 07/13/2012 10:45:21 PM PDT by STARWISE
Now imagine that man mentored the leader of the free world.
(Related: Exclusive: (Article) + See This Clip About Obamas Relationship With Communist Frank Marshall Davis From Dinesh DSouzas 2016′ Film)
On July 17th, Mercury Ink and author Paul Kengor, PhD, will introduce the world to the real Frank Marshall Davis the card-carrying member of the Communist Party U.S.A, and who all accounts indicate was Barack Obamas closest role model and mentor.
Devoid of outrageous conspiracy theories or sensational claims, Kengor painstakingly documents the historical facts of this dynamic, at times even sympathetic character, who walked the path from Republican roots clear through to the radical fringe of unfettered Marxism.
Presently, certain news and commentary outlets are focusing on the more outrageous aspects of Frank Marshall Davis life, such as his self-admitted penchant for perverse sexual escapades as well as for taking photos of naked women (including of Stanley Ann Dunham, Obamas mother).
In fact, the recently released documentary, Dreams From My Real Father, even posits that Davis is the presidents true biological father. While much of Davis bizarre fetishes and sexual peccadilloes provide subject matter worthy of consideration, Kengor believes that his book, The Communist, focuses on the substantive ideological, rather than sensational aspects of Davis past.
At the end of the day, according to Kengor, mentors matter and in no small amount.
The book opens by explaining how Ronald Reagan and Hillary Clintons role models were extremely influential in each of their lives, respectively. In fact, typically the first task of any biographer is to examine the mentors of the subject he or she is writing about. Oddly, when it comes to our current president, left-wing biographers have somehow avoided this topic altogether.
Kengor notes that although both Ronald Reagan and Hillary Clintons role models were indeed of great import to each of them, their names were rarely mentioned in each of their biographies. Ironically, however, Obama mentioned Frank by name no less than 22 times in his memoir, Dreams From My Father.
Weve had 44 presidents and theyve all had mentors, Kengor told me during an exclusive Blaze interview.
Yet never before in the entire 200-plus year [presidential] history of this country, have we had a president with a mentor who was a card carrying member of the Communist Party."
Kengor takes issue with the fact that no liberal biographer acknowledges that Frank Marshall Davis was Obamas mentor, yet those same biographers have never denied that Don Jones mentored Ronald Reagan, just as Ben Cleaver guided an impressionable, young Hillary Clinton until her departure to university.
Perhaps the reason no one cares, according to Kengor, is because both Cleaver and Jones loved America and were not pro-soviet members of the Communist Party. He believes journalists, biographers, and the media in general are guilty of scandalous neglect when discussing Barack Obama.
Rest of article and videos HERE.
Great post STAR-W, thanks!
Thanks for the post, looks like a useful book (and hi, by the way!). I’d have to think about whether this statement is accurate: “Yet never before in the entire 200-plus year [presidential] history of this country, have we had a president with a mentor who was a card carrying member of the Communist Party.” A few of the members of FDR’s Brain Trust come to mind for starters, and the Clintons were groomed by a few who weren’t necessarily “card-carrying” but fall into the category of agents of influence and fellow travelers; and I can think of a few other instances. But no Presidential mentors as blatantly associated with the CP as Obama’s open references to Davis’ mentorship, is probably true.
“However, the CPUSA was so riddled with FBI Agents (see Herb Philbrick’s “I led Three Lives,”) that no one can actually tell whose side anyone was actually on.”
Occasionally, but it’s usually not that ambiguous in most cases, and the FBI had very few black agents before L. Patrick Gray became Director. In this case FBI files’ internal references to Davis as well as HUAC records on Davis make it clear Davis was a surveillance target rather than an agent. For instance, right now I’m looking at a 1953 synopsis on Davis by the Honolulu FBI field office that opens with the summary, “Subject. . .writes weekly column (Frankly Speaking) for the Honolulu Record, Commmunist-dominated newspaper. . .Subject was identified as active in the Dorie-Miller Club, Communist Party, in Chicago, Illinois. Was also active in the AID, CRC, and Abraham Lincoln School in Chicago, all of which were cited as subversive by the Attorney General. In Honolulu, subject has been active in the HCRC.” The remainder of the document goes on to mention various instances where the Bureau collected information on Davis by interviewing informants in his orbit. The gist makes it clear the FBI regarded Davis as subversive.
I shall take your meticulous research under advisement. Now, can you or someone tell me the story with Stanley Ann, or Stanley, or Ma Dunham? The whole family's weird saga is making me itch ... a sure sign that an intelligence op is underway. As far as the WH recumbent goes, his whole lightweight Marxist shtick is starting to remind me of the wise-ass HS sophomore "communists" of my careless youth, except he seems to have many fewer IQ points and looks to me like a jerk who failed geometry and blamed it on racism.
Is it just remotely possible that ole Stanley was working an intelligence beat keeping an eye on FMD?
I used to get the JBS magazine back in the 90s.
The fact that the GOP is now blatantly forcing candidates upon us no conservative wants makes the conspiracy of NWO all to real.
“I Want to See the communist/socialist agenda Crushed. I want to see their political philosophy dead and discredited. I want to see those enamored of it eradicated from the media, from politics, from academic positions, from any position of power.”
I second that, but no Going On Progressive party candidate is going to implement that strategy.
Now about Stanley Ann. She was a denizen of that mighhty mirky NGO world where The State Department, The CPUSA, and The Intelligence Services often collide ... part Ford Foundation ...Part KGB ...Part ONI, CIA, NSA, FBI (when they are lucky).
Would love to debrief the old Karachi Station Chief or maybe séance old Kim Philby to get the whole story on her. The Geithner clan was in on this scam, too. In fact, Geithner Sr. was Stanley Ann's mentor or controller or something ... again ... were they on our team? Their team? Both teams?
A mystery wrapped in an enigma this whole Obama era. I am not too long for this planet ... I gotta know .... who is this guy?!?
As for where that money was coming from I can tell you that the Ford Foundation was the biggest conduit for funding CIA operations at this time, and that the Foundation's policies in Asia reflected the goals of John D. Rockefeller III, a key figure in post-WWII US Asia policy. Rockfeller founded the Asia Society in 1956 on the model of the Institute of Pacific Relations. IPR as you may know was a Rockefeller-supported Asian policy think tank which had been infiltrated by a Soviet intelligence network that had penetrated the OSS and the early CIA. Early CIA leaders had the notion that they could counter Soviet influence by supporting liberal groups that were socialistic rather than CP-controlled. Of course such groups were often CP-infiltrated and could just as easily be turned towards Soviet and Chinese ends, not to mention that they were socialistic in their own right. This US policy of supporting liberal groups abroad was implemented first in Europe in the early 50s and later in Asia and the Third World through operations like the Peace Corps of the Kennedy-Johnson era, the human rights groups that proliferated in the 1970s with support from the Ford and Carter administrations, etc.
Ann came into this whole orbit while teaching English in Jakarta during the late 60s and early 70s. Through her Chinese second husband (whose family had been killed during an Indonesian revolt against Dutch colonists in the 1940s, and who had subsequently become a cartographer for the Indonesian government), she became involved with a series of American-Indonesian liaison groups. During this period USAID had recently been extended to Indonesia following the ouster of Sukarno, who had aligned himself with the Asian Communist bloc and was supported by Western Communists. Of course the intent of USAID here was to serve US policy, but as in Vietnam, volunteers could also be recruited to other ends. The Vietnam antiwar movement was being steered towards sympathy for the Indonesian Communist cause by George McT. Kahin, who had been tasked by the IPR's Owen Lattimore in 1949 with developing an academic challenge to Dutch colonialism in Indonesia. Meanwhile Soviet-sponsored antiwar groups like COLIFAM were using Jakarta as a launch pad to run operations into Vietnam. It was a common tactic for groups like that to infiltrate their own people into USAID-supported groups.
If I continue on this line of thought I'll have to write a whole article, so I'll cut myself off there, but I think those are some background items relevant to some of your questions.
Thank you, Fedora. That's indeed the murky part. I had heard (from a fairly good sources) that Geithner and Stanley Ann were on close enough terms for him to have brought her into the fold.
I can personally tell you that today's USAID is a far-out Leftist operation whose typical political slant is a lot closer to Bill Ayers' than my own. NGO staffs are even moreso.
Thanks again Fedora, you have many many pieces of puzzles that have long baffled me!
Thank you as well. If there is additional information about the nature of the Geithner-Dunham relationship, that would certainly be significant.
There has been a lot of bureacratic struggle over control of USAID since the Nixon administration, often over its relationship to the Executive Branch and the State Department. Nixon and Congress (with a strong antiwar bloc led by Ted Kennedy, etc.) fought over USAID’s direction from 1970 to 1973. In 1978 Senator Hubert Humphrey introduced legislation to roll USAID into a new cabinet-level agency. This general period was concurrent with the post-Watergate shakeup of the intelligence community, which vastly increased the degree of left-wing influence in such agencies. It might be informative to pinpoint where Dunham’s group fit into the landscape of those bureacratic battles.
The other place I’d look to shed light on this is the Indonesian antiwar movement and its overlap with the Vietnam antiwar movement. If I find anything interesting on this I’ll ping you.
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.