Guest Post: Is Barack Obama a “Borderline Communist?”

by Mary Ann Kreitzer

Virginia State Delegate, Todd Gilbert, has taken lot of heat in the past week for a statement calling Barack Obama a “borderline communist.” If it is untrue and libelous, Gilbert should apologize, but is it?

Let’s look at some facts from Obama’s troubling past. After college, he was trained as a community organizer by a group affiliated with Saul Alinsky’s Industrial Areas Foundation in Chicago. He gave workshops to inner city blacks using the Alinsky method of class antagonism. What does that mean? Alinsky wrote Rules for Radicals, outlining his strategy for gaining political control by pitting groups against each other. Alinsky’s rules include seducing your allies with a moral face while doing whatever is necessary to win no matter how unprincipled your actions.

Obama was ripe for seduction by Alinskyites. In his book, Dreams from My Father, he described his college experience. “To avoid being mistaken for a sellout,” he wrote, “I chose my friends carefully. The more politically active black students. The foreign students. The Chicanos. The Marxist professors and structural feminists and punk-rock performance poets….At night, in the dorms, we discussed neocolonialism, Franz Fanon, Eurocentrism, and patriarchy. When we ground out our cigarettes in the hallway carpet or set our stereos so loud that the walls began to shake, we were resisting bourgeois society’s stifling constraints. We weren’t indifferent or careless or insecure. We were alienated.” Note that Obama sought out those who promoted “Marxist” (i.e., communist) ideals and his reference to shedding “bourgeois society’s stifling constraints.” This is, indeed, the language of communism.

According to Ryan Lizza of New Republic Magazine, Mike Kruglik, a man who trained Obama in Alinsky’s method, considered him “a natural, the undisputed master of agitation who could engage a room full of recruiting targets in a rapid-fire Socratic dialogue, nudging them to admit that they were not living up to their own standards….[H]e could be aggressive and confrontational…[to] pinpoint the source of pain in their lives.” This tactic is what Saul Alinsky called “rubbing raw the wounds of discontent” in order to goad the “recruiting targets” into engaging in revolution against the establishment. It is a page right out of Marx’s Communist Manifesto.

But these things happened a long time ago. What about today? Obama’s relationship with Rev. Jeremiah Wright, whose “religious” philosophy is based on class struggle and black liberation theology (another Marxist movement), continued over a twenty-year period up to the present time. In fact, Wright was scheduled to be on the podium with Obama when he announced his candidacy. What happened? Wright’s racist verbal assaults against whites and America herself [“God damn America!], were publicized. They threatened the Obama express. So Obama lifted another page out of Alinsky’s book: pragamatism. When Rev. Wright became a liability, he had to be sacrificed for the cause. The man described by Obama as his “spiritual mentor,” the inspiration of his book, The Audacity of Hope, had to be dumped as collateral damage. In the course of the dumping, Obama claimed he was never in church when Wright made any of his radical, racist, anti-American statements. This is simply beyond belief which casts doubt on Obama’s honesty and integrity.

What Todd Gilbert said was definitely politically incorrect, but he had it just about right.

  • Bah

    Good Grief. Is that the best you guys can do? You realize it is 2008 not 1958?

  • Stephen Gunter

    Yeah, borderline? Since when has he moved to the right?

  • Ragnar

    Give me a break, this is akin to someone on the left referring to Bush as a borderline fascist or NAZI.

    I thought BD was for serious discussion among educated Americans, not baseless slandering.

  • Obama will CHANGE USA into USSA

  • Ragnar

    Do any of you even know what the term communist means?

  • Pingback: Barack Obama a “borderline communist?” - You decide! « PopUpCommontater()

  • Bob

    This article has an extremely, ridiculously poor grasp on what Communism is. Unless you have read the Communist Manifesto and similar literature on the subject, you have absolutely no right to make stupid statements about it.

    “Note that Obama sought out those who promoted “Marxist” (i.e., communist) ideals and his reference to shedding “bourgeois society’s stifling constraints.” This is, indeed, the language of communism”

    Using the word Bourgeois makes you a Communist? Seriously, you don’t know the first thing about the subject.

  • Charles Nickalopoulos

    Obama is a Socialist, of course; he is proud of it. What is in a name, anyway? Whether you call him a Socialist, or a Communist, he has an
    agenda, and that is to control all the wealth. He sees the wealthy as not paying enough taxes, and wants to tax them more: the government will be the steward, to distribute the money.

    If a person does not like free enterprise, and they like the government having control of the wealth, then he/she should vote for Obama. A person should be mentally and emotionally prepared for Obama winning the presidential race, because he could win.

    What would his administration be like? Well, one thing inflation would very high, similar to the Carter administration. Another thing would be a shortage of gas, and fuel oil. Yes, we could probably survive it, but it will be rough.

  • Stephanie

    I think that entire article although intriguing, was actually very ridiculous. Whoever wrote this has almost no idea what communist really means, or what Obama really stands for.

    I think this race is especially hard seeing as i view both of them as “the lesser of two evils” but I never in a million years could vote for McCain and Miss. Say no to equal pay for woman.

    I don’t believe the government should have as much control over money, health care, and a slew of other things but it does seem more logical since our country is in the state it is now.

    Yeah, Maybe we should all vote Nader? =]

  • Michael

    Okay for all those that do not seem to completely understand what communism is its time for a dictionary lesson….

    ? ?/?k?my??n?z?m/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [kom-yuh-niz-uhm] Show IPA Pronunciation
    1. a theory or system of social organization based on the holding of all property in common, actual ownership being ascribed to the community as a whole or to the state.
    2. (often initial capital letter) a system of social organization in which all economic and social activity is controlled by a totalitarian state dominated by a single and self-perpetuating political party.
    3. (initial capital letter) the principles and practices of the Communist party.

    Obama has stated he wants to “redistribute the wealth” by taxing the higher income citizens of american and redistribute it to the lesser income families of America……that my friends is communism.

    However I am not going to sit here and say I am for Mccain either as his agenda doesn’t seem too much different. They both want to police the world and set up military bases in other countries, they both want to set up a government in other countries that support our interests, they both seem to think the government has any business trying to control the economy….see above definition for that one. So no I would not say I support either of these people and no I did not vote for either one as I cannot see myself voting for anything I do not believe in. I will not compromise losing any of my rights and the ignoring of the constitution (which they are sworn to uphold, protect, and obey when sworn in office) simply because one might want to lower taxes…..not one time have I heard these candidates address the more serious and important issues that we have met in this campaign and during bush’s presidency.

    Yes war is terrible and no one wants it of course, yes the economy is in a terrible position (which our government is responsible for by even being involved in trying to manipulate), and yes we want a “change” even though neither talk of any real change. Unless of course by change he means a totalitarian government being installed instead of a Republic which we are supposed to be. But the issue is neither of these candidates talk about our rights being violated every single day by the federal government.

    I’m sure a lot of people probably think I am some redneck from the sticks who has no idea what he is talking about, but I guess it is a bad thing to stand for what we should all be standing for, a united people where all races are united as one under the same banner….freedom. Equal rights for every man and woman regardless of nationality or skin color. I honestly do not see why people can’t wake up and realize what is slowly being taken away from us right in front of our eyes and its so blatantly obvious. Clinton had echelon which had spy taps on cell phones without anyone knowing…..then bush publicly made the patriot act which is the same thing now you just can’t say anything about it. How long must we sit here and let them take it bit by bit from us.

    Obama supports gun control and don’t quote me on this but I wouldn’t doubt it if he wanted to take them away all together. I don’t know about anyone elses city but in my city criminals aren’t getting their weapons legally so I don’t see how this would affect any crime at all. The whole reason for our 2nd amendment was to protect our property and to protect ourselves against a facist government. We went to war with England and won our freedom and created these rights so it would never happen again and people have begun to accept we would much rather have the government run everything and have near unlimited power than for us to take any responsibility over our own lives.

    It is as Benjamin Franklin said,

    “Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both.”

    I know everyone has to feel the same way about their individual rights and liberties…no one likes being told what they can and can’t do with their own lives. I also know how to feels to be ashamed at what has become of this nation and also feel desperation for a change and reaching out for anything that could bring it. Let’s face it though, the government is too big and corruption has seeped in and when it seeps into a place of power it becomes unstoppable by means within.

    The quote from John Emerich Edward Dalberg Acton holds too true,

    “Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad men.”

    Just remember, if you want a real change….you have to be the change. If we can’t find someone within the main stream parties to give us back our individual rights and liberties and let this be a free country for all like it is meant to be, then we need to do something about it and not just vote for “the lesser of two evils”.

    Feel free to comment on this and give opinions after all our 1st amendment gives us that right and be proud of your beliefs and know why you stand for them.

  • Mr. Sam

    The guy is a socialist but is he really much different than the rest of the democratic party? Is his talk much different than Bill Clintion or his wife. Its the same thing with the same focus on class struggle and how much the “rich” are screwing you over. Obama is not a new but the same as any other democratic president.

  • This is poor tax policy. These companies should have been allowed to stand or fail on their own. Barack Obama now wants to tax companies that were not even involved. You should not punish companies that did no wrong. That money will just go for more social programs.

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.