I was reading Michael C. Voeltz’s1 “Contest of Election” filed in Florida (I don’t know how old it is). It contains an interesting paragraph:
Alexander Hamilton, a founder of the country, present during the framing of the U.S. Constitution, would find Barack Obama Senior, Barack H. Obama’s father, as an “improper ancestor.” An “improper ancestor” presents a clear and present danger of foreign intrigue and influence to the Commander in chief. There is no way that the son of a Communist Kenyan, British subject would be considered a “creature of our own” by the founders.
The actual quotation from Federalist 68 doesn’t use the word “ancestor” but rather “an ascendant” which Voeltz takes, based on an 1813 Webster’s Dictionary, to mean “ancestor.” Here’s a longer citation from Federalist 68 with the portion Voeltz cites in bold (final ellipses added).
Nothing was more to be desired than that every practicable obstacle should be opposed to cabal, intrigue, and corruption. These most deadly adversaries of republican government might naturally have been expected to make their approaches from more than one quarter, […] but chiefly from the desire in foreign powers to gain an improper ascendant in our councils. How could they better gratify this, than by raising a creature of their own to the chief magistracy of the Union? But the convention have guarded against all danger of this sort, with the most provident and judicious attention. …
There’s quite a bit here for discussion and I’ll take it one part at a time, first checking the dictionary.
The first edition of Webster’s American Dictionary of the English Language was in 1828. His Compendious Dictionary of the English Language was published in 1806. I couldn’t find either available online, or even a reference to an 1813 edition. I did find the 1848 edition with this:
While the usage meaning “ancestor” appears, Voeltz ‘s reading is patently absurd in context. The phrase “an ascendant” clearly refers to a President and a President is not his own ancestor. If it were a foreign influence whose progeny became President, that would be a “descendant” not an “ascendant.”
““Superiority” seems the far more likely meaning. Examine the context, from Hamilton’s Federalist 11, where the sense of “ancestor” is impossible (emphasis mine):
There are other points of view, in which this subject might be placed, of a striking and animating kind. But they would lead us too far into the regions of futurity, and would involve topics not proper for a Newspaper discussion. I shall briefly observe, that our situation invites, and our interests prompt us, to aim at an ascendant in the system of American affairs. The world may politically, as well as geographically, be divided into four parts, each having a distinct set of interests. Unhappily for the other three, Europe by her arms and by her negociations, by force and by fraud, has, in different degrees, extended her dominion over them all. Africa, Asia, and America have successively felt her domination. The superiority, she has long maintained, has tempted her to plume herself as the Mistress of the World, and to consider the rest of mankind as created for her benefit. Men admired as profound philosophers have, in direct terms, attributed to her inhabitants a physical superiority; and have gravely asserted that all animals, and with them the human species, degenerate in America–that even dogs cease to bark after having breathed a while in our atmosphere. Facts have too long supported these arrogant pretensions of the European. It belongs to us to vindicate the honor of the human race, and to teach that assuming brother moderation. Union will enable us to do it. Disunion will add another victim to his triumphs. Let Americans disdain to be the instruments of European greatness! Let the thirteen States, bound together in a strict and indissoluble union, concur in erecting one great American system, superior to the controul of all trans-atlantic force or influence, and able to dictate the terms of the connection between the old and the new world!
Here is another, even better, example from Hamilton in a letter to the New York Journal:
There are seasons in every country when noise and impudence pass current for worth; and in popular commotions especially, the clamors of interested and factious men are often mistaken for patriotism. You prudently took advantage of the commencement of the contest, to ingratiate yourself in the favor of the people, and gain an ascendant in their confidence by appearing a zealous assertor of their rights.
Voeltz ‘s substitution of “ancestor” is simply not supported by the context.
Mr. Voeltz leaves us dangling with an incomplete paragraph, he ending it at: “But the convention have guarded against all danger of this sort, with the most provident and judicious attention.” One might be tempted to think that the “natural born citizenship” clause is that provident and judicial solution to foreign influence, but it is not. The conclusion of that paragraph describes the Electoral College, “They have not made the appointment of the President to depend on any preexisting bodies of men, who might be tampered with beforehand to prostitute their votes; but they have referred it in the first instance to an immediate act of the people of America, to be exerted in the choice of persons for the temporary and sole purpose of making the appointment.”
The phrase “natural born citizen” does not even appear (perhaps because Hamilton himself was not born in the United States and not a “natural born citizen”). Earlier in Federalist 68 Hamilton lays the foundation for placing his trust in the Electoral College:
It was equally desirable, that the immediate election should be made by men most capable of analyzing the qualities adapted to the station, and acting under circumstances favorable to deliberation, and to a judicious combination of all the reasons and inducements which were proper to govern their choice. A small number of persons, selected by their fellow-citizens from the general mass, will be most likely to possess the information and discernment requisite to such complicated investigations.
It was also peculiarly desirable to afford as little opportunity as possible to tumult and disorder. This evil was not least to be dreaded in the election of a magistrate, who was to have so important an agency in the administration of the government as the President of the United States. But the precautions which have been so happily concerted in the system under consideration, promise an effectual security against this mischief. The choice of SEVERAL, to form an intermediate body of electors, will be much less apt to convulse the community with any extraordinary or violent movements, than the choice of ONE who was himself to be the final object of the public wishes. And as the electors, chosen in each State, are to assemble and vote in the State in which they are chosen, this detached and divided situation will expose them much less to heats and ferments, which might be communicated from them to the people, than if they were all to be convened at one time, in one place.
Subsequent amendments to the Constitution have weakened the role of the Electoral College, but the original principle remains – to make the election of the President a geographically diffuse process, making it difficult for a small group of well-connected power brokers that could be corrupted by foreign bribes to influence the selection.
1Mr. Voeltz is currently represented by Florida attorney Larry Klayman in Voeltz v. Obama.
Also, although I had not heard of Michael C. Voeltz before, but he exhibits one of the common habits of the political fringe, that of hollering “communist” with zero evidence to support the claim. Challenge to lurking birthers: show me proof that Obama Sr. was a communist. Real, credible evidence.
I often point out to birthers that darn close to 100% of all persons who have actually been convicted of treason against the United States qualify as “natural born citizens.”
Example number one, a favorite general of George Washington’s: Benedict Arnold.
You are a close-minded asshole in every sense of the word.
As a starter, part 1; from Beckwith’s 0bama Files on 0bama Sr.:
A copy of Barack Obama’s paper was obtained from the stacks at UCLA. The paper is, as describe by Odhiambo and Cohen, a cutting attack from the left on Tom Mboya’s historically important policy paper, “African Socialism and Its Applicability to Planning in Kenya.” The author is given as “Barak H. Obama” and his paper is titled “Problems Facing Our Socialism”, published July, 1965 in the East African Journal, pp. 26-33.
Senior stakes out the following positions in his attacks on the white paper produced by Mboya’s Ministry of Economic Planning and Development:
1. Obama advocated the communal ownership of land and the forced confiscation of privately controlled land, as part of a forced “development plan”, an important element of his attack on the government’s advocacy of private ownership, land titles, and property registration. (p. 29)
2. Obama advocated the nationalization of “European” and “Asian” owned enterprises, including hotels, with the control of these operations handed over to the “indigenous” black population. (pp. 32 -33)
3. Obama advocated dramatically increasing taxation on “the rich” even up to the 100% level, arguing that, “there is no limit to taxation if the benefits derived from public services by society measure up to the cost in taxation which they have to pay” (p. 30) and that, “Theoretically, there is nothing that can stop the government from taxing 100% of income so long as the people get benefits from the government commensurate with their income which is taxed.” (p. 31)
4. Obama contrasts the ill-defined and weak-tea notion of “African Socialism” negatively with the well-defined ideology of “scientific socialism”, i.e. communism. Obama views “African Socialism” pioneers like Nkrumah, Nyerere, and Toure as having diverted only “a little” from the capitalist system. (p. 26)
5. Obama advocates an “active” rather than a “passive” program to achieve a classless society through the removal of economic disparities between black Africans and Asian and Europeans. (p. 28) “While we welcome the idea of a prevention [of class problems], we should try to cure what has slipped in .. we .. need to eliminate power structures that have been built through excessive accumulation so that not only a few individuals shall control a vast magnitude of resources as is the case now .. so long as we maintain free enterprise one cannot deny that some will accumulate more than others .. ” (pp. 29-30)
6. Obama advocates price controls on hotels and the tourist industry, so that the middle class and not only the rich can afford to come to Kenya as tourists. (p. 33)
7. Obama advocates government owned and operated “model farms” as a means of teaching modern farming techniques to farmers. (p. 33)
8. Obama strongly supports the governments assertion of a “non-aligned” status in the contest between Western nations and communist nations aligned with the Soviet Union and China. (p. 26)
Interesting! Senior allies himself to the communist Oginga Odinga. Forty years later, Obama, Senior’s son, allies himself with Raila Odinga, Oginga Odinga’s son, also a Marxist-Socialist.
Nothing in your lengthy citation even mentions Oginga Odinga, and the latter comment about President Obama and Raila Odinga alludes to a long-debunked birther tall tale.
You can see Mr. Voeltz in “action” here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L8apBFXLHeU&feature=youtu.be
starting about 7 minutes in. What he says from 7:15 to about 8:00 is most illuminating. The rest just tends towards the soporific.
Choose 1 metaphor from column A; choose 1 from column B; mix until you achieve the desired consistency and color.
It’s OBAMA. O-B-A-M-A. With the letter ‘O’, not the number zero. It’s not cute or funny or clever or creative. You’re like one of those obnoxious dipwads who ends most of his sentences with “lol” instead of a period. Doesn’t the content of your posts ruin your credibility enough already without having to resort to a “cute” gimmick?
What is the long-debunked birther tall tale you speak of?
Here’s some of what is available online:
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,833698,00.html
Obama’s Uncle Oginga, Cuz Raila’s Father: “Communism is like food to me”
http://sheikyermami.com/2011/04/09/kenya-the-next-islamic-emirate/
Exactly what does it matter if Barack Obama’s father was a Communist? Even if that’s true, he is dead and is not the president. Seems to me that only President Obama’s beliefs would be relevant since he’s, you know, the guy in charge. My parents are both very devout Catholics, but I’m not religious at all.
Here is the thing Ikey. It’s a 2 man race. The other dude is a rich a-hole who led a gang to attack a defenseless kid because he appeared different (the attack would meet the definition of felony assault and possible hate crime). He later strapped his dog on the roof of his car and drove until the dog pooped his crate (something I know as a dog rescuer that dogs only do when in deep distress). Those things indicate fundamental character, which in my view rarely changes. Arrogant SOB teenagers with no human sympathy almost always grow into arrogant SOB adults with no human sympathy. That’s what my life experience tells me.
Obama had a dad that he saw for about 1 week total and you are suggesting the dad might have been a leftie. Well, I know many left-wing parents with right-wing kids and vice versa. I also know that political beliefs do change over a lifetime. I know many people who have been communist, libertarian, moderate and conservative at various points in their life.
So, you believe the bully, felony assaulter, dog abuser is a better choice than the guy whose dad might have been a lefty. What does that say about you?
It’s probably one of the few pleasures left for some of these lonely, angry birther bigots.
It doesn’t matter what Obama, Sr’s views may have been politically. He was absent and was not teaching his son on any of it.
There is an article in Politico about the Obama, Sr’s paper. They interviewed “…Kenya expert Raymond Omwami, an economist and UCLA visiting professor from the University of Helsinki who has also worked at the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund, said Obama senior could not be considered a socialist himself based solely on the material in his bylined piece.”
“The critics of this article are making a big mistake,” says Omwami, who at Politico’s request read the document and the associated Internet debate over the weekend. “They are assuming Obama senior is the one who came up with this concept of African socialism, but that’s totally wrong. Based on that, they’re imbuing in him the idea that he himself is a socialist, but he is not.”
Even if he were it is still irrelevant, but I like people to base their conspiracy theories on more accurate info.
Oops. Here is the link to the article.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0408/9610_Page2.html
Unreal! JD Reed asked, “show me proof that Obama Sr. was a communist. Real, credible evidence.” As part of my Conservative Curriculum for Truth I provided the evidence he asked for. Now a good number of yas are upset that I did so now you run an attack on me, the messenger providing the evidence.
As far back as the ’90s I already had decided who I was voting for in future general elections until such time there was a change in a political party. That change hasn’t happened. Had no idea who the candidate would be in 2012.
Latest Barack Obama Favorability Poll
AP-GfK Poll conducted by GfK Roper Public Affairs & Corporate Communications. May 3-7, 2012. N=1,004 adults nationwide. Margin of error 3.9.
“Do you have a favorable or unfavorable impression of Barack Obama?”
Favorable: 58%
Unfavorable: 38%\
Unsure: 4%
http://www.pollingreport.com/obama_fav.htm
LOL WUT? Stop projecting.
What a bunch of mangled straw-grabbing nonsense.
I also love how there is a certain subset of birthers who are so desperate to find something, ANYTHING to support their mental illness, they search through ancient english law and writings from the 1700’s. Because that’s relevant to anything today.
Ahem!
Timothy McVeigh was a Natural Born Citizen, with two Citizen parents.
I rest my case.
I have often pondered that my asshole had a mind of its own, usually when it is open when it is supposed to be closed, however.
I should know better, but I’ll bite.
The first principle when you are reading African Decolonialization theory is that the Africans were trying to remember what it was to be African, and not Colonial subjects. The fact that European political theories like Communism and Socialism talked about the impact of colonialism and local economies and alternate control mechanisms in the absence of reliable market economies meant that those theories were going to be referenced. But remember also that the fact that football coaches and basketball coaches both discuss offense and defense doesn’t mean that football and basketball are the same game.
Now then…
And what was the pre-Colonial condition of the African economy? Communal (tribal) ownership of land. This was hundreds of years before Communism, remember. Perhaps Communists are really “Africanists”.
Why the use of quotes around the words “European”, “Asian”, and “indigenous”; and why the word indigenous instead of “African”. Is the author trying to say that these groupings are somehow unimportant to the larger pattern of ‘taking away’ and ‘giving’? That they are “false” groupings, invented to make ideological point? They are not unimportant at all, they are the exactly the point, this is a decolonization process and a nation, whether African or European needs to have control of its economy. Do you think that the Americans didn’t discuss these matters during their decolonization process? Do you think Americans didn’t decry British ownership of supposedly American assets like banks and sewer works? Was not the American Revolution an example of Americans protesting against their Colonial Masters control of their markets?
What is controversial about that? It isn’t even a Communist concept, it is a modern capitalist “user pays” concept. If “the rich” are getting 100% of the benefit derived from public services, then why shouldn’t they pay 100% of the tax required to provide that benefit.
Heaven forfend that there should be more than one view in a debate about decolonialization among hundreds of tribal political groupings with tens of generations and hundreds of years of lost tradition, and extreme educational and experiencial differences.
One or two families (or even a dozen or so) controlling a the economy of a former colony is not a national economy, it is a corrupt feifdom. It would be well for you to consider this next time you have a look at who controls the American economy.
Shocking! Obama Senior want to broaden the market base! What a horrible thought!
I am stunned that you would even think that this is somehow a ‘Communist’ concept. It is a fundamental service of a civilized society, and has absolutely nothing to do with ideology.
Abraham Lincoln created the U.S. Department of Agriculture.
USDA Research Farm (and other) Locations
Wikipedia: USDA Cooperative Extension Service
So, Obama “strongly supports” not aligning with the Communist block and that makes him a Communist? He also “strongly supports” not aligning with the Capitalist block, so doesn’t that make him a Capitalist?.
In summary, you focus much too much on labels like “Communist” instead of focusing on the ideas.
Some birthers are like a child repeating a dirty word and giggling nervously while clearly clueless as to the word’s meaning.
A zero is as a zero does.
Another ‘Good Friday’…
Taitz v Fuddy – Motion to Reconsider based on new evidence denied
Orly v Democrat Party – Motion in opposition to motion to remand
With many good snarks
Hence It’s Obama with an O not a zero…
-“advocated the communal ownership of land” Just like the kibbutzim.
-“Obama advocates an “active” rather than a “passive” program to achieve a classless society” Just like the kibbutzim.
-“Obama advocates government owned and operated “model farms” as a means of teaching modern farming techniques to farmers.” Just like the kibbutzim.
-“forced confiscation of privately controlled land, as part of a forced “development plan”: Just like the American Indians’ Trail of Tears. Just like the Settlers are doing to Arabs. Just like the Israeli government is doing to Bedouins, within the ’67 borders.
I saw something just like this on Stormfront, only everything should be controlled by white Christians. Here’s a gem from Santorum’s stooge:
http://www.mediaite.com/tv/pastor-dennis-terry-introduces-rick-santorum-tells-non-christians-to-get-out/
“Terry is tired, he told his audience, of not being able to say that the United States is a nation founded on Christian principles. He is tired of not being able to pray in public. “Listen to me,” he continued. “If you don’t love America and you don’t like the way we do things, I have one thing to say… GET OUT!”
“We don’t worship Buddha!” he yelled. “I said we don’t worship Buddha, we don’t worship Mohammed. We don’t worship Allah. We worship God. We worship God’s son Jesus Christ.”
Jerry Falwell: ‘All schools should be under church control.’
I’m Jewish, my wife is Buddhist. Guess we don’t belong here.
The income tax rate in Israel is 50%, along with socialized health care.
President Nixon Imposes Wage and Price Controls – August 15, 1971. …Nixon imposed wage and price controls. The 90 day freeze was unprecedented in peacetime, but such drastic measures were thought necessary. Inflation had been raging, exceeding 6% briefly in 1970 and persisting above 4% in 1971. By the prevailing historical standards, such inflation rates were thought to be completely intolerable.
The 90 day freeze turned into nearly 1,000 days.
http://www.econreview.com/events/wageprice1971b.htm
The Cold War is over. Didn’t you get the memo?
Ben Gurion was a socialist, as was Golda Meir. Whe she first went to Palestine, she was a Marxist.
Remember, David Huckabee at 18 caught a stray dog, hung it, slit its throat, and stoned it to death.
His father stopped the investigation.
BRAVO!! So were Charles Manson, Ted Bundy, John Wayne Gacy, Gary Ridgeway, Paul Stephani(the-weepy-voiced-killer), almost ALL Klansmen, the ‘Patriot Militia’, etc…etc…
The list of disgusting scum that were ‘Natural Born Citizens’ with two Citizen parents goes on and on and on; let’s not forget Eric Robert Rudolph(the Atlanta Olympic Park bomber) who had concrete ties to the right wing ‘Christian Identity’ ; somehow it seems to me that being a ‘Natural Born Citizen’ with two Citizen parents, does’nt make one any better nor any more righteous than ANYBODY! If you add-up the dead bodies left in THEIR wake, it seems to to me that Al-Quada hasn’t done much better than they have at killing Americans!!!
“And Alaska — we’re set up, unlike other states in the union, where it’s collectively Alaskans own the resources. So we share in the wealth when the development of these resources occurs. … It’s to maximize benefits for Alaskans, not an individual company, not some multinational somewhere, but for Alaskans.”
–Sarah Palin, explaining the windfall profits tax that she imposed on the oil industry in Alaska as a mechanism for ensuring that Alaskans “share in the wealth” generated by oil companies, New Yorker interview, Sept. 2008
‘UNC stands for the University of Ni***** and Communists’ – Senator Jesse Helms
BTW, I’m a ‘Natural Born Citizen’ with two Citizen parents, just like Dennis Radar( BTK ) the serial killer that terrorized Wichita, Kansas; you know the member of The Christ Lutheran Church council!!
Oh yeah, let’s not forget racist Jesse helms, also a ‘Natural Born Citizen’ ; the kind of trash I’m PROUDLY not affiliated with!!!
This is a brilliant post; I was going to write something similar but not nearly as good.
I’d like to add a further point: the “booga booga” impact of the word “communist” is truly unique to America.
In most of Western Europe where local communist parties were instrumental to defeat the Nazis, and were rooted in trade unions from the beginning, the word had no such impact. Indeed, the Allies worked with the local communists in France, Italy, etc. to oust the Germans.
Enough books have been written about how the USSR quickly diverged from the tenets of socialism (and never reached communism) to sink the Potemkin so I won’t go into that here, but in my book, considering who he was, where he was born, etc. I’m proud that your father’s president was a lefty as opposed to a toady to the British.
I didn’t emphasize this in my article, but the word “investigating” in the title comes from the final Hamilton quote in the article:
Do you mean MIKE Huckabee?
You missed the idea of 0bama Sr.’s paper. He was questioning his friend & mentor Tom Mboya’s presentation of African Socialism & Values for Kenya while at the same time giving a far-Left attack on Kenyetta’s pro-western government. I just read the paper and there’s no doubt 0bama Sr. had a marxist mentality.
#8 is actually criticism of the Kenyetta government, and combined with the rest gives it a flavor we normally associate with a far-Left ideology [strong government control of]. 0bama Sr. uses “indigenous” and the other terms in his paper.
Mike Huckabee’s son, David.
Testimony from fellow Hawaiian student Naranhkiri Tith on 0bama Sr.: “Barak and I were a part of a small group of foreign students who participated in group discussions in various places (Churches, sinagogues, junior colleges) around the campus and in town. Those discussions centered on the role and impact of former Soviet Union and China had in the developing countries. Barak, was more hopeful than I was about the role and the influence of these two major Communist countries in the developing nations in the world, because I had the opportunity to study in Europe, and in France, especially, I was more aware of the nature of communism than Barak was.”
As a fellow traveler, his mother was his original indoctrinator into the ideology, with many more mentors to follow.
Then came ‘Dreams From My Father”
Tom Mboya as Minister for Economic Planning and Development wrote the important “Sessional Paper 10” on Harambee and the Principles of African Socialism (adopted by Parliament in 1964), which provided a model of government based on African values. [from Wiki].
Huckabee Squashed Charges Against His Son For Stoning, Hanging Dog
(Miller County, Arkansas) Two boy scout counselors, 17 year old Clayton Frady and 18 year old David Huckabee, the son of Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee, have admitted to catching a stray dog during their summer session at Camp Pioneer in Hatfield, AR, and hanging the dog by his neck, slitting his throat and stoning him to death.
http://crooksandliars.com/2007/12/16/huckabee-squashed-charges-against-his-son-for-stoning-hanging-dog
Michael Vick went to prison; David Huckabee went home. Any guesses why?
What’s this with conservatives and animal cruelty?
Dogs Against Romney – http://www.dogsagainstromney.com/
One of the figureheads of our Green Party was a die-hard extreme leftist almost all his life, then after leaving the political field, being a lawyer, he turned to defending neo-Nazi holocaust deniers in court. That’s about the biggest swing I’ve encountered.
Personally, I was very right-wing as a teenager (parental influence), strongly left-wing as a student and consider myself moderately liberal right now. My parents are still on the xenophobic right (they went to school during the Nazi regime and never quite disassociated themselves from that).
I don’t doubt that Obama Sr.’s political view were ‘leftist’, possibly even Marxist. But I don’t know that from this paper. This paper doesn’t seem to present a Marxist manifesto for Kenya, and certainly not a Communist one. It does present arguments for Kenya finding a non-colonial African process. That he borrowed heavily from Socialism in doing so is perfectly understandable and reasonable – Kenya did not have a functioning capitalist economy capable of maintaining its society.
I don’t understand what you think they should have done, just ask the Queen to come back and continue to administer them as nice little colonial dependents?
I don’t understand how you can say maintaining neutral “non-aligned” status is something “we normally associate with a far-Left ideology”. Is Switzerland “far-left”? Norway? India?
You aren’t quoting Obama Sr. You are quoting Beckwith. Context is everything.
Don’t you ever get tired of reposting the same 4 or 5 posts over and over again? Do you even bother to type them out anew, or do you just cut and paste from some document on your hard drive?
I like you Misha, but good God is this getting old.
ROTFL… Poor Rambo, so afraid that he lets fear guides his ignorance. How sad…
“Don’t you ever get tired of reposting the same 4 or 5 posts over and over again?”
I’m not at Gail Collins’ intellectual level, but she has managed to get in ‘the dog on the roof’ at least 40 times. Whenever she leaves out a reference, people in the comments section write, ‘hey, where’s the dog?’
Like 2 days ago, was about her 43rd time:
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/12/opinion/collins-the-anatomy-of-a-jokester.html
“Perhaps you may remember that Romney once drove to Canada with the family Irish setter stuck in a cage on the station wagon roof. When he was originally asked about it, he claimed the dog “loves fresh air.” That was the first thing Letterman asked her about.
I’m having a contest with her.
“Do you even bother to type them out anew, or do you just cut and paste from some document on your hard drive?”
No, I go to google to look for any updates. I don’t store anything on the C drive. I have a 1T external RAID. Plus, I built my computer from a Tiger Direct barebones kit, after I got an A+ computer tech certificate. Remember, I’m the generation that bought audio and television equipment from Heathkit. I still have a Heathkit graphic equalizer. The amp wore out, so I found new tube amps from China, on eBay.
That really dates me.
As soon as I get my license back, I’m going to buy a Russian Tourist – http://www.imz-ural.com/2012-ural-tourist/ – and Angel and I are going to Rabbit Hash, Kentucky to meet Lucy Lou, their mayor: http://www.rabbithashusa.com/election_vote.php
When I drove to Anchorage in 2001 for the Iditarod, I photographed and documented the entire trip. I stayed at a lodge 100 miles north of Anchorage, whose owner had a pet wolf. She was full wolf, not a hybrid. We flew in on a Cessna, with skis on the wheels.
Before the stroke, I was starting to write a book about my motorcycle trips. The title was going to be “Riding On Prayer Wheels,” a reference to Buddhism. Remember, I’m a Jubu. With Photoshop, I created a drawing of a MC with the wheels as prayer wheels.
Since he insists upon being disrespectful toward our President, I suggest that the troll should be referred to as Ramb0 until he mends his ways.
No, It can’t be so! ObOts with a Double Standard? Surely you jest.
ObOts wouldn’t whine and cry about somebody accidently missing the “O” occasionally while they continue to spell it Rmoney, and produce the most outrageous lies & smears for Presidents Reagan & Bush, also for Palin, Beck, and a whole host of others on the political Right.
And to top it off, claiming that “Honest Ike” hasn’t any credibility, when none of the ObOts has been able to debunk any major factor on any issue the “Honest One” has posted on.
You see Virginia, it must be a figment of your imagination.
The whole truth:
Stanley Ann was greatly influenced by left-wing and communist teachers in the Mercer Island High School, who had the students read the philosophers Sartre and Kierkegaard, “The Communist Manifesto” and question the existence of God. Stanley Ann touted herself as an atheist.
Mercer Island High was a hotbed of pro-Marxist radical teachers. John Stenhouse, board member, testified before the House Un-American Activities Subcommittee that he had been a member of the Communist Party USA and the school has a number of Marxists on its staff. Two teachers at this school, Val Foubert and Jim Wichterman, both Frankfurt School style Marxists, taught a critical theory curriculum to students which included; rejection of societal norms, attacks on Christianity, the traditional family, and assigned readings by Karl Marx. The hallway between Foubert’s and Wichterman classrooms was called “anarchy ally.”
A high school classmate described Stanley Ann as “a fellow traveler. . . . We were liberals before we knew what liberals were.” The descriptive, “fellow traveler,” was first applied to non-communists who were inclined toward the views of the Communist Party by Leon Trotsky.
This is a good example of what I meant by “smear” in the other article. Stringing together negative associations and half-truths in order to make a third party look bad. When I was in high school, I was taught a fine Christian teacher that such writing was immoral, and this has stayed with me across the decades, probably more than anything else I learned in high school English.
But really, Søren Kierkegaard? He was one of the foremost theologians in the 20th century. I studied him in my Philosophy of Religion class taught by a Baptist preacher.
I’ll grant ya that Senior wasn’t proposing the Communist Manifesto for Kenya, but nevertheless his paper is a marxist-styled critique [constructive criticism] of both Kenyatta & Mboya’s pro-western leanings. Turn around #8 to read “pro-Eastern Bloc” and then ask yourself if Senior would have proposed a middle of the road position. It’s obvious Senior had a deep seated resentment due to the colonial period. The paper he wrote led to him being black-balled from government.
Those are not Beckwith’s comments – his are in blue.
One of the things I’ve found engaging the liberals [the enemy] on politics is their lack of understanding on government ideology & political philosophy. According to many sources, Wikipedia included, they define those who adhere to Marx’s philosophy in the Communist Manifesto as “marxists”.
Also, government control or lack of has shown to be an even bigger problem for liberals as to where the ideologies fall in on the political spectrum. With out that basic understanding one will be forever lost. Here’s a short video that will help:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N4r0VUybeXY
Rambo Ike, how then do you explain we have a Center-Moderate President?
Kierkegaard in 2008:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7M-cmNdiFuI&sns=em
Clearly, they had educational standards back then; these days, it’s considered a major feat if you can get high school students to read anything other than the Twilight books….
Rambo Ike:
If what you say is true, it sounds like an interesting and challenging curriculum.
Ramb0,
Yawn. Old news which has been around since at least the spring of 2008. All it proves is that students at Mercer Island High learned to do critical thinking, a skill which is sadly lacking among birthers.
Ah, yes! What better philosopher than Nietzsche to compliment the MELTS Society.
You might be jumping the gun on that. Based on my own high school experience with its limited amount of class time, and some speculation on my part, I doubt if Stanley Ann’s teachers covered the complete works of Kierkegaard. He was not a ‘one trick pony’ and covered a broad range in his writings. Add in Sartre, and I’m guessing they focused in on their writings on “Existentialism” as an introduction to “Humanism”. That would fit the leftist curriculum at her high school.
Again, that is a guess on my part.
Oops, wrong link (the one above is for the Kant Attack ad). The fun of trying to copy hyperlinks on mobile. Now the correct one:
http://youtu.be/1uYO0vsI6UM
Yawn… You’re a riot… Have you nothing of relevance to do here other than trying to smear the President and his mother?
Coward
This is definitely a smoking gun, Ike. After all, every knows that children have the exact same beliefs and ideas as their parents and are incapable of having even on independent thought. No, all children think and behaves exactly like their parents.
After all, everyone knows that children have the exact same beliefs and ideas as their parents and are incapable of having even on independent thought.
This sounds like a vacuous comment designed to make it sound like you know something about Kierkegaard’s philosophy when in fact you haven’t a clue what Kierkegaard is about except that he is an “existentialist”. “Not a one trick pony” is generic remark you can make about anyone without fear of contradiction.
Existentialism is in some sense a very faith-based idea since it says that philosophy cannot be based on science and moral thinking alone, but that it is rooted in experience — which sounds very much at home with my Southern Baptist upbringing. Kierkegaard wrote of Jesus, whom he called the “God man” who is known through faith. For Kierkegaard:
Billy Graham could’ve said that. For more on the lack of relationship between Marx and Kierkegaard, see my paper on the subject.
Socialism needs democracy like the human body needs oxygen. – Leon Trotsky
It’s called the 1st Amendment. Look into it.
Funny you should mention that: “Why Do the Jews Hate Sarah Palin So Much?” You should read the comments. Take a Xanax before reading them.
http://gawker.com/5441576/why-do-the-jews-hate-sarah-palin-so-much
Ben Gurion was an atheist, as I am. I suggest you read the 1st Amendment.
Golda Meir was a Marxist when she first went to Palestine. The kibbutz I lived on for a year follwed Lenin: From each according to his ability, to each according to his need.
Remember, if Groucho Marx and John Lennon wrote a musical together, it would be a Marxist-Lennonist production.
Outside of a dog, a book is man’s best friend. Inside of a dog, it’s too dark to read.- Marx (Groucho) Better known as Julius Marx.
We loved our colonial period so much, there was a Revolutionary war. Or did you forget?
That was the curriculum at the Jesuit college my degree is from.
Conservatives are relentless in their attacks against the 1st Amendment, reproductive freedom and science. Conservatives pass laws deliberately meant to humiliate women. Any unwanted penetration is legally rape. Evangelicals egg on Settlers into violent clashes with Arabs. I’ve written many times about the Mea Shearim child who threw a rock at my cousin, because she was wearing short pants near their neighborhood in Jerusalem.
Liberals are the enemy? Conservatives appeal to the lowest common denominator.
Like Rush Limbaugh and Newt
McPersonGingrich, who committed adultery three times?My grandfather and my mother were social rebels, as I am. Before the stroke, I did not own a car. I had a Honda bike.
We’re just giving Beck a taste of what Corsi has been dishing out. Besides, why are you defending a man implicated in a rape and murder?
That started with Seamus. You’ll have to take it up with him.
Ike-For the benefit of any of the women reading this who might hope that one of their children would have the opportunity to grow up to be President some day, would you be so kind as to prepare a list of which authors they can and can’t read. We get that any acquaintance with Sartre and Kierkegaard will disqualify their child from holding office, but who exactly may a mother of a future President read?
Thank you for your help.
By the way, I hope you can provide us with the full curriculum at whatever high school Romney’s mom attended, so we can assess his qualifications for the White House.
You should stop while you’re behind. You keep opening your mouth and removing all doubt.
I could not speak about Romney’s mother (actually, I am not sure where she actually went to school) nor can I speak to Romney himself, however, Cranbook today appears to teach various philosophy and religion classes that include, among others, Satre and Kierkegaard.
The Constitution forbids anyone serving as President unless their mother’s education has been verified. This is a grave problem that Romney will have to address ASAP.
That is un-American! The Founding Fathers certainly didn’t sit around reading a bunch of European philosophers.
I thought it started at one of his campaign rallies.
Rmoney
OK, yeah… Its a photoshop. But a double darn good one.
I realize that Rambo Ike is a bigoted lunatic and that none of you share his bizarro worldview, but I have to say, it’s rather sad to see studying Sartre, Kierkegaard and, yes, even Marx, equated with some kind of disease that would somehow disqualify you from being a regular, well-educated human being. It really smacks of FAHRENHEIT 451 and Rambo Ike is holding the torch.
I feel slightly nauseated. (But it could be the bouillabaisse I had for lunch.)
Well, at least you are making some progress. At least you are, finally, admitting what most of us have known all along.
I was considering banning Rambo Ike because he does precipitate “flame wars,” his attitude is offensive, and he’s not all that solid in his facts. However, confirmation bias is not limited to those on the right, and as I read anti-birther comments on other sites, I realize that they repeat myths too. The point is that Rambo Ike provides a check, however biased and misinformed, that might on occasion identify a real mistake on the blog here or in the comments.
My own education in philosophy is pathetic, perhaps due to the attitudes of Alabama school officials who shared Rambo Ike’s world view. Marx could not be studied in my high school. College was better and Marx was included in the Philosophy of Religion class I took.
Like Emerich de Vattel?
Rambo Ike: Add in Sartre, and I’m guessing they focused in on their writings on “Existentialism” as an introduction to “Humanism”. That would fit the leftist curriculum at her high school.
In your child’s universe, anything Conservative is “good” and anything Liberal is “bad.” That’s why you have no ability to see that there are good and bad ideas on both ends of the spectrum, and why you deserve catching so much flack for demonizing fine, intelligent writers and philosophers whom you think disagree with you.
For example: One of the key tenets of existentialism a la J-P. Sartre could be glossed as “No Excuses.” He thought that an individual cannot blame Society, his Upbringing, his Educational Institutions, his Government, etc. for his own failings. Each of us is responsible for how things turn out for us. Anyone who makes such excuses Sartre saw as (if I remember correctly) a “coward or a weakling.”
Gee, RamboIke, what does that sound like? Advocating self-reliance & personal responsibility?
That’s right: Conservatism.
Believe it or not, if you read any humanist philosophy, or even Marx, with an open mind you would find that they are right about a great many things. Should we then base our Government on Marx? Of course not. But please try, for your own sake and so you don’t come of as such an infantile absolutist, to put down the blinders and try to see what is good in Leftist thought and what is bad in Right-wing thought. It won’t kill you.
Life is more complex than Heroes and Demons.
I would just like ike to address what this blog is about. He/She has written about the President’s supporters as being like Hitler. He has touched upon the President’s father and his ( supposed)communist ways ( imagine, wanting to get your homeland away from the colonizing British. The nerve.). Rambo has even pointed out that the President’s mother was an ( oh dear god) atheist ( maybe). Also,R.I has gone to great lengths to draw the President into shady circles ( Bill Ayers, ohhhhhh,superboogieman)yet he/she has failed to address the intent of this blog ( as I see from the title.).
I am just one reader of this blog, and the only question I have is; What has the President, himself, done to be under suspicion of committing any type of conspiracy?
There are other things I would like to add, but I don’t want to fan any flames. I am merely asking a question. Can Rambo answer that one question?
It is statements like that I find the most objectionable and disappointing. It is bad enough to paint approx. half the country as being ignorant, but to refer to them as the enemy is abhorrent.
I attended a DoDDS-Eur high school (Department of Defense Dependents School, Europe). My father was career military. We (gasp) studied Sartre. I am sure my father and the rest of the military community would be shocked and dismayed to learn that a DoDDS education could disqualify their children and grandchildren from the presidency.
For more than 20 years the right wing’s strategy has been to demonize the opposition. Unfortunately, the strategy has been successful often enough that they are doubling down on it.
Two of history’s most brilliant military strategists were Jewish: Moshe Dayan and Leon Trotsky.
I observe kosher. Never had it.
Karl Marx invented Social Security. Uh, oh.
Not really, it was Otto von Bismarck. http://www.ssa.gov/history/ottob.html
And Sir John Monash
Shouldn’t YOU be needing to show proof that he wasn’t? If the man was a US Citizen then the burden of proof would fall on the Birthers. Since he was born in a country whose primary government was not a Republic or even Democratic, I would say the burden of proof is on you. However, I’d like you to show me credible evidence that he was not a communist, socialist, or marxist while you are at it.
The next post by Rambo I believe DID show credible evidence that Obama Sr. was NOT a capitalist, providing his information is accurate. I have no idea if it is or not, I’ve not done any research in that area.
As far as Obama Jr.s connection to Odinga – there definitely WAS some sort of connection. Unless the video I saw of Obama walking and talking with Odinga was just a friendly ….ahhhh…what type of visit exactly was it? I was going to say family visit, but everyone on this site swears they are not related. So, lets see, what reason would Obama have had to visit Odinga on the taxpayers dime during Odinga’s campaign? Hummm…makes one wonder. Whether he was there campainging / supporting / or just visiting for some unknown and unexplained reason, appearances count. Humans have deduction skills, the ability to reason no matter what Obama may say or not say about the visit. Because we all know politicians NEVER lie.
What exactly does religious belief’s have to do with political beliefs? Yes, we all know Obama likes to blur the lines, but the lines really are crystal clear. And while you have a point that Obama is his own man and why would he take on or champion his father’s beliefs, I think you have to look to his actions to understand why the Founding Fathers wanted to guard against the issue all together. I won’t go into all his actions that support his father’s beliefs, you can do the research for yourself and draw your own conclusions – but appearances matter. Actions speak much louder than words.
The mere fact that you asked the question at all – should show you how dangerous it is to have a non-NBC as our President. While I believe it is well possible that Obama holds none of his father’s political beliefs, how do we know? Obviously you don’t know either, or you wouldn’t ask the question. Because we all know politicians NEVER lie.
Joey – unfortunately for Obama, it won’t be popularity contest in 2012 as it was in 2008. Obama is a likable guy – I’ll give you that, but a majority of the people which continues to grow by the day have come to the realization that the man has no clue what he is doing. It was apparent to me before the last election – it’s just now becoming apparent to others. You can look in his eyes and watch his demeanor and see that he is in way over his head.
What does this mean exactly? Are you trying to make the case that if one who is a NBC CAN be a bad apple, then quite obviously one who is NOT a NBC absolutely CANNOT be a bad apple?
I never quite get this type of analysis by Obama supporters.
And again……
And yet again….. come one, surely you can make a better argument than one that makes no sense at all.
I’m proud of you that you reconsidered and are going to allow Rambo his freedom of speech. I’m sad that you even considered it for a minute. The fact that Obama supporters usually want to shut down any real (and however erroneously conceived) debate is very discerning to me. The name calling on both sides shows how little respect we have for each other and how dangerous the President’s stance on continuing to divide a Nation that he positively campaigned to unite truly is.
In reading Rambo, (granted I’ve not visited this site in some time, and have only read his responses to this particular post) I do not perceive any ‘flame war’ – but that’s just my opinion.
And Rambo, you are barking up the wrong tree here at this site. This is a ‘group think’ Obama supporter site. They like to sit around and post agreements with each other rather than have any real discussion on the issue – whether it is right OR wrong. One posts an idea and all the cronies jump on it and agree and slap each other on the back. It’s just the way it is. If an outsider shows up and tries to engage in any real or meaningful discussion, they are attacked, berated, called names, and belittled to the point where they take leave. Which suits the ‘group think’ just as well. They can go back to agreeing with one another in their little world with blinders on.
Personally, I can see both sides of the issue with Obama as a NBC and as a non-NBC. I tend to lean to the side that he is not a NBC, but I do question that stance from time to time. I come here when my google saved search happens to email me the link. Other than that, I don’t waste my time here because I’m not into being attacked, called names and told that I’m a liar when I’ve told not a single lie at this blog.
You providing the proof for Obama Sr. is like what they say about the Birthers getting their coveted Long Form: They will never be happy with anything they are provided, they will always say it’s a forgery (even when Obama’s lawyer admits it was a forgery) and they will never let go of the issue. Same with any evidence or proof you provide. It will never be good enough, it will always be a falsehood, a fabrication, or a figment of your imagination to these people. They have closed their minds to any possibility that Obama might possibly not be a NBC, or even that he might not be The Savior. Or even quite simply that he might have no clue what he is doing as President and is not the best choice for the next 4 years.
In my opinion – there is only 1 difference between Romney and Obama. Obama hates America and her exceptionalism, he thinks we steal resources from other nations and that we live too high on the hog and we need to be brought down to the levels of third world nations. I believe Romney holds the same basic political ideals that Obama does, but I do believe he loves America and wants this Nation to be the exceptional Nation that it was was. I believe he wants to save America for all our grandchildren and he wants to preserve our freedoms (such as they are). They are both liberal politicians.
1 man loves America and the other hates America. I’ll vote for the man who loves America, in the hopes that he can save it from certain destruction. My son, well, he will vote for the man who hates America – knowing and admitting that Obama full well hates America. He sees no way out from the total destruction and he will vote for Obama in order to hasten the destruction so he can see it rebuilt in his lifetime. To be quite honest, I have no idea which is the correct path. But I am extremely concerned about what our future holds.
You can all flame away, name call, and berate me to a pulp, because you know very well that I won’t be back to read a word of it. I’m not interested in your double speak and Obama babble. Just as you are probably not interested in mine, and I’m not even entirely certain that I’ve not been banned from posting here.
Regards,
SallyHill
Shouldn’t YOU be needing to show proof that he wasn’t? If the man was a US Citizen then the burden of proof would fall on the Birthers. Since he was born in a country whose primary government was not a Republic or even Democratic, I would say the burden of proof is on you. However, I’d like you to show me credible evidence that he was not a communist, socialist, or marxist while you are at it.
No. It’s possible he wasn’t communist, capitalist, or anything in between. The burden of proof is on the one making the absurd claim. Others aren’t saying “He wasn’t communist, he was (something else)”. Then you could rightfully say “Prove he was (something else).” They’re saying “You say he was (x), show he was.” One doesn’t prove negatives. It’s like saying “Prove there aren’t unicorns.” No, it doesn’t work that way. One proves there aren’t “not unicorns” by showing there ARE. Likewise, those claiming he was a communist shoul e able to show some action he did, statements he made, that prove it – else how did they come to their conclusion? You can’t prove you AREN’T a communist, all you can do is show you haven’t advocated communism, which isn’t “proof” per se. But if you HAVE advocated communism then it’s easy to show one is a communist, hence eh the burden of proof is on that side.
Proceed, Sally.
Why the big deal about the President’s father?
Rick Santorum comes from a long line of Italian communists.
President Bush’s dad (Prescott bush) had dealings with the Nazi’s.
President Kennedy’s dad admired Hitler.
So what?
Kenya was a colony of a democratic country when Obama Sr. was born. If you want to be pedantically precise, he wasn’t born in a country.
Kenya gained its independence in December 1963 and was initially a Democratic Monarchy with the Queen Elizabeth as Head of State and Monarch (as, for instance, Australia is today). It became a Republic one year later; the Queen is no longer Head of State.
It has always been more or less democratic, though the one party state (until the early 90’s) and the “queued” voting system are pretty obnoxious to most ‘western’ sensibilities.
But when Obama Senior was born it was still a colony.
No, it didn’t. It showed he proposed ideas that many associate with Socialism. It also showed he proposed ideas that many associate with Republicanism (for example Lincoln’s Department of Agriculture to improve the country’s farm methods and Nixonian price controls though at a much lesser level and targeted for a specific result).
Any number of legitimate reasons. Maybe he was just one of the best educated men in the country, explaining his work to a politician? Maybe he was just one of the best educated men in the country trying to show a politician that his policies are wrong or misplaced? Maybe he was just one of the best educated men in the country trying to gauge what one of the most powerful men in the country was going to do, wanted to do, should be endorsed, should be opposed, was somebody you could share a beer with, had a job for him where he might do some good for the people of Kenya ? On the other hand maybe he was a fellow traveler.
You are joking right? An educated man of the calibre of Obama senior, one of the very, very few in Kenya, clearly a member of the national elite, should ignore one of the most powerful men in the country because you think it ‘looks bad’ almost 60 years later?
You are joking again, right? Are you actually alive during this current campaign cycle, please attempt to show some intellectual honesty here. Besides the point that you are pretending to miss was not about religion but that the child does not always follow in the footsteps of the parent.
Gotta go. Your post is full of badly thought out thoughts, I don’t have time to go through it all now. Perhaps others will pick it apart more thoroughly if they have a few seconds to waste.
Sally Hill: What exactly does religious belief’s have to do with political beliefs?
It is called an analogy. Thrifty was demonstrating that his parents beliefs are not his.
I believe Sally was referring to President Obama, who as a US senator in 2006 toured Africa and met with Odinga in Kenya.
Glenn Beck should show proof he did not rape and murder a girl in 1990. All Glenn Beck has to do is release his criminal record abstract stamped “Subject has clear record to date,” and this can be over tonight. He won’t release it, because he was in a heroin haze. In fact, there is a website devoted to that question:
http://didglennbeckrapeandmurderagirl.blogspot.com/
You are confusing us with the John Birch Society.
I never understand the people who support and admire Glenn Beck, a man implicated in a heinous crime.
Also, I’m a Marxist. I’ve studied him in depth, and live by his words:
“Outside of a dog a book is man’s best friend. Inside of a dog, it’s too dark to read.”
OK, I missed that. I had just got out of bed and had to rush off to work. My bad.
Charles Lindbergh was an active supporter, and an anti-Semite. Philip Johnson, the architect, was an active supporter, as was Henry Ford.
Ford was a vicious anti-Semite. Read about The Dearborn Independent newspaper, he published. See this: http://www.orange-papers.org/orange-Ford-medal2.png
Okay, let’s have a meaningful discussion about NBC. What is the issue? Either the President was born in Hawaii, or he wasn’t.
What is this little world with blinders? What group think? Why do you insist that this site is for supporters of the current President?
I hate the New York Yankees baseball team, but I accept them as a baseball team. The only type of agreement that occurs here is confusion when birthers offer facts that are not facts.
With every court case birthers come here and write about how they will gloat when the judge rules in their favor. The case is dismissed and the birther does not come back. I have only been here a short time, and rarely has an outsider come for meaningful discussion. Many times it is people who think of this site as a support site for President Obama. I support the office of the President because I am an American, just like I support and cheer for every American athlete during the Olympics. Even the ones I personally don’t like.
I live in Korea. There are people here who are confused; they think there are Americans who voted for a guy who was not eligible to run for office. People here think that is crazy. This is a country that only last month banned fistfights during Legislative debates, and they think we are crazy because of the Birth Certificate.
You are most definitely wrong here.
As stated many times before, I’m French and as such i don’t have a dog in your fight, so to speak.
Candidly, although i find Obama likeable and a much better President than your ignorant, lunatic Republicans, I disagree with much of his foreign and economic policies. So don’t count me as a supporter of his (other than by default), even as a foreign one.
I do not espouse opinions on American Constitutional matters because I don’t feel competent to do so; however I am competent to discuss Vattel, far more competent than Mario Apuzzo, and I can tell you unambiguously that Mr Apuzzo’s writings on the matter are a tissue of lies and obfuscation.
Further, most of what Rambo Ike has written about Marx(ism), capitalism, Sartre, communism, etc. here is pure, unadulterated rubbish that would get him an “F” in any French high school.
You don’t have to like or dislike Obama to be appalled by such lies and gross ignorance. Birthers collectively present the worst possible face of America to the world; if you were truly patriots, you would crawl back under your rock.
Hmmm. OK. Obama Jr. met Odinga Jr. A touring US Senator, who happened to be descended from the Kenyan Luo tribe, met an important Kenyan politician (who ran for President in 2007 just like Obama), a son of a Luo chief (Ker) who abdicated that chiefdom in order to become a politician himself.
I am wondering how this meeting fits with Sally’s theme of claiming to see Communism in everyone who touches Obama’s life? I think my paragraph pretty much stands even if I was thinking it was supposed to be addressing a meeting between Senior and Senior.
Because the following characteristics, that describe Raila Odinga, the current Prime Minister of Kenya just don’t sound like characteristics you would expect from a Communist or even a Marxist:
=> opposed the imposition of a one party state in Kenya – and went to jail for it.
=> is a capitalist (manufactures gas cylinders and ethanol and imports and distributes petroleum)
His policies don’t even sound like Sally’s idea of a liberal:
=> jail homosexuals
=> cut taxes
Really, where is Sally going with this?
You have just described every birther site in existence. I love how you people always project.
Wherever she is going, there she is, to paraphrase BB.
Anyone particular you have in min here? I have seen few outsiders trying to engage in any real or meaningful discussion lately.
As to being ridiculed. Well, it’s the kind and polite thing to do. When people show up, poorly informed or misled by birther sites, ridicule is appropriate and when the person refuses to educate himself, then they deserve to be exposed for such.
Too bad that the average birther is ill equipped to defend him/herself when faced with the facts.
Right, “Scott Brown”.
Wow. Insightful commentary summed up so succinctly.
And despite what some may think, it would likely get him an F in many an American high school.
Let’s follow some of the comments at ORYR, shall we (edited for language):
Getting back to the actual topic…
What does Obama’s father’s political beliefs, or even Obama’s have to do with eligibility (I am especially commenting on the “Communist” father angle as mentioned in the article). There is nothing in the Constitution or the laws of the United States that prevent a President from being a “communist.” Even if the President was an ultra-liberal, national socialist, Unitarian Muslim (reformed), communist libertarian botanist, he would still be eligible if he were born in this country. Who his father was is even less important to eligibility (or, for that matter, it does not define who he is).
American is a society of individuals not a heredity society. We are exceptional, in part, because you are defined not by your ancestors but solely upon you as an individual and the work you do. Our liberty gives us the ability to move beyond our “station” in life. This is one of the true gifts of American and, it would appear, that Rambo and Sally do not care for this freedom, at least for others.
What Obama believes and what his father may have believed is irrelevant to eligibility. Whether or not a communist or capitalist were to be elected President is entirely the choice of the voters and the Electoral College.
The quote you quoted wasn’t by me, but by Sally Hill.
In 2006, Barack and Michelle Obama were in Kenya as part of an AIDS prevention campaign. Odinga spoke at an event where Obama also appeared.
http://www.factcheck.org/2008/09/corsis-dull-hatchet/
It took me 5 minutes to find this out. Did you not get a Google on your computer? What is your excuse?
How much time do you have? 🙂
SallyHill: “Other than that, I don’t waste my time here because I’m not into being attacked, called names and told that I’m a liar when I’ve told not a single lie at this blog.”
Here is a lie told by SallyHill just before the quote above: “(even when Obama’s lawyer admits it was a forgery) ”
Birthers even lie about lying…
How did I miss that? Oh, yes, I start reading it after a while. Non-NBC President, blah, blah birther nonsense, foreign father, blah blah birther nonsense, hates America, more birther crapola…..
Agreed. Loads of baseless allegations and rumors. Same song, nth verse.
well if she had made such an admission, it might be interesting. Since she didn’t (ask Mr Apuzzo, who was after all there in court, if you don’t believe me) the question does not even arise.
Why do birthers lie so often?
Here is a good example of what Sally Hill is referring to, and what I previously stated about Dr. Conspiracy and his flock as having the style of Hitler & Goebbels.
No where have I smeared or lied about Kierkegaard or Sartre. Instead, if anyone truly understood the term “not a one trick pony” they’d know it’s a compliment, meaning not confined to one area. Only thing I did, in response to Dr. Conspiracy’s comments, was take “a guess” as to why the writings of the 2 mentioned philosphers was used. That guess was partly based on something I was researching several years ago connected to John Dewey & associates.
Sally Hill: “One posts an idea and all the cronies jump on it and agree and slap each other on the back. It’s just the way it is.”
Exactly. It doesn’t matter how many of yas join in on repeating a lie or smear it still doesn’t make it the truth. People possessed of common sense & intelligence understand that.
I’m sure the military would be laughing at Linda seeing her create a “strawman” so she can play to the group think with her lie.
Through my own experience in debating them, Liberals in general have become the enemy of limited government, and have forgotten [whether deliberate or not] the lessons of history on Big Government.
That’s all right. Conservatives have forgotten the lessons of history on Big Business.
Every Blog sites needs someone to provide the humor to keep the intellectually inclined from getting to serious. Dr. conspiracy found his in bob j.
Bob j operates on a different level. The topic of the thread is “Investigating Ancestors”. The 1st poster, JD Reed, set the tone with a challenge regarding Obama Sr. to which I replied. Even though the Obots are having temper tantrums over it it still was an honest response to the challenge by providing the facts that have been accumulated through investigations and interviews.
Rather than bob j asking me an off topic question for this thread he should be asking Dr. Conspiracy what was his intent for starting a thread with the topic “Investigating Ancestors”.
Yes, Virginia, it’s true. Some people are so ignorant that they’re incapable of understanding they’re ignorant.
I don’t disagee. Big Business with its special interest lobby & palm greasing is a major contributor to causing Big Government. Confining that to only Conservatives is misleading. Had you said 2nd term Bush & the Republicans I’m more inclined to agree with you.
Lets hope the coming Romney Presidency will be a change from the recent past. ~grin~
You keep forgetting to include the most important part.
Is it a struggle to keep making crap up?
You’ve already admitted you don’t have a clue.
FIFY.
I have no idea what you are trying to say and I do not know what you are claiming I lied about. You made statements about Obama’s mother and her education, that she studied Sartre and her high school was pro-Marx. The implication being that was not a proper upbringing for a US president.
I went to a DODDS high school in Europe and we studied Sartre. By your own “reasoning”, that would make the children and grandchildren of US servicemen in Europe unfit for the presidency. Just saying.
The way I see it, things work best when opposing interests are well balanced. Business will inevitably aggregate and become big, and when it does, it forms monopolies. Consumers individually don’t have the power to confront monopolies. This is why Big Government has to exist to the extent that it can level the playing field. Leveling the playing field is a Big Subject (and one that’s off topic here).
Try reading what you wrote again.
Your outrageous lie: I am sure my father and the rest of the military community would be shocked and dismayed to learn that a DoDDS education could disqualify their children and grandchildren from the presidency.
What you apparently don’t understand is the majority of what I stated is over 50+ year old facts, available through FOIA and school records. Also, you didn’t comprehend [purposely or not] that board member Stenhouse testified before Congress in the ’50s that he was a former member of CPUSA, and had marxists on the school staff. 2 marxist teachers were teaching the students a leftist curriculum that included the subjects listed.
More recently there has been investigations, and interviews with people that knew Stanley Ann that described her character.
And you still can’t answer a simple question. Why? Or is that too simple a question?
You are funny Ramb0, and yet you still are unable ( or unwilling) to answer questions.
FYI: to is not the same as too. Type less, read more. Jackanapes
Your saying so doesn’t make it so. I suggest that you provided some sources or be prepared to have the rest of your comments deleted.
. . . “again, that is a guess on my part.”
C’mon Hambo, you keep leaving the best part out.
It won’t happen. Here’s why, NSFW:
http://www.dogsagainstromney.com/2012/05/ballad-of-seamus-romney-music-video.html?tw_p=twt
What you do not seem to understand is I did not comment on the veracity of what you said about SAD, only its relevance and the implications you make. You said SAD was greatly influenced by left-wing and communist teachers, who (gasp!) had students read Sartre. You seem to be making the giant leap that what his mother’s beliefs or what she studied in high school somehow affects Obama’s eligibility/fitness for the presidency.
What I am trying to make you understand is that DODDS also taught Sartre, and that if Obama’s mother studying him in high school makes Obama less fit, it would also make the dependents of US servicemen (at least those attending DODDS-Eur) likewise affected. Get it? No lie, much less an outrageous one.
I hope that clarifies it for you. You are welcome.
Thank you for illustrating that birthers in general, are semi-literate.
You show me a conservative, and I’ll show you a fascist theocrat.
When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag, and carrying a cross. – Sinclair Lewis
The citizens of Russia do not speak German, because of Lev Bronstein, AKA Leon Trotsky.
Socialism needs democracy like the human body needs oxygen. – Leon Trotsky
Like Newt Gingrich, Rush Limbaugh and Bob Livingston?
I’m an atheist, as was ben Gurion and Einstein.
So where was this god in Auschwitz? Where was this god at slave auctions, when children were sold from their parents?
One can only speculate whether Rambo Ike didn’t understand what you said, or whether he deliberately misrepresented it. In any case, I don’t anybody else was confused by you or misled by him.
Thanks, Doc.
Of course that isn’t true, as numerous other posts have demonstrated. You have implied that if one’s mother studied them, that should disqualify one from being President. That is prima facie absurd and beneath further discourse, other than to note that with Mother’s Day so recently past, it seems to me that smearing someone’s deceased mother is not only abhorrent, but likely politically counterproductive. Do you seriously think that votes will turn on the curriculum of Barack Obama’s mother’s high school?
SAD’s teacher apparently taught more than Sartre and Kierkegaard:
Atlas Shrugged? Darn that commie training.
In honesty, it looks like the teachers were focused on getting the students to question, everything. This was probably quite progressive in the Eisenhower years.
On a side note, it would appear I stumbled onto Rambo’s source.
Update: I may have stumbled on the source of Rambo’s source. I seen many Freep and other sites who quote the philosopher sections after the original article in the Tribune.
Society for Humanistic Judaism – http://www.shj.org/
The kibbutzim are pure communism. I know; I’ve lived there. Many of my Jesuit professors belonged to the Catholic peace movement. One Jesuit professor used the Berigan Brothers as examples in his lectures.
“The Communist Manifesto” and “Mein Kampf” are sold by Amazon. It’s called the 1st Amendment. Look into it.
Thank God for allowing free choice. But her son, appears to have found his religion. So why do we really care?
Ramb0 Ike doesn’t seem to understand how to properly structure a “Yo Momma” joke.
While searching for a youtube or something to explain it to him, or maybe a bit of classic film where someone take offense to a mention of his mother during an argument, oddly enough all I could come up with is this:
“Don’t Talk About My Mama!” and Other Problems With Black Intellectual Rhetoric
Seems to be a rather intellectual response that would go right over Ramb0’s head, but I liked it anyway.
But not in Germany.
Deep within the archives of the RAMBO REVIEW, your one-stop source for the TRUTH, I’ve found the material you requested.
http://www.archive.org/stream/investigationofc255unit/investigationofc255unit_djvu.txt
You’ll notice at the top John Stenhouse, who at the time was chairman of the Mercer Island high school board, is on the list with those subpoenaed to give testimony. Just past 1/2 way down starts his testimony. A couple highlights: Stenhouse admits to being a long time “card-carrying” member of CPUSA, and a registered democrat voter.
Here’s one from another source with numerous links [Newspapers & Time Mag] that will provide additional info on the subject matter:
http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/10/barack_obama_red_diaper_baby_1.html
You fundamentally misrepresent the testimony.
1) Stenhouse was not a “long time card-carrying member. In fact he had a card only for a short time including parts of two years. He attended something like 4 meetings in Los Angeles.
2) When he was in Washington DC, he was not a card-carrying member, and attended a maximum of 5 discussion group meetings.
3) He testified that Marxism was not discussed at the meetings
4) It is clear that his last contact with communists was 10 years before the testimony you cite.
When Stenhouse had a CPUSA card, it was during WW II when the US and the Soviet Union were allies.
There is nothing about Mercer Island in the testimony.
The American Thinker blog is not a source.
Personally, I found the following excerpt to be more relevant:
Mr. Tavenner. How long did you remain a member of that group or
attend meetings of that group ?
Mr. Stexhouse. Well, that is the question that you asked before,
and, as I told you, I find it very difficult to pinpoint the time. I think
I can limit it to somewhere near the end of 1945 because of the
fact that I didn’t get there until June and I had the operation, and
then my family came out, and we were preoccupied with getting
into a house and things of that sort. And I think it was — I was out
of it by the early part of 1947.
Mr. Tavenner. So that you continued until the early part of
1947? ‘
Mr. Stenhouse. Well, I say it was somewhere in that area. And
I can’t remember.
Mr. Tavenner. Will you tell the committee, please, the circum-
stances under which you stopped attending these meetings?
]\Ir. Stenhouse. Well, the Communist publications that we were
studying seemed to be overready to excuse the Soviet Union and
criticize our country, and this didn’t jibe with the ideas that I had had
about the situation during the war. And I just stopped going and
nobody ever tried to get me back in or approached me in any way.
It helps to actually read primary documents, before you attempt to explain them to others. This is just another example of your lack of basic reading comprehension.
You call me ignorant, and you are correct in regards to a great many subjects; but at least my ignorance is not willful.
Gail Collins’ 44th or 45th time: “The new sensation of dancing dogs on TV talent shows and how many of them do you think were ever made to ride on the roof of a car?”
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/19/opinion/collins-its-their-party.html
Ouch… But other than that…
Sounds like she had found a perfectly adequate answer to that question, for herself. Why shouldn’t everyone ask the question? “Unexamined life”, and all that…
You know, I’m not sure which country Bimbo Ike hails from but here, in the USA there is this whole concept that the (putative and irrelevant non) sins of the father (or mother) are not visited on the child.
You do know that school board positions are elected positions and are not usually involved in the day to day operations (they hire a superintendent for that).
He also has difficulty with various concepts such as freedom. He might want a refresher on amendments 1, 4, 5, 6 (along with the rest of the Constitution).
I would guess that he never bothered to read it.
It is clear from the testimony that Stenhouse attended his first meeting with Communists late in 1943 and he had become disillusioned and stopped attending meetings early in 1947. In that respect he was similar to Communists and Communist sympathizers such as Whittaker Chambers, John Chamberlain and John Dos Passos, who in spite of their beliefs ended up writing for William F. Buckley’s National Review – although those men were Communists or sympathizers far longer than Stenhouse.
Incidentally, John Stenhouse died in Kirkland, Washington in 2000, ten days shy of his 92nd birthday.
This is sensitive material for a blog site dedicated to supporting Obama, and I understand it’s his mother. I’m not presenting dirt, and I’m staying within the boundry of what the topic is. I’m somewhat surprised that you allowed it, and I commend you for it. I expect everyone here to battle tooth and nail against anything I post that supporters could perceived as something negative connected to Obama, even down to pointing out my improper use of the word “to”. If anyone here agreed with me, you could easily knock me over with a feather, and it would send shock waves through the mental image [profile] I’ve formed about the Obama supporters here.
I find the American Thinker article very relevant to helping get a better understanding of Stanley Ann’s beliefs, and likewise for Stenhouse.
We can split hairs over what I’m misrepresenting, but there can be no denial that Stenhouse was a member of the CPUSA, and was for some time a dues paying card carrier. Are we defining time the same? Do you consider a 3 to 4 year poster here “long time”?
I’m sure you noticed the bouts of temporary amnesia Stenhouse developed when asked to describe a particular person, place or thing. Expected? Sure, he definitely not going to convict himself, and he had counsel there advising him.
Because he didn’t attend anymore meetings doesn’t mean he changed his beliefs. HUAC scared many into putting as much distance as possible between themselves and the communist party, and especially if you were in the public service sector.
Why would they discuss Marxism at a meeting? The literature served the purpose for indoctrination into the philosphy and learning the tenets. The meetings were to discuss topics & find solutions from the marxist perspective.
His last contact with the communist party might have been 10 years before he gave his testimony, but he had marxists around him on Mercer Island, both at school and probably as the president of the church the Dunhams attended. It was known as “The Little Red Church on the Hill” with a marxist theology. Did you read Stenhouse’s Obit in the American Thinker article?
To call someone who was a card-carrying member of the communist party for some time more than 0 and less than 2 years a “long time” card carrying member is simple misrepresentation. I’m not splitting hairs to make such a criticism. Why don’t you just own up to misrepresenting the testimony, embellishing it, exaggerating it, whatever you want to call it. You were materially wrong and there is no reasonable interpretation of your remark that is consistent with the facts.
What you are doing is to make things sound worse than they are, and I have no patience with that. I hold such things in utter contempt.
Many good patriotic Americans were ruined by HUAC. I consider it one of the most shameful episodes in American history, alongside the internment of Japanese Americans a few years before.
You are saying Stenhouse must be guilty of things that he didn’t say, and that no one said in the testimony, presumably because it suits your world view. That is guilty until proven innocent, something worth of a Communist show trial, not justice in the United States.
You say “bouts of temporary amnesia” but this is just your imagination running ahead of the facts to suit your own prejudices. I assure you, when I move to another place, I forget names like crazy, and not just people I only saw 4-5 times.
Finally you say that Stenhouse may not have changed his beliefs, only there’s no evidence in the testimony what his beliefs are. All he said is that he supported the war effort, and improved productivity in his labor union. Your imagination is supplying the details.
Maybe a larger context would help:
Sounds like they had an interest in knowing about and helping the people of the world. Rambo’s response reminds me of those so-called “Christians” who claim to love God but hate God’s creation.
Yes, it helps quite a lot. Nothing like a little light to scatter the darkness.
But they do work on influencing the curriculum. Whether that is good or bad I will leave to the reader to decide. Just consider the current efforts to destroy American science by destroying science education, not to mention the destruction of public education completely.
Only this site is not “dedicated to supporting Obama”, many of the posters here and absolutely not Obama supporters. This site is dedicated to debunking lies about Obama’s eligibility for the Presidency. Thinking people are capable of distinguishing between opposition to policies and character assassination.
Dunham’s education background doesn’t have anything to do with whether he is eligible to hold the office of the President. It doesn’t really have anything to do with his electability. It may have influenced his outlook on life in exactly the same way as any other son is influenced by his mother.
Finally, even if Dunham were a wild-eyed, radical, bomb throwing, communist, Soviet spy, there is a seldom referenced provision in the Constitution (ever heard of that? You might try reading it sometime) which says
(Article 3 Section 3 Paragraph 2).
“Corruption of blood” means that the family line is cursed by the sins of the parent. In other words, one person’s crimes, no matter how heinous, including even treason, a crime so heinous that it is the only one defined in the Constitution (ever heard of that? You might try reading it sometime) cannot be punished by punishing the criminals children.
No matter what thought crime you think Sally Ann Dunham was guilty of, it is nothing to do with Obama beyond the normal Mother/Child relationship that we all have. And we all take different things away from our own Mother/Child relationship.
My grandmother was a J. H. Kellogg’s follower and I was probably named after his brother W. Keith Kellogg. On the other hand my mother wouldn’t have Kellogg’s products in the house. Relationships are complicated.
I seriously doubt any birther is even remotely capable of comprehending that.
Roy Cohen and Andrew Breitbart were shondes. They both made careers out of destroying the careers of others. They will not be missed.
Good. So am I, as were ben Gurion and Einstein to name just two.
There is a scientific explanation for everything.
The Children Of Nazi Leaders – 60 Minutes:
Morley Safer reports on the children of Nazi leaders, living in the shadow of the sins of their fathers.
http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=2512321n
Not everyone is a supporter of the President. If you would actually post something substantial, showing that he is ineligible to the office of the Presidency, I would be happy to agree.
The question is not; should he be President. The question is; can he be President.
Why don’t you understand that?
Stenhouse made it clear in his testimony that when he was first contacted by HUAC he told them that he didn’t remember names from a decade earlier but that if they showed him a list of names that they were interested in he would tell them if he recognized any of them.
Mr, Tavenner. I believe I told you that we would try to present
you with a list of persons who had been identified in the Los Angeles
area as members of the Communist Party, but we do not have that
list with us, and we are unable to present it to you now. We may do
so later in an effort to refresh your recollection.
Mr. Stenhouse. I am willing at any time to tell you if any particu-
lar individual in my recollection was at those meetings.
and later
Mr.’ Stenhouse. I just wanted to refer once more to this matter of
remembering the names. There were not more than 5 of these meet-
ings. They occurred in a context where I was discussing the same sort
of subjects in many different groups with many different individuals
with many different points of view. As I said before, I cannot re-
member the names of people with whom I was in daily contact at that
time.
I have moved out of that part of the country. I have very few asso-
ciations with it. It is entirely impossible for me to drag names out of
the air.
If the committee or its staff will be able to submit names to me I
will do my best to say whether or not I can remember those people.
Mr. Moulder. That is the purpose of continuing in force and ejffect
your subpena. And you are now temporarily excused as a witness.
As far as I can determine, the Committee never provided Stenhouse with a list of names and he was never called back to give more testimony.
When you try to insult the intelligence of someone, at least do it correctly. My pointing out your mistake had nothing to do with this discussion, and I do apologize for going off topic.
Mussolini’s daughter is a politician in Italy.
Oh, and I last time I checked the American Constitution doesn’t apply in Germany. They have their own problems to worry about.
– “Rabbi, does heaven exist?”
– “Who knows? We have enough to worry about right here.”
My post reads more harshly than I intended. I remember that 60 Minutes episode from years ago. It is really hard to imagine the effect that the knowledge of their parents actions would have on them. It is remarkable that they have coped as well as they have.
What I meant was that the US Constitution can’t prevent children having psychological issues from the acts of their parents. Only that those kids cannot be ‘thrown in jail’ or deemed ineligible for the Presidency due to the acts of their parents. Neither SAD’s education nor her personal political beliefs have anything what-so-ever to do with Obama’s eligibility, period.
And another, oh yeah…
The Rabbi is a wise man.
I guess that would mean no Corn Flakes tour while growing up.
Hear, hear.
He can be president as long as he can see Russia from here.
I’ll say it again; I’m not deliberately misrepresenting or lying about anything. I don’t do that.
On reading it again, though Stenhouse is vague with his answers, it shows he was a member of the communist party somewhere between 3 to 4 years. I have no idea how you got 0 to 2 years. It also shows he got a card in the beginning so he didn’t need to get another one when he was asked later. It looks like buying the literature covered the dues, at least for the DC area. If there is something there other than what I just stated then I’m not seeing it.
The bigger problem is what I was originally pointing out in the 1st post on Stanley Ann got moved to at least 8 years prior to Stenhouse’s communist party membership. It’s not about his time as a communist party member. That’s not why he was called to testify. The transcript points out it’s about communist activity [not party] in the Seattle area. Those on the list are from that area.
That is nonsense. A membership card is good for as long as you pay dues, and he specifically said he didn’t get a card in DC.
In the testimony he says:
That’s where I got the 0-2 years from.
Later he attended not more than 5 meetings after moving to DC:
I was always taught that it was the Communists who criminalized thought and punished discussing the wrong topics with the wrong people. You write like a good communist.
Do you remember what he said the card looked like?
What kind of citizen was he?
“I’ll say it again; I’m not deliberately misrepresenting or lying about anything. I don’t do that.”
[smh]
And how many questions were asked about Communist/Marxist indoctrination in the public schools in the Seattle area?
I’ll help you out. Zero.
One would think that HUAC would have been all over it if high school students in the Seattle area were being indoctrinated with Communist/Marxist ideas. Is there any record of HUAC ever investigating what was being taught in the Mercer Island school district?
Your entire point in bringing up Stenhouse is to argue that Stanley Ann Dunham was fed far-left ideas in high school, which turned her into a Communist/Marxist/Socialist, and she in turn passed those values along to her son. The problem is that your argument is all innuendo and evidence-free. To be precise:
1. There is no evidence that Stenhouse had any involvement with CPUSA after he severed his ties early in 1947. His uncontradicted testimony was that while a member of CPUSA his involvement was limited.
2. There is no evidence that Stenhouse played a significant role in developing the curriculum at Mercer Island High School. Indeed, since it is a public school I would expect that the school’s core curriculum is dictated by the State of Washington.
3. The educational philosophy which you seem to espouse is that students should not be exposed to a wide range of ideas, and especially not to controversial ideas. Sadly, your approach is typical of the anti-intellectualism which has taken over the Republican Party.
You also seem to assume that whatever a student is taught in school and whatever a child is taught by parents inevitably controls his or her values as an adult. That, of course, is nonsense.
When you come home from a long day of burning books, do you ask your mommy to check under your bed for commies?
Not only that, but I don’t even know what a ‘Corn Flakes tour’ is.
We did have Post’s Corn Flakes, but we were more into Wheaties than Corn Flakes. But Cherio’s, Shreaded Wheat, and Grape Nuts were more likely to be found in our house than flakes of any kind.
I think you got that bass ackwards, didn’t you?
I was under the impression that ‘card carrying Communist’ was nothing more than a canard.
I don’t think the CP actually issued membership cards. What for? Discounts at the local underground bookshop?
Is there any actual evidence that the CP issued cards, other than McCarthy’s rhetoric in the HUAC?
That is something I never have to worry about. We’re Commie-Proofed. Every room has a Christian symbol.
Commies are phobic to them and break out in panic attacks when they see them.
I tend to agree with you. Many in their ranks were subversives carrying out acts of espionage. If they did get cards it would be highly unlikely there would be anything on it that would out them.
This is a no-brainer, why do people keep asking this?
One 2 letter word handles it for both questions. ~grin~
I did a Google Images searches on “CPUSA membership card” and came up empty.
~Not control, but instead, depending on the circumstances, can have a high or low degree of influence.
From the testimony that Rambo Ike linked to: (Thank-you for providing a decent link.)
Mr. Moulder. Do you know whether you were a Communist at
that time?
Mr. Stenhouse. Well, to be frank about it, I believe I signed a
Communist Party card at some time.
I have a vague recollection of a card which had an American flag
on it and some very patriotic phraseology about the war effort and
the alliance between our country and the Soviet Union. It may have
even had some words about the Communist Party on it. But it seemed
to me entirely innocuous. In fact, again it appeared to be directed
to the things I was interested in, in the war effort.
Mr. Moulder. Did you pay dues to the Communist Party after
signing the Communist Party card ?
Mr. Stenhouse. I believe there was some sort of dues structure,
but I don’t remember now how it worked. There were these materials
for sale at the meetings, and money changed hands. I don’t remember
now how much of it was for books, how much of it was for dues.
Sorry Doc, I didn’t mean to include your quote. The above is Mr. Stenhouse talking about his time in L.A, during the war.
Keith: No, I asked the questions I wanted.
Rambo: For the second question, what is your proof?
If this is too off this topic, could Rambo answer in the open thread?.
Si! Es Verdad!
From the Constitution of the Communist Party of America (1919)
So what I’m getting here is that the card he signed here is an application form which would be lodged with the party, not a membership form that he carries around in his wallet.
I just can’t see why there would have been a need for a personal membership card. The idea of a ‘card carrying Communist’ is silly. The epithet ‘Endorsed Communist Party Branch Member’ would make sense, but not ‘card carrying Communist’.