American Thinker: Archives prove Obama was a New Party member (Story is growing legs!!!)

American Thinker ^

[GOPinCa]

Archives prove Obama was a New Party member Thomas Lifson Another piece in the puzzle of Barack Obama has been revealed, greatly strengthening the picture of a man groomed by an older generation of radical leftists for insertion into the American political process, trading on good looks, brains, educational pedigree, and the desire of the vast majority of the voting public to right the historical racial wrongs of the land.

The New Party was a radical left organization, established in 1992, to amalgamate far left groups and push the United States into socialism by forcing the Democratic Party to the left. It was an attempt to regroup the forces on the left in a new strategy to take power, burrowing from within. The party only lasted until 1998, when its strategy of "fusion" failed to withstand a Supreme Court ruling, but after, but the membership, including Barack Obama, continued to move the Democrats leftward with spectacular success.

[GOPinCa]

This is the full text:

October 08, 2008
Archives prove Obama was a New Party member
Thomas Lifson
Another piece in the puzzle of Barack Obama has been revealed, greatly strengthening the picture of a man groomed by an older generation of radical leftists for insertion into the American political process, trading on good looks, brains, educational pedigree, and the desire of the vast majority of the voting public to right the historical racial wrongs of the land.

The New Party was a radical left organization, established in 1992, to amalgamate far left groups and push the United States into socialism by forcing the Democratic Party to the left. It was an attempt to regroup the forces on the left in a new strategy to take power, burrowing from within. The party only lasted until 1998, when its strategy of “fusion” failed to withstand a Supreme Court ruling, but after, but the membership, including Barack Obama, continued to move the Democrats leftward with spectacular success.

Erick Erickson, editor of RedState, explained fusion in a Human Events article:

Fusion is a pretty simple concept. A candidate could run as both a Democrat and a New Party member to signal the candidate was, in fact, a left-leaning candidate, or at least not a center-left DLC type candidate. If the candidate — let’s call him Barack Obama — received only 500 votes in the Democratic Party against another candidate who received 1000 votes, Obama would clearly not be the nominee. But, if Obama also received 600 votes from the New Party, Obama’s New Party votes and Democratic votes would be fused. He would be the Democratic nominee with 1100 votes.

The fusion idea set off a number of third parties, but the New Party was probably the most successful. A March 22, 1998 In These Times article by John Nichols showed just how successful. “After six years, the party has built what is arguably the most sophisticated left-leaning political operation the country has seen since the decline of the Farmer-Labor, Progressive and Non-Partisan League groupings of the early part of the century .... In 1996, it helped Chicago’s Danny Davis, a New Party member, win a Democratic congressional primary, thereby assuring his election in the majority-black district .... The threat of losing New Party support, or of the New Party running its own candidates against conservative Democrats, would begin a process of forcing the political process to the left, [Joel] Rogers argued.”

Fusion, fortunately for the country, died in 1997. William Rehnquist, writing for a 6-3 Supreme Court, found the concept was not a protected constitutional right. It was two years too late to stop Obama.

J. Brown of Politically Drunk on Power has dug up multiple documentary sources (with hyperlinks) proving that Barack Obama was a member of the New Party, despite alleged attempts to cover up his tracks by scrubbing evidence. He or she deserves tremendous praise for doing this detective work.

Obama’s career bears many signs of being helped along by the radical left. At the critical moment when he entered electoral politics, he was part of a movement to take over an established political party and dirct it to the task of building a socialist America.

Hat tip: Rocco DiPippo

[Artemis Webb]

The natural reaction to this from the Obama campaign will be that it is just like “Sarah Palin belonging to the Alaskan Independence Party”. That “just because THAT group claimed she was a member does not make it so”.

I freely admit that I have not been following this story so if there is more proof that is not circumstantial I would be happy to see it. If there isn't I'm not sure that the claim that the story is “growing legs” is true outside of the blogosphere.

[Proud2BeRight]

The snowball is gaining mass and speed. This is fun. Sarah needs to mention it drag the mainstream socialist propaganda media kicking and screaming into the story.

[nufsed]

These stories are a real eye opener for me. I always looked at Chicago as corrupt and everyone having their hand in the till. I didn't know it was such a socialist strong hold.

From my readings this week, it would seem obvious that OB and Ayers are probably conspiring to change the entire direction of education in this country. And the NEA will probably support the changes.

Ayers may be a smart terrorist. He's played everyone in Chicago like a violinn.

[pieceofthepuzzle]

One of the most remarkable and troubling facts that is revealed here is that the Supremes voted 6-3 against this ‘fusion’ idea. Who were the 3 that voted for it and what the hell were they thinking? To me this is proof that the Supreme Court contains not just liberals, but actually contains radicals with pro-socialist leanings. Very scary.

[GOPinCa]

Here’s the thing, these are archived pages from 1995 and 1996, from the actual websites of the New Party and the Chicago Chapter of the Democratic Socialists of America Party. Before Obama was even elected to his first office. One link even states that he was present at a membership meeting of the New Party. Since they are long websites, just hit “Ctrl f” to find “Obama” and it will take you there. Appearantly, there is a lot more information besides these three links.

http://www.chicagodsa.org/ngarchive/ng42.html

http://www.chicagodsa.org/ngarchive/ng47.html

http://web.archive.org/web/20010306031216/www.newparty.org/up9610.html

[i_dont_chat]

Nobody has ever said that communists were dumb.

[sarasota]

“...the vast majority of the voting public to right the historical racial rights of the land.” Uh, “vast majority”? Did a poll tell him that??

[sarasota]

Someone posted that McCain/Sarah will be on Hannity tonight.

[sarasota]

Bingo!

[pieceofthepuzzle]

Thank you SO much for those links. This is absolutely amazing. So much for the ‘investigative reporting’ in this country. The media has proved itself to be incapable, or unwilling to protect the sanctity of the US.

Until now I've taken the ‘Manchurian Candidate’ comments with a grain of salt with little credence. This, to me, is irrefutable evidence that Obama is indeed at the very least a ‘stealth’ candidate.

[HawaiianGecko]

Since the title says the article proves Obama was a member of this party, doesn't it naturally follow that proof would be offered in that very article?

I see Obama's name dropped many times, but no documentation of his membership.

[landerwy]

From the DSA or New Party Website:

This has resulted in a winning ratio of 77 of 110 elections. Candidates must be approved via a NP political committee. Once approved, candidates must sign a contract with the NP. The contract mandates that they must have a visible and active relationship with the NP.

The political entourage included Alderman Michael Chandler, William Delgado, chief of staff for State Rep Miguel del Valle, and spokespersons for State Sen. Alice Palmer, Sonya Sanchez, chief of staff for State Sen. Jesse Garcia, who is running for State Rep in Garcia’s District; and Barack Obama, chief of staff for State Sen. Alice Palmer. Obama is running for Palmer’s vacant seat.

http://www.chicagodsa.org/ngarchive/ng42.html#anchor792932

http://www.chicagodsa.org/index.html

[GOPinCa]

Here is the documentation that, according to the New Party’s own websites in 1995 and 1996, Obama was a member and that he attended meetings of the party.

Just do a “ctrl f” search of “Obama” and read it for yourself.

http://www.chicagodsa.org/ngarchive/ng42.html

http://www.chicagodsa.org/ngarchive/ng47.html

http://web.archive.org/web/20010306031216/www.newparty.org/up9610.html

[landerwy]

Also this page tells a bit more about the contract Obama and others signed.

http://web.archive.org/web/20011214054258/www.greens.org/s-r/12/12-03.html

Chapters generally require endorsed candidates to sign a contract, with requirements that they be NP members, identify as such, support the NP principles and program, and work to build NP chapters.

[Chipper]

The link to Politically Drunk in the article has the pertinent info.

[visualops]

Snippets:

Candidates must be approved via a NP political committee. Once approved, candidates must sign a contract with the NP. The contract mandates that they must have a visible and active relationship with the NP.

Indeed it was an exciting evening because the NP has two crucial components. First, the NP is a true "Rainbow Coalition" consisting of both young and aged African-Americans, Hispanics and Caucasians. Although ACORN and SEIU Local 880 were the harbingers of the NP there was a strong presence of CoC and DSA (15% DSA). Moreover a good 8% were younger Generation X'ers who are critically needed. A more diverse representation of Labor is missing. Secondly, the NP is taking "action." Four political candidates were "there" seeking NP support. The NP is strategically organizing via house parties and tactically entering only elections that they can win. Furthermore they are organizing a campaign on the "Living Wage Ordinance" in the Chicago City Council.

In 1992, he was Director of Illinois Project Vote, a voter registration campaign that made Carol Moseley Braun's election to the U.S. Senate much easier than it would have been.

When Obama participated in a 1996 UofC YDS Townhall Meeting on Economic Insecurity, much of what he had to say was well within the mainstream of European social democracy.

Conclusion The reference to the New Deal was deliberate. To date in the presidential campaign the economic crisis into which we are entering has received little attention. At the Republican Convention neither Joe Lieberman nor Sarah Palin mentioned the economy in their speeches and McCain barely touched on it. I think, however, that will change over the remainder of the campaign. Whether it will change enough to insure John McCain's defeat I am not sure. But, with respect to Obama, it is useful to remember that FDR did not walk into the White Hose in 1933 with a program that resembled what we came to know as the New Deal but only with a commitment to help his fellow citizens. In fact, had he spelled out something that looked like the New Deal during the campaign, he might well not have been elected ­ and that was when the GDP had dropped by more than 10% and the unemployment rate was over 20%. It was the commitment to bettering the lives of other that drove what came next and in this campaign that is probably the best we can expect.

Financial Crisis: Thinking About the Real Socialist Way Out DSA member David Schweickart looks at how the current economic crisis offers opportunities for economic democracy: http://progressivesforobama.net/2008/09/25/thinking-about-the-real-socialist-way-out/

[GOPinCa]

Myself and others are doing this. And you can too. E-mail talk radio hosts, tell all your email contacts about this. There is a deliberate avoidance on reporting this. If the media can incorrectly report Sarah Palin’s involvment with the Alaska Indepedence Party they are clearly not interested in exposing Obama’s involvement with the New Party or the Democractic Socialist Party of America.

[Chode]