Skip to comments.The Cult of Soros
Posted on 08/25/2006 6:52:08 PM PDT by 13Sisters76
The Cult of Soros By David Horowitz and Richard Poe FrontPageMagazine.com | August 25, 2006
Has the Democratic Party become a cult? And is leftwing billionaire George Soros its guru? The chorus of hosannas with which leftwing bloggers now greet Mr. Soros silliest utterances and the faithfulness with which Democratic leaders repeat them -- suggests that the answer to both questions is yes.
Take the current Democratic mantra that, if there are terrorists in the world, George Bush has created them. This is a familiar Soros-ism. As he has done many times before, Soros decried Bushs characterization of the current global conflict as a war on terror in a Wall Street Journal op-ed titled A Self-Defeating War (8/15). According to Soros a misleading figure of speech applied literally has unleashed a real war fought on several fronts -- Iraq, Gaza, Lebanon, Afghanistan, Somalia -- a war that has killed thousands of innocent civilians and enraged millions around the world .we can escape it only if we Americans repudiate the war on terror as a false metaphor.
In normal times and coming from an ordinary mortal, these would be regarded as the comments of a crackpot. After all, the Islamic jihad was on the march and killing Americans -- for twenty years before George Bush employed the metaphor. Back in 1979, the streets of Teheran were already filled with a million frenzied Muslims chanting Death to America, and the 9/11 attacks were themselves hardly in response to anything that the American president had said.
But because this judgment is the considered wisdom of a megalomaniac billionaire whose network controls the purse strings of the Democratic Party, this is now the foreign policy of the liberal opposition. When George Soros speaks, the left listens.
In a review of Soros new book The Age of Fallibility, blogger Jane Hamsher hails him as a latter-day Socrates. Hamsher is the blogger who created a minor scandal by posting a doctored photograph of Joseph Lieberman in blackface on the Huffington Post website. She writes, Challenging a false metaphor such as the war on terror is so threatening to everything the power structure of the Bush administration has been erected upon that to do so will certainly draw down the full force of the right-wing bullies Mr. Soros has done the heavy lifting and dragged the topic into the national debate
Blogger Matt Stoller of MyDD concurs. [This is] the first time a major figure took on the framework of the war on terror, and called it a false metaphor. I think hes right The war on terror just doesn't exist any more than a child's imaginary friend exists.
Like Hamsher, Matt Stoller was a leading player in the anti-Lieberman blogswarm. A long-time Democrat operative, Stoller formerly ran the Corzine Connection blog for Jon Corzines gubernatorial campaign in New Jersey. Today Stoller co-directs BlogPAC, a political action committee for leftist bloggers founded by Markos Moulitsas Zuñiga of Daily Kos.
Their connection to the anti-Lieberman campaign is, as the Marxists like to say, no accident. The Lieberman ouster and Soross role in it signify the emergence of a new phenomenon in Americas political life: the Shadow Party.
During the 2004 election cycle, Soros put together a network of organizations through which he gained effective control of the Democratic Partys campaign apparatus and thus of the Democratic Party itself in a silent coup whose ramifications are still unfolding.
Soross coup was ten years in the making. Since 1994, he had worked with a network of leftwing foundations to fund a $140-million-dollar lobbying drive in favor of campaign finance reform. The campaign succeeded in passing the McCain-Feingold Act, which, by outlawing soft-money donations, in effect de-funded the Democratic Party. As a result of the Act, the Democratic Party could no longer collect the multi-million-dollar donations from labor unions which were its lifeblood.
Soros stepped in with the Shadow Party to collect the donations instead.
Having driven the Democratic Party to the brink of bankruptcy, Soros then offered to save it. In effect, he privatized the Party, by setting up a network of privately-owned, non-profit groups which would raise the big campaign contributions the Party was now forbidden to raise itself.
In a new book, which describes Soross achievement, we call this network the Shadow Party, because it acts as a mirror image or shadow of the real Democratic Party. During the 2004 election cycle, the Shadow Party raised more than $300 million for the Democrat cause but spent the money itself. This allowed it to shape the politics of the Democratic campaign and control the partys future. Joe Lieberman now understands what that means.
David Horowitz and Richard Poe co-wrote The Shadow Party: How George Soros, Hillary Clinton and Sixties Radicals Siezed Control of the Democratic Party (Thomas Nelson, 2006)
This is really as ridiculous as the left's take on Karl Rove.
The days of a rich guy manipulating the world are over. There are hundreds of billionaires, and the top 10% of the general population has much more total money than even they do, not to mention hundreds of times more writers and reasoners.
What happens nowadays is due to the actions of thousands and millions of people at the top of society. Soros can say and believe anything he wants, but if no one buys it his money won't help.
Obviously, some people in the upper-class ruling group who do believe what he says, but they would probably think that even if he didn't exist.
So what? Which is more dangerous--one man with an Idea and the cash equivalent of the resources of millions of people, or many people with many ideas?
You're ignoring the power of Soros' ability to focus, and not need the agreement of others. That 10% you mentioned don't behave as a bloc. Soros, one man, does.
So are the cult followers called Sorasses?
Bump for morning read over coffee.
Conspiracy theories have their place...over a bucket of beer and chicken wings.
Yes, because, afterall, liberalism is a religion, and their main ethos is nihilism.
That's not what Horowitz and Poe are contending.
Instead, they assert that Soros is trying to manipulate a single political party, by having gained control of its funding.
Such an act is well within Soros' means and not inconsistent with Democrat motivations; the party would readily sell its soul for a return to power.
In sum, Horowitz and Poe appear to be correct.
The IRS should investigate george Soros and IMO they would have him by the balls.
If Bubba Clinton were the subject of his attackes he would already be in jail.
"Such an act is well within Soros' means and not inconsistent with Democrat motivations; the party would readily sell its soul for a return to power.
Unfortunately for them, selling out to Soros would probably give a result similar to the McGovern campaign.
Of course, then someone would say that Soros is a Rove puppet.
What planet, exactly, do these folks come from?
Sorry, but you are wrong. This is so true of Soros.
Are you replying to post #2 or post #12?
Read the book and you will see the ties between Soros and other billionaires he has recruited, radical extremists, and Hillary Clinton. It is frightening and maddening at the same time.
Petro-Canada was a band-aid (and an opportunity to launch a liberal get rich quick scheme) to pacify Canada's anti-American Left, who were then protesting over American ownership of the country's oil companies.
Strong talked a good economic-nationalist game to pacify the Canadian left -- but unknown to the Canadian left, and public in general, Pertro Canada was also American owned, and Strong himself was the major reason why the public's oil company was U.S.-owned.
Ten years before, while in charge of Power Corporation, he had made it possible for Shell to take over the only remaining all-Canadian oil company- Petro Canada- by throwing a controlling block of shares in its direction.
After a couple of years, Strong left Petro-Canada for various business deals, including one with Adnan Khashoggi through which he ended up owning the 200,000-acre Baca religious ranch in Colorado, now a "New Age" center run by his wife, Hanne.
Ironically, this ranch also sits on one of the largest fresh water aquifers in the entire USA. Does anyone now wonder why no drilling is allowed anywhere near it?
In 1985, Strong was back as executive coordinator of the UN Office for Emergency Operations in Africa, in charge of running the $3.5-billion famine-relief effort in Somalia and Ethiopia. And in 1989, he was appointed Secretary General of the Earth Summit. Not bad for a guy who hadnever run for office, was never elected to one, and had never went to high school. Is anyone wondering why foriegn aid money never seems to do much? That's because it never gets to where we send it.
When a disasater happens, the UN's media pals go and stage a huge disaster, often filming a destroyed building from every possible angle, and have a Un puppet government plead for help, another giving generously, and is if by magic, Annan and Co. are rolling in $$$. Maurice makes it dissapear among his friends, like Soros.
Soros is also a usefull tool to the likes of the UN's "elite". It takes big money to collapse small countries economies, and soro big money to launder the aid money.
It is interesting to read Strong's 1972 Stockholm speech and compare it with the issues of Earth Summit 1992.
Strong warned urgently about global warming, the devastation of forests, the loss of biodiversity, polluted oceans, and the population time bomb.
Then as now, he invited to the conference the brand-new environmental NGOs. He gave them money to come; and they were invited to raise hell at home. After Stockholm, environment issues became part of the administrative framework in Canada, the U.S., Britain, and Europe.
IN the meantime, Strong continued building his international networking list- on which his influence rests.
He became a member of the World Commission on Environment and Development (the Brundtland Commission).
He found time to serve as president of the World Federation of United Nations Associations, on the executive committee of the Society for International Development, and as an advisor to the Rockefeller FoundationWorld Wildlife Fund. Above all, he served on the Commission on Global Governance -- which plays a crucial part in the international power grab.
Some of Strongs pals include:
- Al Gore. (Of course.) - former World Bank President James Wolfensohn, (formerly on the Rockefeller Foundation Board and on the Population Council Board; (Strong he was Al Gore's favored candidate for the World Bank position).
- James Gustave Speth, head of the Carter Administration's Council on Environmental Quality, crafter of the doomladen Global 2000 report, member of the Clinton - Gore transition team; he also lead the UN Development Program.
- Shridath Ramphal, formerly Secretary General of the (British) Commonwealth, Co-Chairman of the ,b>Commission on Global Governance.
- Jonathan Lash, President of the World Resources Institute -- which works closely with the World Bank, the UN Environment Program, and the UN Development Program -- and Co-Chairman of the President's Council on Sustainable Development.
- Ingvar Carlsson, former Swedish prime minister and Co-Chairman of the Commission on Global Governance.
The Cult of Soros then, is really the cult of Liberal elites, who selecte and not elected, through the UN and the many NGO's, want to rule the world and make people live as they see fit.
Fight this evil organization, and these horrible little Soros trolls than make it thrive.
For more see:
Sorry, but you are dead wrong. The Lberal elite control a lot of things, and as a group have the ability to do a lot of damage to the world.
Time to wake up and read up. Start with the rich guy I posted about. Read the article, then ask yourself again if people like this friend of Soros is powerless. They all belong to the same club.
This isn't some black helicopter/tinfoil conspiracy thing; no, this is a compilation, of sorts, of Soros' dealings and political dabbling for the last decade or so.
The article isn't discussing the top 10% of this nation's political denotations, but rather, Soros and a small band of fellow billionaires, whose sole purpose if control. Soros is a VERY focused man. Forget THE PRINCE and read up on Cardinal Richelieu, in France.
Yes, there are GOPer billionaires ( and in this case, millionaires just don't cut it !), but unlike the billionaires on the far left, the ones on our side aren't into forming a shadow government and never have been.
And it isn't just America, that Soros has meddled with! No, he has tried to meddle, sometimes successfully and sometimes not, in quite a number of nations' politics and economics.
This is hardly a conspiracy theory! Who do you think funds MoveON and Cindy Sheehan and Code Pink and so much of America's "peace" and anarchist groups?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.