Why Obama's Communist Connections Are Not Headlines

There's a lot of frustration among conservatives over how Barack Obama's radical past seems to be making no impact whatsoever among the American public. His connection to communists in particular, from communist-terrorists like Bill Ayers to the communist agitator-journalist Frank Marshall Davis to fellow travelers like Saul Alinsky, has simply failed to resonate beyond the political right. Quite the contrary, the more information that becomes available on Obama's radical associations, the more he seems to widen his lead over John McCain, a man who was tortured by communists in Vietnam.

I have seen for quite some time that although we won the Cold War -- and defeated the Soviet communist empire -- America is vulnerable to varying degrees of collectivism, wealth redistribution, "creeping socialism" (Ronald Reagan's phrase), class-warfare rhetoric, and generally milder, more palatable (but still dangerous) forms of disguised Marxism. Why? How? The answer is simple: The history and truth about communism is not taught by our educators.

That total failure to remind and understand means that Americans are painfully vulnerable to repeat mistakes that should have been forever tossed onto the ash-heap of history.

I've been teaching for many years in NYC Catholic and Public Schools. My public school colleagues are solidly liberal, but I've never seen marxist thought taught or even hinted at in the public schools I've been in.

Surprisingly my three years in a Catholic HS saw overt Marxist instruction on the part of three guys in the Soc St dept and five in the Religion Dept. This was back in the days of Reagan, El Salvador,Pershing Missiles etc. I was quite a bit more liberal back then but I called these folks on their blatant political indoctrination and was told that they were following Catholic Social Action and i should as well. Such a situation has never occured in my 22 years with the NYC schools. I've had plenty of arguments but for the most part the kids are left out of politics. These things may happen in other places but I've been in two schools and my wife inthree and that's been our experience.

Here is a comment left on the American Thinker website that deserves more attention-—

It makes sense to me to focus on Obama’s only “executive experience” while he was Chairman of the Board——

WE NEED TO CHANGE THE BILL AYERS ARGUMENT NOW.....The current approach to the Bill Ayers “connection” or “association” is a WEAK ARGUMENT at best on a country that is absolutely drunk on Obama’s Kool-Aid. In other words, the McCain Campaign and the GOP is taking the wrong approach to this. A MUCH MORE EFFECTIVE APPROACH EXISTS AND MUST BE EXECUTED BY BOTH THE GOP AND MCCAIN CAMPAIGNS. THERE IS A SMOKING GUN THAT IS SITTING RIGHT UNDER ALL OF OUR NOSES.

The smoking gun that will resonate with both undecided pure independents, conservative democrats and moderate republicans (where this race will be won or lost) is with the Bill Ayers issue, specifically the Chicago Anneberg Challenge. The current approach is to call Obama on his lie that Ayers was just a “guy that lives in his neighborhood”....we all know the rest of the story. Although this resonates with we conservatives, it has been and will continue to be rebuked by Obama and he can just point to it being a right wing conspiracy theory or smear campaign...this argument is going on deaf ears of the masses that are inebriated on Obama KooAid.

HOWEVER THERE IS NO, ABSOLUTELY NO REBUKING AN ARGUMENT BASED ON FACTS THAT WILL CALL INTO QUESTION “WHAT OBAMA WILL DO” WITH THE MASSIVE FEDERAL EDUCATION BUDGET. Here’s how the McCain Campaign and GOP ads should go......Throw out all arguments relating to the amount of time and meetings Ayers and Obama spent together.

The ad should then talk about “Walter Annenberg’s foundation offering several hundred million dollars to American public schools in the mid-’90s, and William Ayers appling for $50 million for Chicago. The purpose of his application was to secure funds to “raise political consciousness” in Chicago’s public schools. After he won the grant, Ayers’s group (NOT AYERS HIMSELF....Obama keeps pointing to this fact and it should be irrelevant in the context of this argument anyway) chose Barack Obama to distribute the money, as the Chairman of the Board.

It should highlight that this was actual executive experience that Obama has chosen to avoid highlighting. WHY WOULD OBAMA PURPOSELY HIDE ACTUAL EXECUTIVE EXPERIENCE.....UNLESS HE HAD SOMETHING TO HIDE. HERE’S WHY AND WHAT HE HAD TO HIDE: Between 1995 and 1999, Obama distributed the $50 million and raised another $60 million from other civic groups to augment it. In doing so, he was following Ayers’s admonition (regardless of Ayers continued involvement) to grant the funds to “external” organizations, like American Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN) to pair with schools and conduct programs to radicalize the students and politicize them.

Regardless of the fact that Ayers played a lesser role after the founding in 1995, Barack Obama carried out Ayers vision throughout the entire tenure of his involvement (i.e. pumping money into left wing groups to “radicalize students.”) THIS IS WHAT OBAMA WAS HIDING......IS THIS THE TYPE OF EXPENDITURES AMERICA WANTS TO SEE IN THE FEDERAL EDUCATION APPROPRIATIONS IN AN OBAMA ADMINISTRATION?

We need to stop talking about his not being able to lead and start talking about his vision for change’s being the WRONG KIND OF CHANGE. THE INEBRIATED OBAMA DISCIPLES NEED TO BE CAREFUL WHAT THEY ARE ASKING FOR....THEY JUST MIGHT GET IT.....AND THEY NEED TO QUESTION THIS. If they start to question why Obama purposely hid actual executive experience, they will start to question his BS arguments about deregulation causing the current financial crisis, etc. etc. etc.

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.