Friday, November 29, 2019


Former Harry Reid Staffer Jabs Buttigieg: ‘Sneaky Pete’ Only Got 8,500 Votes in His Last Election

Pete Buttigieg
AP Photo/Nati Harnik

Democrats continue ripping Mayor Pete Buttigieg for only earning 8,500 votes in his last campaign for re-election as the Mayor of South Bend, Indiana — which has a population of roughly 100,000 people.

Former Deputy Chief of Staff to Sen. Harry Reid Adam Jentleson mocked Buttigieg on Friday after the mayor released a new ad against giving tuition-free college education for children of wealthy parents.
“A guy who received a total of 8,500 votes in his last election now wants to be POTUS because he believes in his own ambition above all else,” he wrote on Twitter.

Jentleson called Buttigieg “Sneaky Pete” for throwing ideas embraced by Sen. Elizabeth Warren and Sen. Bernie Sanders “under the bus” for a position that was more “consultant-tested.”
The attack against Buttigieg’s weak voter draw was also deployed by Democratic strategic Alexis Grenell in April as proof that sexism was “alive and well in 2020.”
“When we see smart, specific, incredibly qualified women articulating a vision, somehow that is less sexy than a mayor from a town that is barely 100,000 people, who won re-election with 8,500 votes and who thinks that policy is minutia,” she said in an appearance on CNN.

.@agrenell: "To the White Men Running to Be the Democratic Presidential Candidate: Can You Not?" She dishes on gender and politics here:

100 people are talking about this

Buttigieg frequently cites his election in a midwestern city within the red state of Indiana as proof he can appeal to all voters.
But South Bend is overwhelmingly Democrat, thus explaining the low voting numbers. The last time the city elected a Republican mayor was in 1964.

BET FOUNDER BOB JOHNSON SAYS NO DEM CANDIDATE CAN DEFEAT THE SWAMP KEEPER - We remember that Obomb did nothing for Black America for 8 years

BET Founder Bob Johnson: No Democrat Candidate Can Defeat Trump

Bob Johnson, founder of BET, right, gestures as he speaks next to President Donald Trump during a ceremony for the signing of an executive order establishing the White House Opportunity and Revitalization Council, in the Roosevelt Room of the White House, Wednesday, Dec. 12, 2018, in Washington. (AP Photo/Jacquelyn Martin)
AP Photo/Jacquelyn Martin

Appearing Friday on CNBC TV, BET Founder Bob Johnson said he believes no current Democrat White House contender can beat President Donald Trump in the 2020 general election.

A partial transcript is as follows: 
HADLEY GAMBLE: When you take a look at what President Trump has done in the last several months, particularly the conversation surrounding the U.S.-China trade spat, is this his to lose you think?
BOB JOHNSON: I think the president has always been in a position where it’s his to lose. He’s bringing a disruptive force into what would be called “political norms.” I don’t care if it’s the way he conducts foreign policy, the way he takes on government agencies, and the way he deals with immigration, he brings his style. Now, a lot of people, particularly people who voted for him and those who will vote for him in the next election, like that style. I think what the Democrats have to do is to be careful is to not get caught up in stylistic-Trump and more in substantive-Trump.
Michael Bloomberg is willing to spend a lot of money to make the care to voters. But more important than the money is his narrative about what he’s going to do and how he introduces himself, particularly to the African-American community. I think he’s got to address the “Stop and Frisk” issue that was under his leadership when he was mayor of New York City. And I think hee’s got to let the African-American community know that he identifies with their issues. He’s done it to a certain extent in New York. He’s been positive on gun control and climate control.

Why Michelle Obama may jump into the race

Although it's far from a lead-pipe cinch, a plausible case is to be made that former first lady Michelle Obama may enter the Democratic primary race.  There are three reasons for believing this.
First and most obvious is the current field of contenders for the Democrat nomination.  As has often been said, they resemble occupants in a clown car that tumble out together for their periodic debates.  The emotion that they instill in the general public is one of not enthusiasm, but fear.  The most seemingly stable among the Democrat field is former vice president Joe Biden.  But Slow Joe is terminally plagued with a cloud of corruption hanging over his head.  This cloud can only grow thicker as more information about Biden's corrupt dealings in China, Ukraine, and beyond come out.  Joe also shows early signs of dementia, which doesn't help his case.  Although Biden is said to lead in national polls, his candidacy has the stench of political death about it.
Second, the only Democrat of national stature is former president Barack Obama.  Bill Clinton has been so discredited that he's radioactive to his party.  His wife, Crooked Hillary, is not far behind hubby in that regard.  So Obama's the man.  And what has Obama said about the current field of contenders?  He said he couldn't support Crazy Bernie, openly opined that Biden can't connect with voters, and has shown no enthusiasm for any of the other candidates.  This leaves the Democrats essentially leaderless.
For those reasons, Michael Bloomberg, a onetime Republican, has stepped into the vacuum.  Unfortunately for him, the former New York City mayor has zero charisma and is wrong on issues important to the general voting public.  His entry into the primary race appears to be a vanity-fueled pipe dream more than anything else, and he'll soon learn that his money can't buy him love...or votes.
Third and perhaps most importantly is the support President Trump has among blacks and Hispanics.  The support he has is stronger than that of any other Republican in recent memory.  This has set the Democrats' teeth on edge.  A high-visibility black here and there escaping the Democrat Plantation of Dependency is one thing.  But a mass prison break to freedom is something else entirely.  It would shake the Democratic Party to its core.
Although Democrats are in denial about the erosion of minority support for them, it is nonetheless true.  This really shouldn't be a surprise, given how the strong Trump economy has benefited minorities.  This contrasts sharply with the decades of neglect and empty promises from Democrats.  Plus the Democrats collectively are on the wrong side of minorities when it comes to issues like school choice, the LGBT agenda, jobs, and radical abortion rights.
To have any chance nationally, the Democrats do not just need minority support; their candidate must overwhelmingly capture the black and Hispanic vote.  None of the leading Democrat candidates is up to that task — not the homosexual from South Bend, not the fake Indian from Massachusetts, and not Crazy Bernie.  Biden sort of comes the closest, but he'll flop for the reasons mentioned above.
This is where Michelle Obama comes in.  She addresses each of these three concerns.  She stands out positively compared to the Democrat field, which is admittedly a low hurdle.  Michelle would have Barack's full support.  And finally, party elders would view her as having at least a chance of stemming a widespread defection of blacks to President Trump...although not so much with Latinos.

Photo credit: Gage Skidmore.
None of this is to say Michelle Obama will enter the primaries, let alone win the nomination.  If she has half the smarts she thinks she has, she'll stay out, realizing that 2020 is not a Democrat year.  And if Michelle does enter the race, it will soon dawn on her just how pathetically unprepared she is.  But given the hand the Democrats have to play, they just might be tempted to throw a Hail Mary pass with Michelle as their standard-bearer.  After all, one in a thousand Hail Mary passes succeeds.  Just ask Roger Staubach and Doug Flutie.

For all his naivetΓ©, Obama had a political gift for shrouding the direction his party has been moving in since triangulating Bubba turned the White House quarters into various seraglios. 


 Barack Obama is hoping to stave off a splinter of the super-rich from the moderately rich.  He’s getting last-minute help from billionaire Mike Bloomberg and former Massachusetts governor and current Bain Capital executive Deval Patrick.

"That phase of the takeover was started in 2008 by President Barack Obama.  Throughout his eight years in office, Obama practiced divisiveness and hammered away at the Second Amendment while pouring gallons of fuel on the fire of the "Black Lives Matter" lie.  His administration was rampant with corruption, pushing the envelope with every new scandal." RICK HAYES

When Obama found religion (or feigned the motions of doing so for future electability), he chose out of the near 1,000 available options to him in Chicago a church whose pastor was an outspoken anti-American, anti-white, and anti-Semitic conspiracy theorist.  For the next 20 years, Obama and Michelle chose to sit in the pews of that swine and devour the filth he shoveled out from the trough at his altar.

By the end of the speech, Obama had skillfully twisted the events to the point where theoretical, faceless white racism was to blame for the actual, documented racism of Xavier Johnson. 

On a fundamental level, Obama understands that America is not the systemically racist cesspool he allowed it to be portrayed as under his watch.  Yet he was Machiavellian enough to let this yarn spin itself for the purpose of political advantage.

Democratic Socialists of America, and 

coincidentally were all prominent California supporters of presidential candidate Barack Obama and long time ally of both the Communists and DSA.

Obama a sellout?

Barack Obama is selling out to stuffy-nosed swells.  Don’t take my word for it; that’s the dim asseveration of David Dayen, executive editor of the liberal periodical the American Prospect.
In an optimism-popping post “What Obama Really Wants,” Dayen explores taboo territory for Democrats: a clear-eyed assessment of what the forty-fourth President wants to see in the 2020 election (besides his spare frame back behind the Resolute desk).  Dayen ditches the burnished terms with which the media usually uses to describe the former community organizer and law don.  He opts for Realpolitik: “[Obama’s] interventions in the presidential race are music to the ears of the wealthy and powerful.”
How is Obama, the one-time tribune for the hope-starved underclass, now doing the bidding of the well-heeled set?  By splashing cold water on his party’s red hots.  “The average American doesn’t think we have to completely tear down the system and remake it,” Obama told the New York Times, not so subtly addressing Bernie Sanders’s infernal column-like rhetoric.  Moreover, Obama dampened more keyed-up Democrats, saying that though the Party could “push the envelope” with a “bold” vision, “we also have to be rooted in reality.”
In other words, free health care, free college, free housing, and free and open borders all sound nice, but they lack the verisimilitude of being politically doable.
Imagine that.  Barack Obama berthing the highest hopes of voters who elected him to chart new courses of the possible.  It’s almost like he knows something about being elected president not once, but twice.
Dayen doesn’t care for Obama’s party-pooping, what with two Young Pioneers leading the primary field.  Only cold-hearted Scrooges would bother waking progressives from their profuse dreams.  “[W]ithout doubting Obama’s sincerity that a moderate politics and only a moderate politics can spell victory next November,” Dayen sadly avers.  “I can’t help but notice the audiences for his targeted attacks on progressive policy: wealthy donors in the most rarefied, winner-take-all enclaves of America.”
Is this really a surprise?  You have to question the political ken of someone who thinks it unusual the owner of a $14 million Martha’s Vineyard estate might be dubitative about courting the wrath of the landed.  Obama already intimated that he’d vocally oppose Sanders clinching the nomination.  He’s not about to let the Bolsheviks put what’s left of his legacy up against the wall
For all his naivetΓ©, Obama had a political gift for shrouding the direction his party has been moving in since triangulating Bubba turned the White House quarters into various seraglios. 
In a sweeping new article in American Affairs, Julius Krein dispels a modern narrative about American politics: the working class is of no concern to crafters of national policy.  “However one defines the working class, it has scarcely any political agency in the current system and no apparent means for acquiring any,” Krein writes in contradiction to the claim that a handful of Midwestern counties now decide national elections.
The fundamental political divide is no longer working class versus elite, or even urbanites versus rural roturiers.  Our real rubber match over power is between two well-off sects: “elites primarily dependent on capital gains and those primarily dependent on profes­sional labor.”  And the clash is tearing Democrats apart.
While income equality has become a pervasive phrase on both the left and right, its application has usually been to the economic divide between lower and higher classes.  This is misleading, if not irrelevant.  Yes, the top 10 percent has leapfrogged over the slim gains of the middling rungs of the economic ladder.  But the separation is much starker when comparing the top 9 percent to the top one percent.  “Since 1979, the real annual earnings growth of the top 1 percent has more than tripled that of earners at 10 percent, while growth for the 0.1 percent is, in turn, more than twice that of the 1 percent,” Krein notes.
The upper class losing footing compared to the upper-upper class is driving the radical politics of the Democrats, who have given up on Clintonian neoliberalism—otherwise known as lightly managed capitalism—and have adopted outright socialism and racial and sexual identity politics as their doxa.
The false god of identity and false promise of communistic utopia are meant to transpose what Krein calls “meaningless and depressing” information jobs the professional class now relies on.  There is also the acute economic anxiety felt by these Democrat-voting winners, who fear “when the next recession, the increasing automation of white-collar jobs, and the logic of shareholder primacy all take their toll.”
The fear of precarity among the near-elites is the driver behind the swell of support to the Warren and Sanders campaign, despite neither appealing to the traditional Democratic base of hard-up workers and minorities.  It’s also why both campaigns draw so much support from university students, despite their much higher average earning potential compared to the non-college educated.
As the Republican Party continues to make inroads into former industrial enclaves that have shed their former productive glory, Democrats fight over a handful of populous urban centers.  Barack Obama is hoping to stave off a splinter of the super-rich from the moderately rich.  He’s getting last-minute help from billionaire Mike Bloomberg and former Massachusetts governor and current Bain Capital executive Deval Patrick.
Democrats have a choice: try to retake political power with the help of the moneyed, or fully embrace egalitarianism.  “The heart wants what it wants,” said the poet.  This presidential primary could end up breaking the Democratic heart with a choice between two loves.





"That phase of the takeover was started in 2008 by President Barack Obama.  Throughout his eight years in office, Obama practiced divisiveness and hammered away at the Second Amendment while pouring gallons of fuel on the fire of the "Black Lives Matter" lie.  His administration was rampant with corruption, pushing the envelope with every new scandal." RICK HAYES

Michelle Obama castigates whites for ‘running from us’


Speaking at an event in Chicago called the “Obama Foundation Summit” (were any heads of state present?), Michelle Obama let slip her resentment of white people. The grudge goes back to her childhood, and she does not seem to see much progress in the behavior she attributes to Caucasian-Americans. Fox News reports what the New York Times doesn’t:
White Americans are “still running” elsewhere when minorities and immigrants move into their communities, Michelle Obama observed Tuesday. (snip)
In a sit-down interview with journalist Isabel Wilkerson, in which Obama was accompanied by her brother, Craig Robinson, an executive with the NBA’s New York Knicks, Obama described when she first became conscious of what’s been called “white flight.”
We were doing everything we were supposed to do – and better,” Obama said of her family, recalling when they got a new address on Chicago’s South Side. “But when we moved in, white families moved out.
“I want to remind white folks that y’all were running from us,” she continued, according to the Chicago Sun-Times. “And you’re still running.”
This is remarkably un-self-aware, considering that the Obamas currently reside in Kalorama and Martha’s Vineyard. How many blacks live near their two mansions?
“I can’t make people not afraid of black people,” she said, according to The Hill. “I don’t know what’s going on. I can’t explain what’s happening in your head."
Maybe what’s going on in the heads of white people is the same as what was going on in Jesse Jackson’s head when he said:
“There is nothing more painful to me at this stage in my life than to walk down the street and hear footsteps... then turn around and see somebody white and feel relieved.”
It would be wonderful if black crime rates were similar to those of whites and Asians, but they aren’t. That’s is why many minorities flee from ghettos as soon as they are financially able – a group that includes Barack and Michelle Obama.
Mrs. Obama is stoking racial resentment with her remarks, an emotion that the Democrats use as part of their electoral strategy to drive black turnout.
At least her statement castigating whites is consistent with her oft-expressed position that she has “zero interest” in running for president.
Here is video of her remarks on race:
Photo credit: YouTube screen grab
Hat tip: Ed Lasky

"That phase of the takeover was started in 2008 by President Barack Obama.  Throughout his eight years in office, Obama practiced divisiveness and hammered away at the Second Amendment while pouring gallons of fuel on the fire of the "Black Lives Matter" lie.  His administration was rampant with corruption, pushing the envelope with every new scandal." RICK HAYES

October 3, 2019

The Political Civil War is real

The American Political Civil War, which began in November 2016, has so far witnessed leftist Democrats initiating a series of unsuccessful offensive maneuvers against the president and his allies.  The unrelenting Russian collusion bombardment did not produce the shock and awe promised by leftist operatives such as Adam Schiff, Chuck Schumer, and Nancy Pelosi.  And so a new front was opened up against the president, having the appearance of impeachment proceedings that dealt with a routine phone call from President Trump to the Ukrainian president, Volodymyr Zelensky.
Sometimes aggression must be met head on, with resolve to stop it in its tracks.  History reviles Neville Chamberlain not because he was unsuccessful in halting German expansion, but because he couldn't identify or didn't want to acknowledge the clear evidence of imminent war. 
Chamberlain's self-deception and fear helped pave the way in allowing an aggressor to gather strength and strike when he had amassed enough power.  In the same way, it was the self-deception and cowardice of Republican members of Congress that allowed the Democrat impeachment machine to gain control of the House during the midterm elections. 
But the leftist Democratic Party has taken a different approach toward total political and social conquest.  Unlike the German war machine that promised peace but delivered war, leftist Democrats do not promise any compromises.  Instead, they are openly mobilizing for political war and are prepared to deliver on that threat, no matter the cost to the country.
And to be clear, it will continue to be an all-out, extremely aggressive assault on the president and any American who wants nothing more than to live in peace and raise a family.  To pretend that what is happening today is merely dirty politics as usual would be the equivalent of British citizens identifying descending V-1 rockets in the battle of Britain as no more than pesky mosquitoes.  
It is, thus far, a bloodless, political civil war to change America forever.  And it has already seen a coup attempt against the president by the Left that desires a winner-take-all conclusion.  And because Leftist Democrats never conceived that anyone other than a person they selected would become president, the rules, laws, and language must change and contort to fit their agenda so they can finally seize power.  Once in power, the rules and laws dictated by the Left will become unrecognizable, and there will be no bridge to cross to get back to the Constitution.  
Politically speaking, these leftist radicals have proven that they will attack all those who want to remain living in a Republic.  As in every past revolution into socialism, the socialist victors demand complete obedience from the conquered. 
In their own words, leftist Democrats confirm that they are counting on a misinformed public in order to gain power.  Take, as an example, the statement made by Jonathan Gruber, the architect of Obamacare, where he brags to a group of people how in order to pass Obamacare he relied on "the stupidity of the American voter."  Although Gruber doesn't explain how the American voter becomes so "stupid," the evidence is clear that the corrupt, indoctrinating media play a crucial role.  They dole out misinformation and deceit, as does the leftist education system.
There are no more pretenses, as the corrupt major media have all but announced their alliance with the far left's aggressive goals.  An article in the October 2018 edition of Investor's Business Daily points out this blatant one-sided absurdity that passes for today's media:
To say that the big networks haven't exactly had a love affair with Donald Trump, as they did with President Obama, is an understatement. A new survey shows that not only is coverage of Trump overwhelmingly negative, but the President's biggest accomplishment — the roaring economy — gets almost no attention.
The article goes on to say Trump receives 92% negative coverage and that the Media Research Center watched network TV for four months and found that the coverage surrounding Trump's economic boom was only 0.7% of the entire coverage.
It cannot be overstated that for America to 
"change," there had to be a push to revoke 
some or all of the Bill of Rights.  That phase 
of the takeover was started in 2008 by 
President Barack Obama.  Throughout his 
eight years in office, Obama practiced 
divisiveness and hammered away at the 
Second Amendment while pouring gallons of 
fuel on the fire of the "Black Lives Matter" 
lie.  His administration was rampant with 
corruption, pushing the envelope with every 
new scandal.  Only because outsider citizen Trump became President Trump do we now know that there was no chance that justice would have ever been served for the victims of the scandals of Benghazi, the IRS, and Fast and Furious while Obama was in office.  Just like the leftist Democrats of today, Obama was protected by America's version of Pravda.
The ongoing coup attempt against President Trump and his administration will continue.  The American people will get deluged with fake news and lies from hostile media sources.  There still exists a sliver of hope in the name of William Barr.  But even Barr holding a winning hand is not enough to turn the tide against the waves of corruption slamming into America.  It will also take the selfless efforts of the average American who demands liberty.  It will take the courage and grit of ordinary men and women to secure a victory — not just for the president, but for America's bright future and the joy of living in ultimate freedom.

Mecha's  (M.E.Ch.A.) own slogan reads, "For the race everything. For those outside the race, nothing." (CALIFORNIA’S ATTORNEY GENERAL XAVIER BECERRA IS A MEMBER OF THE MEX FASCIST SEPARATIST MOVEMENT OF M.E.Ch.A.)

LA RAZA: The Mexican Fascist Party of LA RAZA “THE RACE” and the Reconquista and surrender of America to NARCOMEX

The comparison to the Nazi Party is well deserved. La Raza openly supports pushing all but Latino Americans out of a portion of the United States (ethnic cleansing), they call for 'Reconquista' or the re-conquest of the American Southwest by Mexico (the re-occupation of the Sudetanland), and the establishment of 'Atzlan' which is the utopian all-Latino version of the American Southwestern states (Adolf Hitler planned to called his utopia Germania).

"Despite the fact that the majority of documented hispanics oppose illegal immigration, as do the majority of Americans, Aztlan and La Raza race hate groups have become the self-appointed voice for a separatist movement that threatens a violent overthrow of the Constitutional system and a barbaric program of ethnic cleansing. This is held up by the media as 'diversity' and to vociferously oppose it is scorned as racism."

Jose Pescador Osuna, Mexican Consul General We are practicing "La Reconquista" in California."

"We’ve got an even more ominous enemy within  our borders that promotes “Reconquista of Aztlan”  or the reconquest of California, Arizona, New  Mexico and Texas into the country of Mexico."

"Remember 187 -- the Proposition to deny taxpayer funds for services to non-citizens --- was the last gasp of white America in California." --- Art Torres, Chairman of the California Democratic Party… NOW THE PARTY for LA RAZA SUPREMACY… do a search for Barack Obama and LA RAZA.

"The American Southwest seems to be slowly returning to the jurisdiction of Mexico without firing a single shot."  --- Excelsior, the national newspaper of Mexico

“The watchdogs at Judicial Watch discovered documents that reveal how the Obama administration's close coordination with the Mexican government entices Mexicans to hop over the fence and on to the American dole.” Washington Times  


“Make no mistake about it: the Latino community holds this election in your hands. Some of the closest contests this November will be in states like Florida, Colorado, Nevada and New Mexico -- states with large Latino populations.”   PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE BARACK OBAMA  

“I know how powerful this community is. Just think how powerful you could be on November 4th if you translate your numbers into votes.”    PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE BARACK OBAMA 




When Obama found religion (or feigned the motions of doing so for future electability), he chose out of the near 1,000 available options to him in Chicago a church whose pastor was an outspoken anti-American, anti-white, and anti-Semitic conspiracy theorist.  For the next 20 years, Obama and Michelle chose to sit in the pews of that swine and devour the filth he shoveled out from the trough at his altar. 


The Crisis Obama Let Go to Waste

Barack Obama's legacy is nothing if not consequential.  In his decades as "community organizer" among Chicago's poorest, most desperate neighborhoods, he did nothing other than perpetuate complete dependence on Big Brother.  His Affordable Care Act, and its accompanying criminal penalties for not engaging in commerce, scythed a mile-wide berth into the already frayed concept of a citizenry living free from government coercion.  More ominously, Obama was able to entwine his instinctive Marxism with a vision for America's path forward in a way his predecessors had been unable to. 
The singular cunning of Obama was his success in realigning the "victim" hierarchy almost completely from class to race.  Free citizens in a market society can climb or descend the social ladder, but race remains a constant throughout.  Race is our most recognizable difference, no matter its superficial nature.  In the deepest recesses of our prejudices, race is pure tribalism.  And in the darkest hours of human history, at our most trying moments, and during our most vicious wars, people of all tribes have taken refuge not within their class, but within their race or ethnicity.  The examples of Nazi Germany, of Bosnia, of Rwanda, and of the Armenians in Turkey are but a few examples of the horrors lifelong friends and neighbors of the same class can inflict on one another in the name of racial identity politics.
This isn't to say Marxism hasn't been peddled before under the guise of racial identity grievance.  Indeed, Lenin himself was able to provoke satellite regions like Ukraine and Kazakhstan to revolt from czarist Russia in the name of ethnic separatism.  In the United States, it has been tried repeatedly since the 1960s.  But as our nation's first (half) black president, Obama was able sow division with absolute authority, and with minimal criticism by a political class that either openly supported his aims or was petrified of soliciting unsubstantiated accusations of racism. 
And sow division he did, with every chance he got. 
When Obama found religion (or feigned the motions of doing so for future electability), he chose out of the near 1,000 available options to him in Chicago a church whose pastor was an outspoken anti-American, anti-white, and anti-Semitic conspiracy theorist.  For the next 20 years, Obama and Michelle chose to sit in the pews of that swine and devour the filth he shoveled out from the trough at his altar.  When asked to justify his close association with this shameless bigot, Obama shrugged off such concerns, comparing Wright to "an old uncle who sometimes will say things that I don't agree with."  Obama distanced himself from Wright only when it started affecting his poll numbers.
When armed Black Panthers were caught threatening voters outside a Philadelphia polling station in 2008, the Department of Justice under the Bush administration charged (and convicted) them with violations of the Voting Rights Act.  Once in office, Obama had political appointees in the DOJ dismiss the charges.
When Cambridge Police (both white and black, not that it should matter) arrested his black friend Henry Gates for disorderly conduct, Obama, after admitting that he didn't know all the facts, stated that the police "acted stupidly."
After Trayvon Martin was shot by Afro-Peruvian (AKA "white Hispanic") George Zimmerman, Obama intoned, "If I had a son, he'd look like Trayvon."  This implies that Martin was shot because he was black, and not because he was repeatedly pummeling Zimmerman's head into the pavement.  Even Eric Holder's investigation concluded otherwise.
After black nationalist Xavier Micah Johnson opened fire and murdered five Dallas police officers in 2016 (as they protected a Black Lives Matter march), Obama gave a eulogy at their funeral.  The eulogy itself stands as perhaps one of the most despicable moments of the Obama presidency.  He used the podium to equate the murder of the Dallas police officers with the recent shootings of Alton Sterling and Philando Castile (both of which were investigated and found justifiable, and neither man was "unfairly targeted" because he was black, as Obama asserted).
It was a speech as deft as it was cynical.  Reading through the text, one realizes more clearly the manipulation taking place that, when spoken, is less detectable.  He subtly but unmistakably steers the speech from a tribute to the murdered officers to a damning indictment of our alleged systemic racism, coupled with a defense of the paranoid style of the Black Lives Matter movement.  By the end of the speech, Obama had skillfully twisted the events to the point where theoretical, faceless white racism was to blame for the actual, documented racism of Xavier Johnson. 
One wonders if, had he attended Sterling's funeral, he would have lectured the audience about murdered police.
At this point, I must interject a side note regarding the aforementioned shootings.  Philando Castile was shot in a horrible case of mistaken identity.  He closely matched the description of a suspect from a recent armed robbery, and the officer thought he was reaching for a gun he admitted to having.  Alton Sterling (who had a long arrest record that included battery, burglary, and weapons charges) was shot because he was physically fighting with police, despite being tasered several times.  Police shot him when he reached for the loaded .38 caliber revolver in his pants.  His shooting was completely warranted, and Baton Rouge is a safer place without him.  Neither the tragic shooting of Castile nor the justified shooting of Sterling can in any reasonable way be attributed to racism, nor can they be remotely likened to the premeditated slaughter of the five Dallas officers.  But such are the dots that Obama connected to hustle his race narrative.
Obama is notoriously thin-skinned to criticism, or to the suggestion that someone, somewhere, might be smarter than he.  This is the guy who claimed, with a straight face, that he was a better speechwriter than his speechwriters, more knowledgeable about policy than his policy directors, and a better political director than his political director.  Still, one assumes he was adroit enough to recognize that objections to his policies, or questions of their constitutionality, were not the default reactions of repressed racism.  If he had thought they were, he would have said so.  On a fundamental level, Obama understands that America is not the systemically racist cesspool he allowed it to be portrayed as under his watch.  Yet he was Machiavellian enough to let this yarn spin itself for the purpose of political advantage.
Obama also understood the political pitfalls inherent in hiding behind the race card in efforts to deflect policy debates he could not win.  So he did one better.  He let his media sycophants do it for him.  For the duration of his presidency and beyond, these shrieking curs claw the flesh off their faces at the slightest hint of criticism of Obama, his policies, or his style of governance.  I am unaware of a single instance in which he publicly censured his groupies for their utter lack of nuance.
Therein lies the biggest tragedy of Obama's legacy.  As a biracial president, he had a foot in both black and white America.  He was uniquely positioned to use this to the advantage of the entire country, to serve as a bridge of healing and progress between races who have butted heads for far too long.  Instead, for eight continuous years, he chose to do the exact opposite.  He entrenched identity politics as deeply as he could, ripping open wounds in the process, and divided this great nation perhaps past the point of no return.  He did this to spread a thoroughly debunked ideology, the achievability of which his ego will never allow him to admit he was mistaken about.
In a 2008 speech in which Obama attempted to justify Jeremiah Wright's irrational hatred, he said, "At times, that anger is exploited by politicians, to gin up votes along racial lines, or to make up for a politician's own failings."  Never before has a poker player so inadvertently revealed his own hand.  When Obama spoke those words, he was no doubt doing what he does best: thinking of himself.

Pollak: Barack Obama Wrote the Playbook on Political Division


Left-wing pundits have accused President Donald Trump of using his tweets last weekend to launch a divisive re-election campaign.

David Axelrod, former adviser to President Barack Obama, tweeted: “With his deliberate, racist outburst, @realDonaldTrump wants to raise the profile of his targets, drive Dems to defend them and make them emblematic of the entire party. It’s a cold, hard strategy.”
That is debatable — but if so, Axelrod should know; Obama did it first.
By 2011, Obama knew that re-election would be difficult. The Tea Party had just led the Republicans to a historic victory in the 2010 midterm elections, winning the House and nearly taking the Senate. The economy was only growing sluggishly, and Obama’s stimulus had failed to keep unemployment below eight percent, as projected. Moreover, the passage of Obamacare had provoked a backlash against Obama’s state-centered model of American society.
Facing a similar situation in the mid-1990s, President Bill Clinton had “triangulated,” moving back toward the middle, frustrating the GOP by taking up their issues, such as welfare reform.
But Obama rejected that approach. Having watched his icon, Chicago mayor Harold Washington, settle for an incremental approach when faced with opposition in the 1980s, only to die of a sudden heart attack before fulfilling his potential, Obama chose the path of hard-left policy — and divide-and-rule politics.
The first hint of his strategy emerged during the debt ceiling negotiations in the summer of August 2011. As Bob Woodward recounted in his book about the crisis, The Price of Politics, then-Speaker of the House John Boehner (R-OH) had wanted to reach a “grand bargain” with the president on long-term spending cuts. But Obama blew up that agreement by demanding $400 billion in new taxes, to his aides’ surprise. Obama wanted an opponent, not a deal. (Last week, Boehner told Breitbart News Tonight that Obama’s decision was his worst disappointment in 35 years of politics.)
In the fall of 2011, a new left-wing movement, Occupy Wall Street, was launched. A mix of communists, anarchists, and digital pranksters, the Occupy movement cast American society as a struggle between the “99 percent” and the “one percent.”
Obama and then-House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) embraced the movement — and failed to distance themselves from it even as it collapsed into violence, sexual assault, and confrontations with police.
Instead, Obama picked up on Occupy’s themes and used them to shape his campaign.
In December 2011, Obama gave a speech at Osawatomie, Kansas — a place steeped in radical symbolism — at which he doubled down on his left-wing policies. He focused on the issue of economic inequality, and attacked the idea that the free market could lift the middle class to prosperity. “This isn’t about class warfare. This is about the nation’s welfare,” he insisted.
Then, in the spring of 2012, Obama made a controversial play on race. When a black teen, Trayvon Martin, was killed in Florida during a scuffle with neighborhood watch volunteer George Zimmerman, Al Sharprton — who was serving as an informal adviser to Obama at the time — made the local crime story into a national racial controversy. Obama, following Sharpton’s lead, weighed in: “If I had a son, he’d look like Trayvon,” Obama said at the time.
Poll numbers suggest that race relations, which had been improving, dropped precipitously after that. But to Obama, it was worth it: the campaign needed to find a way to motivate minority voters. (Vice President Joe Biden did his part, telling black voters that GOP nominee Mitt Romney was “gonna put y’all in chains.”)
Trump is pushing a non-racial, nationalist message. But if he actually wanted to divide America for political gain, he could learn from the master.

Joel B. Pollak is Senior Editor-at-Large at Breitbart News. He earned an A.B. in Social Studies and Environmental Science and Public Policy from Harvard. He is a winner of the 2018 Robert Novak Journalism Alumni Fellowship. He is also the co-author of How Trump Won: The Inside Story of a Revolution, which is available from Regnery. Follow him on Twitter at @joelpollak.

Heading for civil war

Donald Trump’s opponents are completely unhinged. The hate and slander directed towards the president and his supporters is off the charts. The vitriol comes not just from the Democrat party, the media, and the world of entertainment, but also from a sizable proportion of the federal bureaucracy and many seemingly ordinary people.  
The media coordinates this campaign and amplifies the hate at every opportunity. Media twist every event, be it big or small, into a criticism of the president. The goal is always to present Trump in not just an unfavorable light but to make him appear too loathsome for polite society. And Trump is not the sole target of this demonization. It is directed at his supporters, too. 
Where will all this lead? No less than Angelo M. Codevilla fears it could ultimately result in a bloody civil war. And if it comes to that, there's no doubt where he places the blame.  
The story of the contemporary American Left's sponsorship of hate and violence began around 1964, when the Democrats chose to abandon the Southern constituencies that had been its mainstay since the time of Jefferson and Jackson. In less than a decade, the party found itself increasingly dependent on gaining super-majorities among blacks, upscale liberals, and constituencies of resentment in general -- and hence on stoking their hate. 
For the past half century, America's political history has been driven by the Democrats' effort  to fire up these constituencies by denigrating the rest of America.
Codevilla notes that prominent Democrats like Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi, and Hillary Clinton have led millions of their followers "to think and act as if conservatives were simply a lower level of humanity, and should have their faces rubbed in their own inferiority."
It’s not surprising that many ordinary followers have concluded that harassing conservatives in restaurants, airports, and public functions is "not just permissible but praiseworthy, and if thousands of persons who exercise power over cities, towns, and schools have not concluded that facilitating such harassment and harm is their duty."
This is the toxic environment that the Democrats, in conjunction with the media, have created. Has Pandora's box been opened? Are we beyond the point of no return? Are leftists and their liberal soulmates too obtuse not to expect that hate and violence will someday be answered in kind? These questions are up in the air. Right now, one thing is clear. As Yeats wrote: "The best lack all conviction while the worse are full of passionate intensity."
Codevilla's worry about a civil war dovetails with The Fourth Turning,: What the Cycles of History Tell Us About American's Next Rendezvous with Destiny (1997)  by William Strauss and Neil Howe. To my reading, these authors predict a Fourth Turning Crisis period around the years 2020-2022. Then, many things that Americans have always taken for granted will unravel. 
Just to touch on a few of the changes that Strauss and Howe see: today's soft criminal justice system will become swift and rough. Vagrants will be rounded up and the mentally ill recommitted. Criminal appeals shortened and executions hastened. Pension funds will go bust and Social Security checks become iffy. The full spectrum of society will be under distress. All the problems will be combined into one -- the survival of society.  
Aren't the seeds already planted for a crisis? Trust in Washington and in government institutions is at an all-time low. Political violence is tacitly condoned and often openly encouraged by Democratic officeholders. The political establishment encourages massive Illegal immigration. The mainstream media is highly partisan and corrupt beyond reform. The American flag, the country's history, and even its nationhood are openly despised in universities. American public schools are a disgrace despite the money poured into them. The country is burdened by a $22 trillion national debt to which many trillions more of unfunded government liabilities must be added. Students owe a trillion dollars in school loans that can never be repaid.
Someday there has to be a reckoning for all this dysfunction. Irrespective of the election results in 2020, the time frame of 2020-2022 sounds about the right for things to come to a head. It would be prudent to be ready. 

Hatred is Hatred, whether from the Left or Right

The Reverend Not So Sharpton is not considered a hater.  He was much sought after by 12 of the Democrat presidential candidates, who made the pilgrimage to his humble abode to kiss his ring.
When it was time to renew his television show, his credentials were examined (but the ratings were ignored), and yes, he was qualified because he is still black.  That seems to be the reason Al is a television star.  Al is paid $500,000 annually by MSNBC for his television work, and he pays himself over $200,000 from his civil rights non-profit organization.
You might think a television star with a net worth of up to $5 million and annual income of over $700,000 could pay his bills, but Al still owes $4.5 million in state and federal taxes, and he often forgets "to pay travel agencies, hotels, and landlords," according to the records.  In 2015, Al paid almost $2 million on his back taxes.
In 2004, Al bought himself a Rolls-Royce Phantom for his 50th birthday.  That is the most expensive production car in the world, with a base price of $475,000.
That is one Baptist who was not held under water long enough!
Just kidding, but he is not my kind of Baptist.
A black killer in Dallas who killed five police officers and injured 14 other innocent people said, "I want to kill white people, especially white cops."  When asked if the shooting should be considered a hate crime, President Obama said, "It's hard to know what his motives are."  Can't Obama understand clear English?  The killer was a hater, and his race or political position did not matter.  By being a defender of hate, does that make Obama a hater?
It seems hate is identified depending on the hater and the hatee.
A French rapper named Nick Conrad has a song titled "Hang Whites!" that declares, "I enter day care centres, I kill white babies, Grab them quickly and hang their parents, Take them apart to pass the time."  In one scene, the rapper and an associate drag a white person along a street and kick him in the head.  The lyrics include calls to kill white people and their children.
That's hate by a self-described "black artist, Parisian, proud sophisticate" — or more precisely, a French jerk who shot to fame with his hate-filled "song."
Thaddeus Matthews, Memphis disc jockey, interviewing Charlotte Bergmann, a black, female conservative Republican candidate for Congress, called her a "token negro" and "curly-haired nigga."  He added, "I'm so sick of your s---, yourself, and I'm about to put your a-- up outta here," he said.  "You are a token negro that white folk have control over."  As she got up to leave, she tried to shake his hand, and he refused, saying, "I don't need to shake your hand.  I'm scared because some of that whiteness might rub off on me." 
Thad, the black hater of whites, is still a disc jockey in Memphis.  Charlotte won her primary but lost in the 2018 general election.
The mother of Michael Brown (the teen thug who was killed by a police officer in Ferguson after Brown tried to take the officer's gun) is running for city council!  But Momma's comments will haunt her.  She wrote on social media after two police officers were shot, "If my FAM woulda got JUSTICE in August maybe those two comps wouldn't have got shot LAST NIGHT..."  Also, "F--- THEM 2 COPS...DON'T GOT NO SYMPATHY FOR THEM OR THEY FAMILIES…Aint no FUN when the Rabbit got the GUN."
That too is undisguised, unreasonable, and uncontrolled hate and indicates a problem in public education.
Maggie Gallagher cited a book that expresses extreme hatred toward conservative Christians in America who "tend to hold relatively high levels of social power."  So Many Christians, So Few Lions: Is There Christianophobia in the United States? was authored by George Yancey and David A. Williamson, who asked people about conservative Christians.  "'I want them [conservative Christians] all to die in a fire,' said one man with a doctorate[.] ... 'The only good Christian is a dead Christian,' said another man with a doctorate.  'I abhor them and I wish we could do away with them,' said a woman with a master's degree.  'A tortuous death would be too good for them,' said a college-educated man.  'They should be eradicated without hesitation or remorse,' said an elderly woman with a master's degree."
Hate is not defined by education, race (and yes, of course blacks can be racists), religion, national origin, politics, or financial status.
"Look at thus [sic] chorus of entitled white men justifying a serial rapist's arrogated entitlement.  All of them deserve miserable deaths while feminists laugh as they take their last gasps.  Bonus: we castrate their corpses and feed them to swine?  Yes."  This was so eloquently spoken by white Georgetown University professor Christine Fair. Chrisy is no longer teaching at Georgetown; she is "on leave."
No sane person will defend hate, but many haters use hate as a weapon and often go into battle with Christian conservatives.  Since the progressive cannot defend his castle in ruins (liberalism), he fires the only bullet in his possession: "You're a hater."  That is supposed to settle the argument in favor of progressives!
Pseudo-intellectuals like Georgetown's Michael Eric Dyson said after George Zimmerman was acquitted in the killing of Trayvon Martin that it would be a good thing for more white children to be murdered so Americans could better understand racism.  Mike is also a Baptist preacher, but not a historical or biblical Baptist, for sure.
Sarah Jeong is a member of the New York Times editorial board.  She wrote: "Dumba-- f------ white people marking up the internet with their opinions like dogs pissing on a fire hydrant."  Also, "Are white people predisposed to burn faster in the sun, thus logically only being fit to live underground like groveling goblins[?]"  Finally Sarah's "White men are b-------"; "#CancelWhitePeople"; "oh man it's kind of sick how much joy I get out of being cruel to old white men" and "f--- white women lol."
Sarah is still with the Times!
According to a report from Newsweek, Trinity College professor Johnny Eric Williams is making waves again.  Breitbart News reported in June 2017 that Williams had argued that first responders should have let Representative Steve Scalise die after he was shot during a practice for the congressional baseball game.  Williams also shared a blog post by an anonymous author that asked black people to withhold life-saving help from white people in need.
In a recent social media post, Williams wrote that "whiteness is terrorism[]. ... If you see them [whites] drowning.  If you see them in a burning building.  If they are bleeding out in an emergency room.  If the ground is crumbling beneath them.  If they are in a park and they turn their weapons on each other: do nothing," the post read.
Of course, hatred is hatred whether from the Left or right or in the middle; however, all the haters quoted today have been from far out in left field.
Dr. Don Boys is a former member of the Indiana House of Representatives who ran a large Christian school in Indianapolis and wrote columns for USA Today for 8 years.  Boys authored 18 books, the most recent being Muslim Invasion: The Fuse is Burning!  EBook is available here with the printed edition (and other titles) at  Follow him on Facebook at Don  Boys, Ph.D. and visit his blog.  Send request to for a free subscription to his  articles, and click here to support his work with a donation.

Class Conflict within the Democratic Party

Over many decades, the American Left, the Democratic Party and their mutual propaganda arm, the self-styled “mainstream media,” have successfully portrayed conservatives and the Republican Party as a coalition of the wealthy and intolerant.  Further, the Democrats and the left have claimed that they are the true champions of the working or middle class as they unceasingly fight to defeat and marginalize this evil menace. 
The reality, however, is that this cabal has virtually no interest in defending or aiding the working class as they are, in fact, the party of a bifurcated constituency: the wealthy and those dependent on the largess of the government.
Of the fifty wealthiest congressional districts throughout the country, the Democrats now represent forty-one.  Of the remaining nine represented by Republicans, three are in Texas, the only red state on the list of fifty districts. Not coincidentally the residents of these same fifty districts are supposedly among the most well-educated and sophisticated.  This transformative process is not a recent phenomenon as the trend began in the 1980’s and accelerated rapidly in the early 2000’s.
America’s elites, now overwhelmingly represented by the Democratic Party, have a single overriding interest: their self-indulgent lifestyle.  This is manifested in their mistaken belief that conservatives (i.e. the “right”) are hell bent on enforcing their version of morality on the nation, thus potentially calling into question the lifestyles of the rich and solipsistic. 
The veracity of this claim is immaterial as it would require an element of deliberation not emotion --  a trait in extremely short supply among the nation’s privileged class, nearly all of whom have difficulty in generating an original thought due to the ill-education rampant in America’s universities.  Thus, the mindless accusations of racism, misogyny and Fascism directed at the conservative rubes in middle America are acceptable, and in far too many instances believed, particularly as many had the temerity to vote for Donald Trump – who, although wealthy and Ivy League educated, is considered the ultimate unsophisticated rube.
As conservatives are the dominant force in the Republican Party and this nation cannot function politically with more than two major political parties, the alternative is the Democratic Party.  An entity dominated by the American Left, an assemblage whose core philosophy is antithetical to the interests of the wealthy and privileged.  Yet, determined to protect their lifestyles and vilify conservatives, they willingly ally with the left and overwhelmingly support virtually any Democratic candidate.  In the recent 2018 mid-terms, Democratic House candidates outspent their Republican opponents by a two to one margin thanks primarily to this wealthy but myopic assemblage. 
Their colleagues in the Democratic Party, and the preponderance of the membership, are those dependent on the largess of the federal and state governments.  On the other hand, the growing segment of the citizenry who are working and self-sufficient are increasingly joining those who believe in limited government in migrating to the Republican Party-- a process that is accelerating with the policies and tactics of Donald Trump in combating the entrenched left and their determination to culturally and economically transform the nation.  The Republican Party will inevitably become the party of the working or middle class.  As such, they could potentially dominate the political agenda for the foreseeable future.
The left and the Democratic Party, in order to offset this possibility, must aggressively seek to increase the number of dependents by promoting the legalization and ultimate citizenship for untold millions of illegal immigrants and promising all Americans cradle to grave economic security.  In order to enact this strategy to defeat the Republicans, the left must have the active participation and financial support of the nation’s wealthy-- which they have. 
The Democratic Party has evolved into essentially an incompatible two-tier class-driven entity encompassing the nation’s wealthiest and the nation’s poorest.  Nonetheless, it is at present a convenient home for the elites to hold off the imaginary horde of conservatives outside their gilded doors. 
However, the voting numbers within the party are overwhelmingly with those who generally support the leftist philosophies of redistribution (e.g. socialized medicine and guaranteed incomes) and curtailing of freedom (e.g. speech, assembly and religion).  While it may not manifest itself to the affluent who have cast their lot with the Democrats, the redistribution of wealth must, by necessity, come from the wealthy, as that is where the bulk of the nation’s wealth resides.   It is also this same small-in-numbers group that benefits the most from freedom of speech and assembly. 
Once fully embroiled in this marriage of convenience, a divorce will be impossible as the co-inhabitant of the Democratic Party, the dependent class, must continue grow in order to electorally defeat the Republicans and protect the left’s agenda.  Further, the oversold expectations promulgated by the left will never be satisfied regardless of how many promises are made or token redistributive programs are enacted by the current ruling class.  Only a complete transformation of this nation into a failed socialist state will satiate the left, their acolytes and their attendant army of dependency.  A goal more in reach than ever thanks to the inability of the nation’s elites to give a damn about the future of the country.
There is not a more short-sighted and self-absorbed group of citizens in this nation than the white, wealthy well-educated urban and suburban voters.  They are willing to rend the fabric of this nation in order to protect their privilege and lifestyle.  While the vast majority of Americans will ultimately pay the price, the current ruling class and their progeny will have far more to lose. 
Xavier Becerra
As Fox News pointed out in a 2003 interview on the Sean Hannitty Show, Becerra has a devout relationship with MEChA, as well as The Fabian Society. But don’t go looking for the clip; it is apparent Becerra’s people have been busy at work cleaning up his inline reputation and record. KATY GRIMES




As Chicanas and Chicanos of AztlΓ‘n, we are a nationalist movement of Indigenous Gente that lay claim to the land that is ours by birthright. As a nationalist movement we seek to free our people from the exploitation of an oppressive society that occupies our land. Thus, the principle of nationalism serves to preserve the cultural traditions of La Familia de La Raza and promotes our identity as a Chicana/Chicano Gente.

By Katy Grimes and Megan Barth
CA Marxists Ramping Up Destabilization of the Golden State
Immediately following the November election, California Governor Jerry Brown appointed U.S. Rep. Xavier Becerra (D) to replace State Attorney General Kamala Harris, who won election to the U.S. Senate seat vacated by the retiring Sen. Barbara Boxer.
Many wonder why Xavier Becerra was chosen by Brown. But all anyone has to do is peek into the radical California Legislature, and fanatical Gov. Jerry Brown, to see the trend of militant Marxist, Socialist, Jesuit, Liberation Theology, Latino activism on the increase.
The goal by these extremists in California is to push the state, and eventually the country to such a crisis, a reorganization is the only cure. That is what Communists do. Modern day “Progressives” as they like to be called, like Brown and Becerra, refer to themselves as Multiculturalists and Progressives. But as history very clearly demonstrates, using Marxism as the cure to anything in society is a very dark fairytale.
The term “progressive” is simply another way of saying “socialist” or “Marxist;” But it’s as important to recognize how liberation theology factors into the radical Latino lawmakers: In Latin America, the big enemy is not Marxism, it is capitalism. And the main enemy of liberation theology, according to its founder, the Rev. Gustavo Gutierrez of Peru, and many of its adherents, is the United States–Michael Novak, the author of the 1984 ”Freedom With Justice: Catholic Social Thought and Liberal Institutions.” Novak describes liberation theology as “gaining its excitement from flirting with Marxist thought and speech.”

Xavier Becerra
As Fox News pointed out in a 2003 interview on the Sean Hannitty Show, Becerra has a devout relationship with MEChA, as well as The Fabian Society. But don’t go looking for the clip; it is apparent Becerra’s people have been busy at work cleaning up his inline reputation and record.
According to a NewsMax account on Free Republic:
“I got to be the first in my family to go to college” thanks to MEChA, Becerra said.
Hannity repeatedly pressed Becerra on why he would belong to a group that preaches racial discrimination, prompting the Bustamente backer to complain, “Are you calling me a racist?”
When the Fox host pointed out that MEChA favors the return of California to Mexico, Becerra still declined to criticize the group, saying, “I got a lot of help from people in the organization who have promoted education for kids and who continue to do that. … What I know is what they do.”
MEChA is a Hispanic separatist organization (400 chapters nationwide and in many high schools) that encourages anti-American activities, civil disobedience, and romanticizes Mexican claims to the “lost Territories” of California and the Southwestern United States, in a Chicano country called “Aztlan.” The official national symbol of MEChA is an eagle holding a machete-like weapon and a stick of dynamite.
The Fabian Society and Fabian Socialism uses the teachings of John Maynard Keynes as their catechism of political economy. Like Marxism, it embraced the idea of a Communist Utopia, where the State owned everything and controlled every aspect of the public’s lives. They have installed Fabian Socialism and Keynesism as the new faith, both in the Universities and in Government bureaucracy. Keynes supported statism and socialism, and managed and planning economies. U.S. President Barack Obama has long advocated the use of Keynesian economic concepts — despite the fact that John Maynard Keynes was incompetent, a fraud, and accused of being a pedophile.
These groups have worked diligently behind the scenes to implement their Socialist policies into our government, labor unions and throughout academia. They have infected the working class, demanding higher and higher wages, resulting often in welfare and other government handouts once their employers are ruined. They use illegal immigrants as messengers of their ideology, demeaning patriotism, and America. And they have manipulated the political process so that only those candidates well-versed in Marxism receive the attention of the corporate Media.
Illegal Immigration and Marxism
Even though the law doesn’t allow them to vote, illegal immigrants are changing the landscape of the U.S. government, especially in California, by impacting the census’ through mass migration. California allows illegal aliens to vote.
Former Mechista Rep. Xavier Becerra, the U.S. congressman for California’s 31st District, says what all leftist Latino lawmakers say: their (illegal) constituents still pay taxes and contribute to society, therefore they should vote. — “An individual doesn’t have to be a citizen to pay taxes – you pay taxes if you work in this country, you pay taxes if you purchase something,” Becerra said.
Led by Los Angeles County Federation of Labor head Maria Elena Durazo, a group of socialist and Communist California labor officials and Democrat Party operatives created a program to target Latinos and immigrants (illegal and legal) to permanently drive California politics far to the left, Democrat political consultant Richie Ross wrote in CalBuzz in 2010. Ross openly boasts of targeting the Latino community’s fear of anti-illegal immigration measures, to drive the community even further into the arms of the Democratic Party.
In 1994, then-Governor Pete Wilson put Proposition 187 on the ballot.  It was called the nation’s first anti-immigrant initiative, but in fact the goal of Proposition 187 was to make illegal aliens ineligible for public benefits including public social services, public health care services, and public school education. It came in the middle of a deep recession in California and was popular partly because the fiscal estimate from the California Legislative Analyst’s Office said that it would save the state about $200 million/year.
Latinos and Communists
The two most significant Marxist groups in the United States, the Communist Party USA and Democratic Socialists of America, are both committed to increasing the Latino vote in order to give Democrats a permanent electoral majority.
Maria Elena Durazo,Los Angeles County Federation of Labor head, is closely associated with both groups. She is is also well connected to former LA Mayor and Gubernatorial hopeful Antonia Villaraigosa, as well as former California State Senator Gil Cedillo, both long time immigration activists.
“Durazo, Villaraigosa and Cedillo, all trained under legendary Los Angles Communist Party USA activist, Democratic Party activist and “immigration reform” pioneer Bert Corona,” Trevor Loudon wrote in 2013. All three have long ties to both the Communist Party USA and Democratic Socialists of America, and 

coincidentally were all prominent California supporters of presidential candidate Barack Obama and long time ally of both the Communists and DSA.
(former mayor of Mexico’s second largest city of Los Angeles) Villaraigosa has a long history with MEChA. As a student, he headed the UCLA chapter of MEChA, but left UCLA six weeks before graduation to become a full-time organizer with Corona’s Centro de Action Social Autonoma.
Another radical activist isRep. Luis Gutierrez (D-IL), a co-sponsor of the 2010 Comprehensive Immigration Reform. Gutierrez,  a former member of the Marxist-Leninist Puerto Rican Socialist Party, chairs the Immigration Task Force of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus. Longtime amnesty activists Gutierrez and Rep. Xavier Becerra (D-CA), both members of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, worked on the amnesty effort.
Communists seek to use amnestied illegals to build a “permanent progressive majority.” Most thinking Americans know that Democrats only care about illegals for the winning voting bloc they can provide, but most are unaware that this idea was hatched and developed by the American Communist Party, which Richie Ross clearly explains in his op ed:
The campaigns we developed broke new ground, organized new union workers, and increased the political impact Latino voters have had on California politics – simultaneously tripling their number of registered voters, increasing the Democratic share of that vote by 50%, and doubling the percentage of the total votes cast in California from Latinos.
Through the rest of the 1990′s our campaigns focused on legislative races in Los Angeles.  We succeeded.  But it was all small.
In 2000, our message was controversial (until it worked).  “If you want to make a difference, voting isn’t enough.  Don’t bother voting unless you sign our pledge to get 100% of your family to vote.”  Latino turnout rose… and accounted for 14% of the votes cast according to the State’s voter registration and voting history records.
The Enemies Within
Trevor Loudon’s 2013 book, Enemies Within: Communists, Socialists and Progressives in the U.S. Congress, “profiles fourteen Senators and more than fifty Representatives. Their ties to Communist Party USA, Democratic Socialists of America, Workers World Party, the Institute for Policy Studies, Council for a Livable World and other radical anti-American organizations.”
Loudon identifies Bert Corona, as the “Communist Father of the ‘Immigrants Rights’ movement” in 1960. In 1964, Corona, Cesar Chavez and future Democratic Socialists of America member Dolores Huerta forced Congress to end the guest worker “Bracero” program. Later, Corona sought ways to address “problems confronting Mexicans in the United States who had no visas or citizenship documents” – in other words, illegal aliens – including “how to defend persons detained by immigration authorities and how to help immigrants acquire disability and unemployment insurance and welfare.”
Loudon writes:
On March 11, 1998, Los Angeles Democratic Socialists of America leader Steve Tarzynski wrote an email to another Los Angeles DSA leader Harold Meyerson.
Tarzynski listed 25 people he thought should be on an “A-list” of “25 or so leaders/activists/intellectuals and/or “eminent persons” who would gather periodically to theorize/strategize about how to rebuild a progressive movement in our metropolitan area that could challenge for power.”
Included in a suggested elected officials sub-group were Mark Ridley-ThomasGloria RomeroJackie GoldbergGil CedilloTom HaydenAntonio VillaraigosaPaul Rosenstein and Congressmen Xavier BecerraHenry Waxman and Maxine Waters.
In further preparation for battle, the California

legislature just hired former Attorney General, 

Eric Holder. “Having the former attorney 

general of the United States brings us a lot of 

firepower in order to prepare and safeguard 

the values of the people of California.” Kevin 

de Leon, the Democratic leader of the Senate, 

said in an interview. “This means we are very, 

very serious.”
Very serious, and very Marxist, indeed.
Part 2 of this series will be published next we