Here's a quiz: What political group published this list of reasons they hope George W. Bush will be defeated in the upcoming Presidential election? Read them carefully and see if you can tell.
1. Bush is destroying workers rights and outsourcing jobs instead of protecting the right to organize and creating new jobs rebuilding schools, bridges, roads and hospitals.
2. Bush is privatizing Medicare, Social Security and public education with phony reforms instead of enacting health care for all, protecting retirement funds and full funding for public education through college.
3. Bush is bankrupting the Federal Government with giant tax cuts for the very rich and super-funds to the military instead of securing the budget for human needs by taxing the rich and spending on human needs.
4. Bush is rolling back civil rights gains instead of enforcing and expanding affirmative action to end racism in all areas of life.
5. Bush is curtailing women's rights and choice by undermining Roe v. Wade instead of upholding the right to choice and ending the gender wage gap.
6. Bush is abusing immigrant workers in low-wage jobs instead of providing a clear path to citizenship and equal rights.
7. Bush is exploiting and ruining the environment by protecting corporate polluters instead of conserving our natural resources for the public good.
8. Bush's war in Iraq is a disaster for our security and economy. He is pushing for more preemptive wars and for first strike nuclear military policy instead of negotiations and cooperation utilizing the UN.
9. Bush is denying civil liberties and free speech in the name of fighting terrorism instead of repealing the USA Patriot Act and helping cities, towns and states fund firefighters and police.
10. Bush discriminates against Gays and Lesbians with a Constitutional Amendment instead of expanding civil rights and liberties for all.
Just how true is the old phrase, "birds of a feather flock together?" As the Democratic party has drifted further and further left, many have speculated that it was only a matter of time before they became indistinguishable from our old enemies the Communists. Lo and behold, the Communist Party USA has recently published on its web site the above document, "Top Ten Reasons to Defeat Bush." It could just as easily have been taken from the Democratic National Committee's web page, word for word. In fact, the list could double as Kerry supporter talking points. Let's take them one by one.
1. Calling for a government jobs program is as close to Communism as one can get. The WPA was a necessary evil during the full-blown depression America suffered in the early 1930's, when unemployment rates ran as high as thirty percent. It was dismantled as soon as the economy recovered. Making more citizens dependent on the government for income isn't the sort of thing a society based on freedom and capitalism should advocate as a normal matter of course. As for outsourcing jobs, Democrats and Communists pretend not to know that outsourced jobs have been more than balanced by insourced jobs. That's free market capitalism at work. As long as the US provides an environment in which small businesses -- the backbone of our economy -- can thrive, business will be good.
2. Health care for all, a neat euphemism for socialised medicine, only increases one's dependence on the government -- an important pillar of Communism. Socialised medicine is unworkable. Under Great Britain's national health care system, for instance, patients often wait months for heart surgery... unless they have their operation in another country. As for public education, the interests of children would be far better served by holding the system accountable for giving them a real education, instead of processing them through the system like so many head of cattle. What good are functional illiterates with college degrees they can't even read? The No Child Left behind Act will force the system to actually educate children, although school vouchers would put the power to hold school systems accountable directly into the hands of the parents.
3. Democrats and Communists always say that they want to tax "the rich," but they never say how they plan to do so. Since the truly rich -- like Teresa Heinz-Kerry, for instance -- don't have an actual income, raising or lowering the income tax will never affect them in any way. When Democrats and Communists say they plan to raise taxes on the rich, they mean business owners and entrepreneurs -- the people who drive our economy. Raising taxes on their businesses would cause them to cut back on expansion, fire workers, and raise the prices of their goods and services to make up the loss. No one has yet been able to get a Democrat, Communist or Liberal to explain how that will improve the economy... unless large industries are nationalised, owned or at least controlled by the government. The last political party to do that was the National Socialist Party of Germany, otherwise known as the Nazis.
4. Affirmative Action will never end racism; it only covers it up while making it worse. As long as people are given advantages based on skin color, others will resent it and racism will flourish. It's just the usual Democrat attempt to keep people divided along racial and economic lines so they can promise reforms in exchange for power. The only way to end racism is to stop teaching people that their differences are more important than their similarities, that their character and abilities mean far less than the color of their skin. Racism will continue as long as groups like the NAACP -- now little more than a mouthpiece for the DNC -- undermine powerful black people like Colin Powell and Condoleeza Rice for purely political motives. Instead of praising their high-level appointments, based on their suitability for the jobs, so-called "civil rights" organisations denigrate them as "sellouts."
5. Many people in this country continue to oppose abortion, despite "mainstream" media's euphemistically calling abortion exercising a "right to choose." A plurality believes it should be legal only under tighter restrictions than currently exist. President Bush has never tried to outlaw abortion, because he doesn't believe "the culture has changed to the extent that the American people or the Congress would totally ban abortions." A clear majority (68%, according to a CNN/USA Today/Gallup Poll taken in October 2003) supported the President's bill to make partial-birth abortions illegal. This puts Democrats and Communists in the bizarre position of demanding that the current President be replaced for doing what the people actually wanted him to do. Note that those polls were taken before it was shown that babies in the womb cry, smile, yawn and even play, as ultrasound pictures have since proven. Women who choose to stay home and raise their children are the largest contributors to the gender wage gap. (They could call it exercising their right to choose, but that choice isn't acceptable to the Left.) The only way to legislate it away would be to mandate that all children must be raised in State-run daycare centers... something that would please the Communists no end.
6. Obviously the Democrats and Communists are referring to illegal immigrants. The only "clear path" they should get is one that leads to the nearest border... and the majority of Americans agree. Three fourths of Americans say that the United States should not make it easier for illegal immigrants to become citizens, according to a January 2004 Gallup poll.
7. Regulated private industry is actually the best guarantor of conservation of natural resources, as long as the laws are enforced. Unlike Liberals, Democrats and Communists, corporations plan for long-term use of natural resources, the same way a farmer plans to harvest his fields year after year. Locking sections of the country behind glass will never serve "the public good." Consider the terrible California fires of 2003. They spread so quickly and so far because the forest was unregulated and unharvested due to environmentalism gone wild. Dead trees were never removed and undergrowth never cleared. The animals that would have performed that function ceased to inhabit California decades ago; humans are responsible for taking on the job of forest maintenance. Instead, due to environmentalism, we have been forced to abandon that responsibility in the name of "preservation." American industry already has the most restrictive pollution controls in the world. According to the CIA World Factbook 2003, there are very few countries without environmental problems, most of them far worse than can be found in the US.
8. By removing a brutal totalitarian dictator who supported international terrorism and replacing him with a democracy, President Bush hopes to attack terrorism at its very heart. Congress approved the liberation of Iraq when they voted the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq into law, otherwise it could never have taken place. What kind of people argue against freeing people from brutal oppression? At one time, it was believed by some that Liberals actually stood for freedom from oppression, but their support for Communism and totalitarian dictatorships has finally uncovered the lie. As for the United Nations, it's doubtful that another such corrupt, self-serving, amoral gathering of international villains could be assembled outside of a James Bond film.
9. No one has yet been able to find a single case of a single American citizen's civil liberties being impacted by the PATRIOT Act. (Before you scream, "Jose Padilla," be aware that he is being held under the 1942 case ex parte Quirin, not the PATRIOT Act.) No one's free speech has been taken away, no one has been herded into death camps, no one has lost the right to own a gun. Whoops... that's one civil right the Left actually does want to remove from American citizens.
10. The proposed Constitutional amendment to define marriage was done in a perfectly legal manner, and was defeated fairly in the Senate. Preventing runaway courts from forcing a redefinition of marriage down the throats of a people that neither want nor need it is not discrimination, it's protecting the rights of the majority from being abused by a tiny minority. Marriage has deep roots in religion, biology and millennia of tradition; gay "marriage" is an attempt to force a change in a society by legislation when the people clearly want no such thing. According to a CBS poll taken in February 2004, the public "seems to have become even less receptive toward gay marriage in the past seven months. Although a majority has always opposed gay marriage, last July, 40% said they would favor allowing homosexual couples to legally marry, as did 34% in December. That figure is now 30%." Why do Democrats and Communists continue to push the issue? It divides people, creates tension, and distracts voters from the booming economy and successful prosecution of the war on terror. The Left believes that fomenting tension and division will convince Americans to vote for John Kerry, though there's no logical reason to do so.
And if the American citizens suffer from a damaged economy, lose ground in the fight against terrorism and take a severe blow to their self-confidence as Kerry raises taxes and moves the war on terrorism into the courtroom, then so be it, right? As long as the Democrats -- and by association, the Communists -- win.
Posted at Sunday, July 18, 2004 by
CavalierX
 |  |  |
liberty July 20, 2004 04:13 PM PDT
Brilliant.
I think for the most part that the list is self-evidently the party line among democrats, but it would be interesting to find a similar list on their sites. Then the response from the Marxian left would have to be:
So what? We all agree on certain points - the sky is blue. (An actual argument made on my site by a leftist who thought that everybody must agree with Marx that capitalism can no longer work with a free market and small government since its no longer pre-industrial and workers need protection from business now, and security from the government)
But, we can compare to the communist manifesto points and other communist documents to show that these have been their grinding points from the start as they do each lead toward socialism.
My big question these days is this (don't think I am being too paranoid here):
The Soviet Union is dead. (right? Putin is ex-KGB, not still communist...) -- so where is all the funding for these huge mass communist movements coming from? 100,000 people at anti-WTO protests -- but no KGB to organize it? Many of these groups are communist - A.N.S.W.E.R. for example and allegedly, NION, but are they just lone commies joining forces or do they have backing? I suppose before the USSR people had to do it somehow... |
 |

 |  |  |
JM July 20, 2004 04:54 PM PDT
>so where is all the funding for
>these huge mass communist
>movements coming from?
Like so many questions,the answer can be found on the Web. See "Tracking Down A Fifth Column" at: http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Printable.asp?ID=3181 |
 |

 |  |  |
Dan July 21, 2004 06:51 AM PDT
I just want to know. Will Dr. goldfinger Tell the president his plan for world domination right before the elections so that he can be foiled again?? |
 |

 |  |  |
OH Conservative July 21, 2004 01:53 PM PDT
Without peeking at the source I would have said these 10 points were part of the Democratic platform. I read today that the Communist Party USA has endorsed Kerry for president. Wake up America before it is too late. |
 |

 |  |  |
JM July 21, 2004 04:26 PM PDT
Just thought I would give you all a look at the kind of stupidity generated every time I write anything. I got this one by email:
"You probably forgot how many people did totalitarian communistic soviet union freed during world war II while you morons were drinking beer until pearl harbor,irrogant conservative punk"
- sadfasd@pop.com
Isn't that great! I didn't know Joe Stalin Junior was reading my blog! I wonder how he feels about the fact that his dad murdered at least 20 million people and enslaved countless millions more?
http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/tribune-review/opinion/guest/s_121699.html |
 |

 |  |  |
barnclnr53 July 21, 2004 07:36 PM PDT
It is time to clean out the barn and then have a Boston Tea Party where we dunk the treasonous traitors into the harbor.
We the people can continue swatting flies and lose our country or we can get to the rot that is breeding the flies and have a bloodless revolution. The rot was introduced into this country in 1958 and you can find every thing you need to know by doing a 'Search' of the Federation of Earth which identifies itself as the New World Order and the UN. Everything you have on your list comes straight from the pages of this diabolical monster which has spread its tentacles and permeated the very fiber of our country. That is because they are one and the same: the Federation of Earth, The Communist Party and the Democrat Party (since 1968).
The first thing that must be done is for we the people to bombard the 'news' networks with the knowledge that we are on to the their plan, we will not lose our focus and we don't need their 'analysis' of the news which was introduced in the 1970's and isn't 'news' at all but propaganda for the advancement of the Federation of Earth which is far closer to fulfillment than most people realize. If these diabolical world organizators are to win, they must see Bush defeated and Kerry elected since they did not get Al 'Earth in the Balance' Gore. That was a set back when they were sooo close.
Use the list of 'World Problems' from the Federation of Earth aka the New World Order aka the UN for a score card in the upcoming conventions and listen for the keywords. |
 |

 |  |  |
JM July 21, 2004 08:22 PM PDT
If you mean the World Federalist Association, our pal Hillary is with them. Not only did she attend their yearly gathering in 1999, she introduced speaker Walter Cronkite. See what I wrote about it here:
http://guardian.blogdrive.com/archive/cm-11_cy-2003_m-11_d-18_y-2003_o-0.html |
 |

 |  |  |
Laura July 22, 2004 05:54 AM PDT
Barnclnr: Your info does not surprise me. How to reach the people when the media is touting this Communist philosophy. Many don't have a PC, and many more do not read anymore. It is frustrating. This AM I am searching for news of the Berger scandel. Not finding much except 'timing'. The prisoner 'abuse' story was hyped so that's all you heard everytime you turned on the news for weeks. The Democrat party is not what it was in the days of FDR and Truman. If Bush is to win he must beat the media. |
 |

 |  |  |
Lea July 22, 2004 04:21 PM PDT
They've change their name. It's now Citizens for Global Solution. They are masking their purpose under the guise of fighting world terrorism and promoting cooperation between nations. |
 |

 |  |  |
JannyMae July 23, 2004 07:18 PM PDT
I had seen this before, but you did one great job of refuting the points! Certainly, it could easily be out of the democrat's talking points. Kinda scary... |
 |

 |  |  |
liberty July 24, 2004 03:35 PM PDT
Here's another compelling comparison:
http://www.alphapatriot.com/home/archives/2004/07/24/two_americas.html |
 |

 |  |  |
JDurelo August 18, 2004 05:52 PM PDT
You present a very interesting point about insourced vs. outsourced jobs, and back it up with evidence. Your text phrase, “outsourced jobs have been more than balanced by insourced jobs,” links to an article from the OFII on insourcing vs. outsourcing.
This article states that 10 million jobs, or 7 percent of domestic U.S. employment, are outsourced, while 6.5 million jobs are insourced. This is a net movement of 3.5 million jobs out of the United States to other countries. 3.5 million jobs (2.45% of U.S. domestic employment, again using these same figures) is more than a drop in the bucket, particularly compared to the miniscule job growth we've seen in the past couple years. By the way, this report was published by OFII. In the organization's own words, “OFII is a business association in Washington D.C. representing the U.S. subsidiaries of international companies.” |
 |

 |  |  |
JDurelo August 18, 2004 05:58 PM PDT
One more thing on your first point...take a look at John Kerry's platform on international trade.
http://www.johnkerry.com/issues/economy/trade.html
I believe that once you get beyond the political rhetoric (which is entirely appropriate on the campaign Web site) you will find some very solid ideas, but I welcome you to refute it. That's what this sort of discussion is all about.
Thanks for providing a legitimate forum for discussion. |
 |