17 Mar

This was not the first time Soledad O’Brien tried to rewrite history [Reader Post]

                                       

Obama sycophant Soledad O’Brien got into a tussle with Joel Pollak of Breitbart.com and had her head handed to her as she tried desperately to dissuade viewers of the truth- that Barack Obama was heavily influenced by the radical Bell.

In her conversation with Pollak she at first appeared not to know what Critical Race Theory actually was while at the same time she was sure Pollak was wrong. From somewhere she came up with a definition that happened to be curiously similar to the one found in Wikipedia. Soon after the Wikipedia page for CRT was changed repeatedly and so often that it came under editorial lockdown.

TheDC also previously reported that an editorial lock was placed Monday on the Wikipedia article about Critical Race Theory itself, following a separate “edit war” which followed a CNN debate between O’Brien and a Breitbart.com editor. While O’Brien insisted on-air that Critical Race Theory was not a backlash against perceived “white supremacy,” the theory’s Wikipedia article mentioned white supremacy in two different sections — including a definition of Critical Race Theory from UCLA.

O’Brien was so flummoxed that she invited another liberal professor to attempt to rewrite history at CNN, which caught the eye of Skook.

There is nothing wrong with being a sycophantic fan of a writer, but the problem becomes apparent when the fan is passed off as an objective analyst; unfortunately, for Soledad, she was humiliated and became a laughingstock, along with her employer, the Obama Propaganda Bureau, CNN.

CNN has now decided to do battle with the forces that have no reservations against calling the racist Derrick Bell, a racist, by rewriting or blunting the message of the racist mentor of President Obama and trying once again to repackage the vile message of racism under a pretense of scholarly circumlocution.

The story of our president and the endemic racism of his associates is ongoing with many surprises.

Michelle Malkin asked the question “What’s the Matter with Soledad O’Brien?”

When viewers took to Twitter to pepper O’Brien with follow-up questions about critical race theory, the CNN star had a twit fit. She invited a liberal professor, Emory University’s Dorothy Brown, on her television show to back her up and then lashed out: “See? That was our critical race theory 101. Stop tweeting me. We have moved on, people.”

Not so fast, sister.

Turns out that O’Brien, a Harvard grad, has a rather emotional connection to Bell. As documented at my new Twitter curation/aggregation site Twitchy.com, O’Brien tweeted that it was a “rough day” for her when Bell passed away last fall. She wrote that she had “just started re-reading” one of his books and mourned again: “RIP Prof. Bell.” O’Brien also shared tributes to Bell from fellow Harvard prof and friend of Obama Charles Ogletree. That’s the same Professor Ogletree who bragged that he “hid” the Obama/Bell video during the 2008 campaign.

O’Brien failed to disclose her pro-Bell bias to viewers before her segments.

O’Brien also failed to disclose that the liberal prof who denied on her show that critical race theory had aaaaaanything to do with bashing America as a white supremacy-ruled government actually wrote the exact opposite. In one of her own books, Brown asserted that the purpose of CRT was to “highlight the ways in which the law is not neutral and objective, but designed to support White supremacy and the subordination of people of color.” Oops.

But this wasn’t the first time O’Brien tried to shield her viewers from the truth. Far from it.

In January she flailed away at Newt Gingrich when Gingrich tied Saul Alinsky to Barack Obama.

YouTube Preview Image

She actually has the audacity (to coin a term) to try to tie Alinsky to the Tea Party.


Transcript:

O’BRIEN: Ok first of all, nothing wrong with getting ideas at Harvard and Columbia by the way. But also people listening are like, “Huh, who is Saul Alinsky?” Well, the Speaker mentions Saul Alinsky often especially when he is talking about President Obama and what Speaker Gingrich believes to be his radical liberal beliefs.

So we wanted to ask, who’s Saul Alinsky? He’s a guy who was born in Chicago in 1909. He was a community organizer, just like a young Barack Obama in Chicago as well. He spent his life helping minorities in poor neighborhoods exert their political force by organizing them to get to the polls.

But Alinsky is probably best known for a book that he wrote which is called “Rules for Radicals.” And he is referring to Machiavelli’s “The Prince” and he wrote this, “The Prince was written by Machiavelli for the haves to hold power.” “Rules for Radicals”, his book is written for the have-nots on how to take it away.

President Obama has never said that he was influenced by Alinsky. In fact, he was 10 years old when Alinsky passed away. And in doing our research, we found this. Alinsky’s organizational tactics haven’t only influenced Democrats. In fact, his practices have been linked to some conservatives and his tactics have been used with great success by the Tea Party.

Former House Republican Majority Leader Dick Armey admits he has been influenced by Alinsky, saying, quote, “What I think of Alinsky is that he is very good at what he did, but what he did was not good.” And in an interview with “The Financial Times,” the head of FreedomWorks which is aligned with the Tea Party, said regarding Alinsky’s work, “We don’t organize people to turn up at these town hall meetings, but we tell them about the meetings and we suggest good questions they could asks – ask, I mean, not asks.

Sounds like something Alinsky might do. The problem, perhaps, that Newt Gingrich has with Alinsky and the reason he is trying to link him to President Obama wasn’t really Alinsky’s organizational skills but the book outlining how the have-nots could take power from the haves. So we will be sure to ask the former Speaker that next time we get a chance to talk to him about that.

Did you catch it?

“President Obama has never said that he was influenced by Alinsky.”

Duh.

Obama has never said he was influenced by Bill Ayers or Bernadine Dohrn either.

But the facts tell us otherwise:

• Obama first learned Alinsky’s rules in the 1980s, when Alinskyite radicals with the Chicago-based Alinsky group Gamaliel Foundation recruited, hired, trained and paid him as a community organizer in South Side Chicago. (Gamaliel’s website expressly states it grew out of the Alinsky movement.)

• In 1988, Obama even wrote a chapter for the book “After Alinsky: Community Organizing in Illinois,” in which he lamented organizers’ “lack of power” in implementing change.

• Gamaliel board member John McKnight, a hard-core student of Alinsky, penned a letter for Obama to help him get into Harvard Law School.

• Obama took a break from his Harvard studies to travel to Los Angeles for eight days of intense training at Alinsky’s Industrial Areas Foundation, a station of the cross for acolytes.

• In turn, he trained other community organizers in Alinsky agitation tactics.

• Obama also taught Alinsky’s “Power Analysis” methods at the University of Chicago.

• During the presidential campaign, Obama hired one of his Gamaliel mentors, Mike Kruglik, to train young campaign workers in Alinsky tactics at “Camp Obama,” a school set up at Obama headquarters in Chicago. The tactics helped Obama capture the youth vote like no other president before him.

• Power would no longer be an issue, as Obama infiltrated the highest echelon of the political establishment — the White House — fulfilling Alinsky’s vision of a new “vanguard” of coat-and-tie radicals who “work inside the system” to change the system.

• After the election, his other Gamaliel mentor, Jerry Kellman (who hired him and whose identity Obama disguised in his memoir), helped the Obama administration establish Organizing for America, which mobilizes young supporters to agitate for Obama’s legislative agenda using “Rules for Radicals.”

• Obama’s favorite rule is No. 13: “Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it and polarize it.” You see that in his attacks on “fat cat bankers,” “greedy health insurers” and “millionaires and billionaires.” He also readily applies Alinsky’s fifth rule of “ridiculing” the opposition.

“Obama learned his lesson well,” said David Alinsky, son of the late socialist. “I am proud to see that my father’s model for organizing is being applied successfully beyond local community organizing.”

I did not know that Obama was specifically indoctrinated at an Alinsky re-education camp. That’s something people ought to know.

But he’s never said he was influenced by Alinsky, right, Soledad? Nothing to see here, just move along.
Except- if that’s the case, why are they hiding everything?

The videotape of Obama praising and hugging his America-bashing, Constitution-trashing law professor Derrick Bell isn’t the only evidence that’s been hidden from the public. A 1998 video of Obama praising the late Marxist agitator Saul “The Red” Alinsky alongside a panel of hard-core Chicago communists also exists. Yet it, too, has been withheld.

So has a 2003 video of Obama speaking at a Chicago dinner held in honor of former PLO spokesman Rashid Khalidi. Anger at Israel and U.S. foreign policy were expressed during the private banquet.

Why have Obama’s remarks and actions during the controversial event been suppressed? Perhaps it’s because the radical Khalidi — a close friend and neighbor of Obama, who held a 2000 political fundraiser in his home for him — has strongly defended the use of violence by Palestinians against Israel, while expressing clearly anti-American views.

If there’s nothing to hide, why keep these tapes under wraps? Why not release them?

Obama’s supporters pretend there’s nothing all that radioactive about Khalidi or Alinsky, who authored the Left’s bible, “Rules for Radicals.”

But if Alinsky is not a problem, why did Obama disguise the name of his radical Alinsky trainer Jerry Kellman in his memoir? And why did he also try to shield from readers the identity of his Alinsky mentor John McKnight, who wrote him a letter of recommendation to Harvard?

If his Alinskyite indoctrination is of no concern, why did Obama leave out his weeks-long training at Alinsky’s Industrial Areas Foundation in Los Angeles? This station of the cross for Alinsky acolytes is strangely missing from all 500 pages of his tediously detailed memoir.

For that matter, the late Alinsky is not cited by name in either of the president’s autobiographies, even though leftist activists confess this father of community organizing had a powerful influence on Obama.

Moreover, if communist Frank Marshall Davis wasn’t a controversial factor in Obama’s life, why did Obama also mask his identity in his first memoir? If listening, spellbound, at the feet of a known subversive isn’t a red flag, why keep his real profile a secret?

Obama also couldn’t find room in “Dreams From My Father” to mention the most striking thing about his father’s politics. Obama Sr. was a pro-Soviet socialist, who as a government economist wrote a communist tract for Kenya in 1965.

The folks at Investors.com have it nailed:

Some argue that linking him to this vast underground network of radicals is “guilt by association.” Actually, it’s guilt by participation.

Obama at one point was an employee of the radical shakedown group Acorn, and later trained its goons in Alinsky agitation tactics. He also worked with Pentagon-bombing Marxist Bill Ayers on the board of the Woods Fund, where the two comrades doled out cash to other radical groups.

In other words, Obama didn’t just rub elbows with radicals, he operated as a one. It’s now plain he and his fellow travelers are intentionally suppressing information that could provide the voting public a clearer link between the incumbent and radicalism.

Obama’s new campaign infomercial, ironically titled “The Road We’ve Traveled,” is just another attempt to suspend disbelief before the election.

Darn right. This next election is a litmus test of the intelligence of this country. Soledad O’Brien has already failed.

About DrJohn

DrJohn has been a health care professional for more than 30 years. In addition to clinical practice he has done extensive research and has published widely with over 70 original articles and abstracts in the peer-reviewed literature. DrJohn is well known in his field and has lectured on every continent except for Antarctica. He has been married to the same wonderful lady for over 30 years and has three kids- two sons, both of whom are attorneys and one daughter on her way into the field of education. DrJohn was brought up with the concept that one can do well if one is prepared to work hard but nothing in life is guaranteed. Except for liberals being foolish.
This entry was posted in ACORN, Ayers, Barack Obama, Celebrity Idiots, Deception and Lies, Liberal Idiots, Media, MSM Bias, Obama Euphoric-Rapture Syndrome, Politics, propaganda bureau, Radical Relationships and tagged , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink. Saturday, March 17th, 2012 at 6:00 pm
| 3,412 views

13 Responses to This was not the first time Soledad O’Brien tried to rewrite history [Reader Post]

  1. Skook says: 1

    Saul Alinsky:

    Alinsky once boasted, “I feel confident that I could persuade a millionaire on a Friday to subsidize a revolution for Saturday out of which he would make a huge profit on Sunday even though he was certain to be executed on Monday.”

    Hillary wrote a 92 page senior thesis on Saul Alinsky, how cute. The Marxists have taken over the Democrat Party, how can real Americans abide by this subversion of our American way of life and our freedoms.

    http://old.tehrantimes.com/index_View.asp?code=161235

    ReplyReply
  2. anticsrocks says: 2

    My WWII veterean, 85 year old father just doesn’t get why I am not a Democrat. When I tried to tell him that what he knew as the Dem party as a young man is worlds apart from what it is now, he didn’t get it . Sadly he suffered a stroke and I lost a great part of who my father was. He is still with me, but in a sense, he isn’t. So now if politics comes up, I just steer the conversation away so as not to upset him.

    He lied about his age to become a Marine and serve in WWII. He was in the invasion of Okinawa and saw heavy action; stood in awe at viewing the mushroom cloud over Japan, and had orders in hand for massive Allied troop movements to mainland China in preparation for invading Japan. He is a patriot and a great American. If he could truly know that what he fought for is being bastardized by Obama, Alinsky, Axelrod, etc… he would be as angry as I am, if not more so.

    Useful idiots like Soledad Obrien are, in their own way as dangerous as any other threat to our culture and Constitution.

    ReplyReply
  3. marc says: 3

    Alinsky once boasted, “I feel confident that I could persuade a millionaire on a Friday to subsidize a revolution for Saturday out of which he would make a huge profit on Sunday even though he was certain to be executed on Monday

    Looking at all those rich, useful idiots in hollywood, I wouldn’t doubt this for a second.

    ReplyReply
  4. hitthedeck says: 4

    @Skook: The lawyer Obama reminds me of another lawyer who said he was bringing hope and change to Cuba. Fidel Castro did not reveal that he was a communist until he became president. The Cuban people got their change! One dictator was changed for another and now there is no hope.

    ReplyReply
  5. retire05 says: 5

    “If you voted Obama into office to prove you’re not a racist, you need to vote him out of office to prove you’re not an idiot.

    That is all that needs to be said.

    ReplyReply
  6. Smokey Behr says: 6

    @hitthedeck: I’ve been telling people that if Obama is re-elected, there will be an assassination, a revolution, or both.

    ReplyReply
  7. hitthedeck says: 7

    Smokey if he looses it could be just as bad with the commies burning down cities and crying that the republicans fixed the election. This is the crap that Obama has trained with his community organizing. He has been very successful in dividing our country. He has spread hate and wants revolution for a communist takeover. He reminds me of another lawyer by the name of Fidel Castro who kept his secret of being a communist until after he became president.

    ReplyReply
  8. drjohn says: 8

    @hitthedeck: I truly think there would be a collective sigh of relief. They know he sucks. They know he’s a liar.

    ReplyReply
  9. hitthedeck says: 9

    drjohn there will never be relief until these left wing extremists are purged from government offices. We have people in congress who have forsaken our Constitution. We have American trades unions walking hand to hand with the American communist party and Obama has planted socialists in the green movement. The American people do not know just how many extremists are in our government. The liberal media will not expose them and have left wing reporters that portray Obama as the savior of the nation. It will take a strong President to rid our nation of those who want to destroy our way of life and probably take years to cleanse our government.

    ReplyReply
  10. Ditto says: 10

    It is also appears to be necessary to cleanse the Republican party of the establishment progressives who have taken over the reins of the GOP and continually provide us with ineffective progressive “moderate” leadership. The Tea Party portion of society must become organized with a clear mission and agenda to rebuild this nation, remove the progressive elite’s of both parties from their positions of power, to downsize oppressive government, reform our school systems and reinstate the Constitution as the law of the land. But they must do so with a careful eye, for just as surely as the Reform Party was infiltrated and destroyed from within, so will the progressive’s use subterfuge and camouflage to defuse and destroy and organized Tea Party movement.

    ReplyReply
  11. Drumwaster says: 11

    Obama was only ten when Alinsky died? I imagine that Alinsky hadn’t yet been born when Karl Marx died, but the influence there is unmistakable… never mind Machiavelli.

    ReplyReply
  12. AnonymousDrivel says: 12

    @Drumwaster: Exactly. To broaden that out a bit, Jesus died a good while ago, yet, somehow, his life left a bit of an imprint. I know some people who never met the man but, curiously, worship his life and deeds.

    O’Brien is throwing out enough red herrings to actually feed the masses.

    ReplyReply
  13. Pingback: Soledad O’Brien: Me? Biased? [Reader Post] | Flopping Aces

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>