Barrack Obama, trained and skilled in Alinsky-styled community organizing by agitation, is using religions and social differences as a surreptitious means to achieve his end goals, nationally and internationally. But what are Obama’s goals? And how do you know, since he is willing to lie to achieve his purpose and he is so skilled at doing so?
For example, Obama has spoken frequently about the idea of uniting the country and the need for bipartisan action. But his training, skills and actions produce exactly the opposite results; blame and class warfare produce divisions and less communication. He repeatedly talks of helping the poor, but in 2011 more than 46 million (15% of all Americans) got food stamps. That’s 45% higher than when Obama took office, and twice as high as the average for the previous 40 years.
In the early to mid-1980s, John L. McKnight helped train Barack Obama in the agitation/infiltration tactics of Saul Alinsky, whose Reveille for Radicals has been a blueprint for the revolutionary activism of “community organizers” since its 1946 publication, as has Alinsky’s 1972 book Rules for Radicals. Saul “The Red” Alinsky wrote a letter of recommendation for Obama when he applied to Harvard Law School. Alinsky, the father of community organizing, dreamed of socialism one day replacing the “jungle” of American capitalism. He wrote that he hoped “for a future where the means of production will be owned by all of the people instead of just a comparative handful.” In Rules for Radicals Alinsky wrote, “[t]he job of the organizer is to maneuver and bait the establishment so that it will publicly attack him as a ‘dangerous enemy.’
Alinsky dedicated the first edition of his book, “Rules for Radicals,” to Satan: “Lest we forget at least an over-the-shoulder acknowledgment to the very first radical known to man who rebelled against the establishment and did it so effectively that he at least won his own kingdom – Lucifer.”
Obama approached Northwestern University professor John L. McKnight – a loyal student of Alinsky’s radical tactics – to pen a letter to Harvard in the late 1980s. McKnight, who enforced affirmative action for Attorney General Robert Kennedy, was far more than that to young Obama. He helped train him in Alinsky’s agitation tactics.
The Chicago-based Gamaliel Foundation (GF) lists McKnight as a board director. From 1985 to 1988, Obama worked for a subsidiary of Gamaliel, where he cut his teeth as a community organizer on Chicago’s South Side. McKnight and Gamaliel, which was founded on Alinsky’s principles, provided training for the budding radical Obama. Before leaving for Harvard, Obama wrote an article published in a journal titled, “After Alinsky: Community Organizing in Illinois,” in which he praised McKnight and his organizing strategies. While at Harvard, Obama found time to take advanced training courses at the Industrial Areas Foundation, a group founded by Alinsky and affiliated with Gamaliel. He also would return to Chicago to work as a consultant and trainer for Gamaliel. Obama also served as a trainer for ACORN, the now disbanded organization indicted in multiple states for multiple types of criminal activities. Under the tutelage of McKnight and other hardcore students of Alinsky, Obama says he got the “best education I ever had, better than anything I got at Harvard Law School.” He made the remark in 2007 while campaigning in Iowa.
GF’s modus operandi is to bring local, inner-city churches into its fold, and then to pressure political and corporate leaders to support Gamaliel’s goals. Former GF community organizer Rey Lopez-Calderon reports that Gamaliel’s “culture” is exceedingly “strange and warped.” “[Gregory] Galluzzo,” says Calderon, “told me that he wanted organizers to be tough bastards who could build power like the Conquistadors.” Calderon further reveals that Galluzzo, in seminars, would teach trainees to be “ruthless” in actualizing the premise that “the ends justify the means,” a common underlying method throughout Alinsky’s books.
GF receives much of its funding from the Catholic Campaign for Human Development. Yet according to the Roman Catholic Faithful website, the foundation’s “goals and philosophies are at fundamental odds with Church teaching.” In March 2010, David Ricken — the Roman Catholic bishop of Green Bay, Wisconsin –said that certain “principles of the Gamaliel Foundation are inconsistent with the tenets of our Catholic Social Teaching.” Vicar general and Chancellor Father John Doerfler of Northeast Wisconsin specified one particularly problematic GF doctrine: “The end,” he said, “does not justify the means.”
According to Rutgers political scientist Heidi Swarts, who has studied GF extensively, Gamaliel’s organizers engage freely in ideological talk when speaking privately among themselves, but they carefully avoid such talk during their trainings so as not to alienate working-class people. In those settings, the organizers present their ideas as pragmatic, “commonsense solutions” for “working families.”
Like the Gamaliel Foundation itself, GF’s affiliates carefully select non-threatening names that form biblical acronyms. Michigan, for instance, has the Interfaith Strategy for Advocacy & Action in the Community (ISAAC); a Wisconsin affiliate is called Joining Our Neighbors, Advancing Hope (JONAH); and a New York affiliate is named Niagara Organizing Alliance for Hope (NOAH).
Former Jesuit priest Gregory Galluzzo was executive director of GF for 24 years beginning in 1986. Gamaliel was restructured as a community-organizing leadership institute that focused on training activists “to build and maintain powerful organizations in low-income communities.” GF has since grown into a network of faith-based community-organizing affiliates with branches in 18 U.S. states, South Africa, and the United Kingdom.
In the mid-1980s, Galluzzo served as a mentor for a young Barack Obama during the latter’s organizing days in Chicago. The Developing Communities Project, where Obama first worked as an organizer, was (and still is) part of the Gamaliel network. By early 1988, Obama had become a consultant for, and a trainer of, GF community organizers; he would maintain his ties to Gamaliel throughout his years in the U.S. Senate. As Galluzzo said shortly after Obama was elected President in 2008: “Barack has acknowledged publicly that he had been the director of a Gamaliel affiliate. He has supported Gamaliel throughout the years by conducting training [and attending] our public meetings.”
In 2001, Dennis Jacobsen, director of Gamaliel’s National Clergy Caucus, published Doing Justice: Congregations and Community Organizing, a handbook/ideological guide for GF’s religious organizers. Depicting the U.S. as a “sick society” in need of radical transformation, this text derides America’s free-market system for allegedly harming the poor. The author affirms that GF’s goal is to foment public anger and “shake the foundations of this society.” A self-described “radical Christian,” Jacobsen acknowledges that he has “deep prejudices … against wealthy people.”
Here’s Stanley Kurtz on Gamaliel and Obama in an article titled “Senator Stealth”:
The same separatist, anti-American theology of liberation that was so boldly and bitterly proclaimed by Obama’s pastor is shared, if more quietly, by Obama’s Gamaliel colleagues. The operative word here is “quietly.”
Gamaliel specializes in ideological stealth, and Obama, a master student of Gamaliel strategy, shows disturbing signs of being a sub rosa radical himself. Obama’s legislative tactics, as well as his persistent professions of non-ideological pragmatism, appear to be inspired by his radical mentors’ most sophisticated tactics. Not only has Obama studied, taught, and apparently absorbed stealth techniques from radical groups like Gamaliel and ACORN, but in his position as a board member of Chicago’s supposedly nonpartisan Woods Fund, he quietly funneled money to his radical allies — at the very moment he most needed their support to boost his political career. It’s high time for these shadowy, perhaps improper, ties to receive a dose of sunlight.
The Gamaliel connection appears to supply a solution to the riddle of Obama’s mysterious political persona. On one hand, he likes to highlight his days as a community organizer — a profession with proudly radical roots in the teachings of Chicago’s Saul Alinsky, author of the highly influential text Rules for Radicals. Obama even goes so far as to make the community-organizer image a metaphor for his distinctive conception of elective office. On the other hand, Obama presents himself as a post-ideological, consensus-minded politician who favors pragmatic, common-sense solutions to the issues of the day.
Candidate and President Obama promised to get unemployment down, but of course unemployment has gone up. Obama promised to solve the housing crisis, but it has gotten worse (1). Obama promised to get health care costs down and improve quality, but the cost of health insurance for a family of four has effectively almost doubled. On the stage in Grant Park, Obama said “I will listen to you,” “especially when we disagree.” And he proclaimed that his would be the most transparent administration, no lobbyists, no crony deals, but today his administration has more secrets than any before him and a super majority of Americans and more than half of U.S. states vigorously and legally oppose Obamacare, which he claims as his crowning achievement.
Obama’s 2012 campaign website claims that Obama is “The only candidate fighting for the middle class,” but his policies have produced a shrinking middle class with less income, less assets, and out of control debt. Obama said, “Words are important.” But there is no connection between his words and his actions. Citizens would fare better to listen to Obama’s words and then assume he means exactly the opposite.
Princeton Professor Cornel West, an African-American, eagerly shakes the hand of President Barack Obama in June 2010. Today, West calls Obama “a black mascot of Wall Street oligarchs.” Millions of Americans endured financial calamities in the recession. But for many in the black community, job loss has knocked them out of the middle class and back into poverty. And some experts warn of a historic reversal of hard-won economic gains that took black people decades to achieve. “History is going to say the black middle class was decimated” over the past few years, said Maya Wiley, director of the Center for Social Inclusion. “But we’re not done writing history.” Adds Algernon Austin, director of the Economic Policy Institute’s Program on Race, Ethnicity and the Economy: “The recession is not over for black folks.” Austin thinks more black people than ever before could fall out of the middle class because the unemployment rate for college-educated blacks recently peaked and blacks are overrepresented in state and local government jobs. Those are jobs that are being eliminated because of massive budget shortfalls.
What does Obama want? Based on his actions and policies, he wants a huge, permanent increase in the size of government. This is the “change” he campaigned on, but never described. His goal is to change the US into a European-style “Social Democracy,” a bureaucratically-driven nanny state with state-controlled capitalism, subservient to a supranational governing oligarchy of global bankers, corporations and elites, all paid for by redistributing wealth away from the middle class. For Obama, any and all religious, cultural and social issues including war are means to that end.
(1) Despite a massive federal bailout of the housing industry, 10.7 million American mortgages were underwater as of September 2011 – meaning the debt on these properties exceeds their fair market value. Another 2.4 million borrowers had an equity stake of less than 5 percent in their homes. Also, bear in mind that these dismal stats don’t include the nearly four million U.S. homes that have already been foreclosed on since the recession began in December 2007.
(2) According to the Census, 97.3 million Americans are currently classified as low income. Meanwhile an additional 49.1 million Americans are currently living below the poverty line. Add those numbers together and you’ve got 146.4 million people – or 48 percent of the country – who are currently either poor or low income, an increase of 4 million people from 2009. Within that total an estimated 44 million people – or 15 percent of the population – are currently receiving food stamps, a 69 percent increase from 2007.
(3) In 2004, the median net worth of white households was $134,280, compared with $13,450 for black households, according to an analysis of Federal Reserve data by the Economic Policy Institute. By 2009, the median net worth for white households had fallen 24 percent to $97,860; the median net worth for black households had fallen 83 percent to $2,170, according to the institute.
(4) The black unemployment rate has risen from 14.7 to 16.2 percent, according to the Department of Labor. Last April, black male unemployment hit the highest rate since the government began keeping track in 1972
References: No claim to originality. Contents above heavily borrowed from these and other references.