Obama WAS a "New Party MEMBER": a "Party within a Party".

I have wanted to write on Obama’s link to the Marxist New Party and to the socialist DSA and just can’t get to it… there’s just so much to try to keep up with. Fortunately hundreds of others are on top of Mr. Obama and his wiley ways of shrugging off his bogus past as just conservative lies and internet noise.

Having seen on other sites that there is a New Party web page showing Obama was a MEMBER (and not just an unaware ‘candidate’ supported by a left wing socialist group)I tried to find a page that stated MEMBER of– not just the words ‘candidate’ – but MEMBER.

Keep in mind I had seen copies of such pages at other sites but I always like to try to find my own and confirm the root source.

Links at other pages listed at many websites:
http://www.freepress.org/Backup/UnixBackup/pubhtml/newparty/newpart5.html
http://web.archive.org/web/20010306031216/www.newparty.org/up9610.html
http://web.archive.org/web/19990218075127/www.freepress.org/newparty/newpart4.html

Well there is no speculation – he was a MEMBER.

I’d like to write up paragraphs of what this New Party goals are but most has been said everywhere else. I read a lot that they have gone belly-up in 1990. Not so, active in 2008 minimum.
In order to build an organizational and financial base the NP sponsored house parties…house parties- Ayers- house parties- Obama – hummm – do you think?

The one thing I don’t find much anywhere is their written goals to infiltrate the Democratic party and build a coalition of a “party within a party“. (re-find the link on their site that explains their infiltration techniques using the Democratic party voting base to get their own (small d) members in.)

…a “party within a party”.

Look around – this they (and similar octapie) have done starting nearly 2 decades ago with school boards, city councils, county boards, and have moved right up the elective ladder. There is a very long list in nearly every State of their victories. (upload list and put in url here) Obama is on their member list. If you have a problem with that you should take a look at who’s sitting on your child’s school board.

Why I’m getting this done today is because once again there was a concerted effort to erase Obama’s background, as has been done on so many websites, that once carried information detrimental to Obama’s history.

If you go to archive.org (using IE) and input http://www.newparty.org and then open Feb 05 97 what you then get when you click on the What’s New! Link is a BLANK page .
If you don’t want to go through those motions go direct here…

Internet Explorer returns a blank page, yes?

Now, using the same url but using Firefox you get a not so blank page that looks something like this instead:

---

N e w  P a r t y

---

A Fair Economy.   A Real Democracy.   A New Party

email:
phone: 1-800-200-1294

227 West 40th Street,
Suite 1303
NY, NY 10018

---

Site maintained by: np-tech@nettexas.com

© 1996, The New Party

---

The blank whats_new.html page using Internet Explorer made me scratch my head – maybe it was my version 7? Reboot?

So I opened Firefox and got something completely different, as shown above.

innocent looking …nothing here- go away.

wth? so I opened the SOURCE and there the page content was. The html was being blocked from being loaded.

Skimming down the contents of the Source, you can see the html urls that would have been links on the mal-jacked whats_new.html page…had it been allowed to loaded up.

Sooo much obscured transparency with this Obama and his pals, eh?

In your browser address box – remove whats_new.html and tack on too the end of the url octup.html or elections96.html found in the Source… and the hidden links that you would have seen on the what’snew page… loads up.

According to google the following urls may be the first urls anywhere on the net; I doubt that. Hyper-Links may be out there under the guise of ‘click HERE’. But it’s possible. Hey, maybe Wikipedia will put Obama back on the New Party list now. Doubtful too.

http://web.archive.org/web/19970205071722/www.newparty.org/octup.html

http://web.archive.org/web/19970205071734/www.newparty.org/elections96.html

Illinois: Three NP-members won Democratic primaries last Spring and face off against Republican opponents on election day: Danny Davis (U.S. House), Barack Obama (State Senate) and Patricia Martin (Cook County Judiciary.

and

NP member and State Senate candidate Barack Obama won uncontested.

So as I mentioned way up there somewhere this is nothing new as far as the text…I just wanted to show a of couple web pages that had been hidden.

Beertime!!!

---

correction: octup.html was posted on Hannities forum; elections96.html appears to be lonely still.

---

Regulatory czar Sunstien: Obama’s beliefs should be LAW

Sunstein’s 2006 Yale Law School paper:
“Beyond Marbury: The Executive’s Power to Say What the Law Is.” (pdf under 300kb)

Should be renamed, “How to shift Judicial review too a Regulatory Branch of Government.”

or: Obama and not the courts to interpret the law – you decide.

excerpts from Obama’s Regulatory Czar’s paper:

Suppose that in hard cases, the search for “legislative intent” is often a fraud, and that when courts speak for that intent, they are often speaking for their own preferred views… then there seems to be little reason to think that courts, rather the executive, should be making those judgments. The President himself should be in a better position to make the relevant judgments, simply because of his comparatively greater accountability. And if specialized knowledge is required, executive agencies have large advantages over generalist judges.

“The allocation of law-interpreting power to the executive fits admirably well with the twentieth-century shift from common law courts to regulatory administration if the governing statute is ambiguous.”

“..in the face of ambiguity,the key questions are not for those with legal training, but instead for other professionals.”

There is no reason to believe that in the face of statutory ambiguity, the meaning of federal law should be settled by the inclinations and predispositions of federal judges. The outcome should instead depend on the commitments and beliefs of the President and those who operate under him.

Yes- what hypocracy! the inclinations and predispositions of the judicial many should not interpret law – no- instead we should leave that to the ONE and the radical czars who operate under him.

NOT!

Do you begin to understand why certain types of people were chosen for the roles they must play in the fundamental transformation of America?

Obama: says, “The role of a justice is to favor the weak over the strong. In the most difficult cases, the determining factor is not what the law in question says, or what the Constitution says. In those difficult cases,’ ” what matters is “what is in the judge’s heart.”

…In those most difficult cases…parsing ambiguity…
…the determining factor is not what the law in question says, or what the Constitution says…

…or what the Constitution says…

And Obama’s beliefs should determine the Law?

I would say this is a prime example of why we need the separation of Executive and Judicial Branches of governing, with strict review of constitutional factors, circumscribed in their powers.

Obama to Bail Out Newspapers! Define fascism

This guys plan becomes more clear everytime something is introduced.

There will be free speech for none but the Obama core when this all gets in place.

He’s right it’s gona take his civilian security force to nail down what our military can’t. After he weakens our military of course. It reminds me how khomenhi took out the Immortals with his green bands.

these notes to be fixed later—- One can’t keep up with all the ‘changes’.

notes.
Take over of banks – refusal to except payback dollars – remain in charge so long as the taxpaper owns them- sophist – taxpayer doesn’t own them – Obama does.

Let’s not forget this PAY Czar we are hearing about.

The slippery slope- gov. demands books n salaries of other non Tarp banks.

Government Motors – firing GM’s CEO – putting the union ‘workers party’ ahead of other lien holders on owed funds – according to Ezekiel – don’t give bail out unless they support health care plan.

These appointments of radical czars with one world industry take over ideals.

take over of:
industry – Energy- health care- Banks- media – Education- Security – Housing

as to media:
We already know about Obama’s Czar that will take over the TV broadcasting because the liberal point of view doesn’t get as many viewers as conservatives …now we learn the next step is to prop up failing newspapers.

Another mandatory tax, that isn’t a tax, with or without a dictionary, forced upon us?

Sunday morning with the Obama Iron Curtain: “I am concerned that if the direction of the news is all blogosphere, all opinions, with no serious fact-checking, no serious attempts to put stories in context, that what you will end up getting is people shouting at each other across the void but not a lot of mutual understanding.”

He also indicated that readers should be made to pay for online news content in the near future:

“What I hope is that people start understanding if you’re getting your newspaper over the Internet, that’s not free and there’s got to be a way to find a business model that supports that.” he said.

Maybe what Obama needs to understand is if the newspaper put their content on the net for FREE then doh it sure as bleep is free.

People- it won’t be long before internet information that we all enjoy now won’t be FREE. A charge for every click. Bet on it.

They charge me for every click I have to stop writing. You have to pay for every click you have to stop reading.

Slick isn’t it?

As to serious fact – sure – we can get the facts from Soros/Obama Factcheck or the Obama Disinformation White House czars video propaganda station. Or we could chek with Buffy Wicks. Have we got the new Internet Czar yet?

What does blogosphere ‘opinions’ have to do with NEWS—->|<—- papers, their sales, and mutual understanding?

So we are suppossed to fund another failing industry?

why?

note:
“Newspaper Revitalization Act.” introduced by Senator Ben Cardin (find bill)

Obama said he would be happy to look at bills that could give newspapers tax-breaks if they were to restructure as 50 (c) (3) educational corporations.

So we are to be re-educated by Obama’s taxpaid take over of failed liberal newspapers who then answer to the government to provide us with “serious fact” – who the Dem’s tell us they have the right to control because they gave them money.

All we can hope for people is the Republicans keep standing up to say NO YOU CAN’T.

Write them on this one too people. FREEDOM is slipping away.

I’ll fix this up tomorrow…..had to get it out of my system….hopefully readers get the idea for now.