Custom Search



The Congressional Progressive Caucus (CPC) was established in 1991 by five members of the United States House of Representatives:

Ron Dellums (D-CA), Lane Evans (D-IL), Peter DeFazio (D-OR), Maxine Waters (D-CA), and Bernie Sanders (I-VT).


help fight the media




The Socialists In The United States Congress

Progressives are individuals who are ostensibly working within the republic and its capitalist system, while their real goal is to subvert it, weakening its foundation, the Constitution of the United States of America, and amending it to reflect the Marxist-Socialist philosophy described as Progressivism.

Progressives contend that Progressivism is rooted in three core principles:  "Fighting for economic justice and security for all; Protecting and preserving civil rights and civil liberties; and Promoting global peace and security."  That's what they say -- it sounds great -- but it's not what they intend.

Everything you need to know about Progressives and Progressivism can be learned from visiting the Progressive Democrats of America's Advisory Board page which features the bios of 25 of the leftiest leftists in America.


In the United States House of Representatives, these people are all Democrats and they all belong to the Congressional Progressive Caucus (CPC), that was established in the early 1990's.  The 83 members of the Progressive Caucus also belong to the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA), a confederation of socialists formed in 1983 when a splinter group of the Socialist Party (Michael Harrington's Democratic Socialist Organizing Committee, DSOC) merged with the Students for a Democratic Society's (SDS) splinter group, the New American Movement (NAM).

The main aim of DSA was to convert the Democratic Party into a social democratic organization.  to that end, during the early 1990's, the DSA hosted the Progressive Caucus' website, which contained the names of its members.  When the word got out, all the information regarding the Progressive Caucus vanished.  These congress critters don't want you to know their true colors (red).


In 2009, of the twenty standing committees of the House, eleven are chaired by members of the CPC.


The DSA has many celebrity members, including feminist Gloria Steinem, actor Ed Asner, black activist Cornel West, and libertarian socialist Noam Chomsky.  It is also the chief American member group of the Socialist International, which includes the British Labour Party and the French Parti Socialiste.


Note:  This list needs to be updated after the 2010 elections


bullet Ed Pastor (AZ-4, Phoenix)
bullet Raķl Grijalva (AZ-7, Tucson), Co-Chair

bullet Lynn Woolsey (CA-6, Santa Rosa), Co-Chair
bullet George Miller (CA-7, Richmond), Chairman, House Education and Labor Committee
bullet Barbara Lee (CA-9, Oakland), Chairwoman, Congressional Black Caucus
bullet Pete Stark (CA-13, Fremont)
bullet Michael Honda (CA-15, San Jose)
bullet Sam Farr (CA-17, Monterey)
bullet Henry Waxman (CA-30, Los Angeles), Chairman, House Energy and Commerce Committee
bullet Xavier Becerra (CA-31, Los Angeles)
bullet Judy Chu (CA-32, El Monte)
bullet Diane Watson (CA-33, Los Angeles)
bullet Lucille Roybal-Allard (CA-34, Los Angeles)
bullet Maxine Waters (CA-35, Inglewood)
bullet Laura Richardson (CA-37, Long Beach)
bullet Linda Sanchez (CA-39, Lakewood)
bullet Bob Filner (CA-51, San Diego), Chairman, House Veterans Affairs Committee

bullet Jared Polis (CO-02, Boulder)

bullet Rosa DeLauro (CT-3, New Haven)

bullet Corrine Brown (FL-3, Jacksonville)
bullet Alan Grayson (FL-8, Orlando)
bullet Robert Wexler (FL-19, Boca Raton)
bullet Alcee Hastings (FL-23, Fort Lauderdale)

bullet Hank Johnson (GA-4, Lithonia)
bullet John Lewis (GA-5, Atlanta)

bullet Neil Abercrombie (HI-1, Honolulu) -- The only person on the planet to see Barack Hussein Obama Sr. and Anna Dunham together
bullet Mazie Hirono (HI-2, Honolulu)

bullet Bobby Rush (IL-1, Chicago) -- This guy is an ex-Black Panther
bullet Jesse Jackson, Jr. (IL-2, Chicago Heights)
bullet Luis Gutierrez (IL-4, Chicago)
bullet Danny Davis (IL-7, Chicago)
bullet Jan Schakowsky (IL-9, Chicago)
bullet Phil Hare (IL-17, Rock Island)

bullet Andrť Carson (IN-7, Indianapolis)

bullet Dave Loebsack (IA-2, Cedar Rapids)

bullet Chellie Pingree (ME-1, North Haven)

bullet Donna Edwards (MD-4, Fort Washington)
bullet Elijah Cummings (MD-7, Baltimore)

bullet John Olver (MA-1, Amherst)
bullet Jim McGovern (MA-3, Worcester)
bullet Barney Frank (MA-4, Newton), Chairman, House Financial Services Committee
bullet John Tierney (MA-6, Salem)
bullet Ed Markey (MA-7, Malden)
bullet Mike Capuano (MA-8, Boston)

bullet Carolyn Cheeks Kilpatrick (MI-13, Detroit)
bullet John Conyers (MI-14, Detroit), Chairman, House Judiciary Committee

bullet Keith Ellison (MN-5, Minneapolis)

bullet Bennie Thompson (MS-2, Bolton), Chairman, House Homeland Security Committee

bullet William Lacy Clay, Jr. (MO-1, St. Louis)
bullet Emanuel Cleaver (MO-5, Kansas City)

New Jersey
bullet Donald Payne (NJ-10, Newark)
bullet Frank Pallone (NJ-06)

New Mexico
bullet Ben R. LujŠn (NM-3, Santa Fe)

New York
bullet Jerry Nadler (NY-8, Manhattan)
bullet Yvette Clarke (NY-11, Brooklyn)
bullet Nydia Velazquez (NY-12, Brooklyn), Chairwoman, House Small Business Committee
bullet Carolyn Maloney (NY-14, Manhattan)
bullet Charles Rangel (NY-15, Harlem), Chairman, House Ways and Means Committee
bullet Jose Serrano (NY-16, Bronx)
bullet John Hall (NY-19, Dover Plains)
bullet Maurice Hinchey (NY-22, Saugerties)
bullet Louise Slaughter (NY-28, Rochester), Chairwoman, House Rules Committee
bullet Eric Massa (NY-29, Corning)

North Carolina
bullet Mel Watt (NC-12, Charlotte)

bullet Marcy Kaptur (OH-9, Toledo)
bullet Dennis Kucinich (OH-10, Cleveland)
bullet Marcia Fudge (OH-11, Warrensville Heights)

bullet Earl Blumenauer (OR-3, Portland)
bullet Peter DeFazio (OR-4, Eugene)

bullet Bob Brady (PA-1, Philadelphia) - Chairman, House Administration Committee
bullet Chaka Fattah (PA-2, Philadelphia)

bullet Steve Cohen (TN-9, Memphis)

bullet Sheila Jackson-Lee (TX-18, Houston)
bullet Eddie Bernice Johnson (TX-30, Dallas)

bullet Jim Moran (VA-8, Alexandria)

bullet Peter Welch (VT-At Large)

bullet Jim McDermott (WA-7, Seattle)

bullet Tammy Baldwin (WI-2, Madison)
bullet Gwen Moore (WI-4, Milwaukee)

bullet Donna M. Christensen (Virgin Islands)
bullet Eleanor Holmes Norton (District of Columbia)

Senate Members
bullet Bernie Sanders (Vermont)
bullet Tom Udall (New Mexico)

Former Members
bullet Sherrod Brown (OH-13) - Elected to Senate
bullet Julia Carson (IN-07) - Died in December 2007
bullet Lane Evans (IL-17) - Retired from Congress
bullet Cynthia McKinney (GA-4) - Lost Congressional seat to current caucus member Hank Johnson
bullet Major Owens (NY-11) - Retired from Congress
bullet Nancy Pelosi (CA-8) - Left Caucus when Elected House Minority Leader
bullet Hilda Solis (CA-32) - Became Secretary of Labor in 2009
bullet Stephanie Tubbs Jones (OH-11) - Died in 2008
bullet Paul Wellstone (MN Senate) - Died in plane crash in 2002
Barack Obama's Relationship To The DSA
The New Zeal blog has 19 links to articles it has produced about Barack Obama's long term association with the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA).

So what you say -- they're "democratic" aren't they?  They're only "socialists, not communists or militant radicals? 

Some facts:

Obama has close personal and political ties to several DSA members including Quentin Young, Timuel Black, the late Rabbi Arnold Jacob Wolf, the late Saul Mendelson, Lou Pardo, Congressman Danny Davis and DSA honorees Jackie Grimshaw, Jackie Kendall and Congresswoman Jan Schakowsky.

DSA's several thousand strong membership has grown increasingly militant over the years until the point its policies are almost indistinguishable from those of the Communist Party USA.  In an article in DSA's Democratic Left, Spring 2007, DSA National Political Committee member David Green wrote;

Our goal as socialists is to abolish private ownership of the means of production.  Our immediate task is to limit the capitalist classís prerogatives in the workplace...

In the short run we must at least minimize the degree of exploitation of workers by capitalists.  We can accomplish this by promoting full employment policies, passing local living wage laws, but most of all by increasing the union movementís power...

The DSA has some cross membership with the Communist Party and considerable cross-membership with the the equally militant Committees of Correspondence for Democracy and Socialism.

DSA has close ties to many Congressman, including John Conyers, Danny Davis, Jan Schakowsky (all close Obama supporters) Jerrold Nadler and Bob Filner.

DSA has key personnel or allies at the top of AFL-CIO, SEIU, United Auto Workers, United Steelworkers of America and other major unions.

DSA has considerable influence in ACORN, Working Families Party, Green Party, Democratic Party, USAction, Jobs with Justice, Economic Policy Institute, Campaign for America's Future, Demos (which Obama helped found), Black Radical Congress and many other mass organizations, including some churches.

DSA is affiliated to the Socialist International which now includes several "former" communist parties-Mongolia, Mozambique, Bulgaria, Latvia, Belarus, Ukraine, Estonia, Angola, Hungary and Poland, as well as the Nicaraguan Sandinistas and the still-existing Communist Parties of Laos, Cuba and China ("observer" only).

Continue reading here . . . this guy's got stuff . . .
Americaís Future NOW!

It's amazing to me that we get the news, that "Americaís Future NOW!" is underway right now at Washington D.Cís grand old Omni Shoreham Hotel, from New Zealand!


For three days leading activists from the radical Instititute for Policy Studies, Democratic Socialists of America, Congressional Progressive Caucus and the Democratic Party, labor unions and "community organizations" confer and plan the next stages of the Obama revolution.


The event is organized by Campaign for Americaís Future, itself a creation of I.PS. and D.S.A. and is the latest incarnation of the Take Back America conferences that ran for several years up to 2008.


This is the heart of the "progressive movement" that put Barack Obama into power.  Their next step is to consolidate that power, building a movement that will keep the Obama administration tracking hard left.


Trevor Loudon says these are the people (videos) Glenn Beck warned you about!

Obama Boasts Of Progressive Triumphs
Sam Youngman says Obama told a Hollywood fundraiser Monday night that he and congressional Democrats have passed the most progressive legislation in decades.

"We have been able to deliver the most progressive legislative agenda -- one that helps working families -- not just in one generation, maybe two, maybe three," Obama said.

Obama was joined by a number of lawmakers and celebrities at an event for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) that raised $1 million.

Obama is hitting the campaign trail hard this week before he goes on vacation to Martha's Vineyard, boasting of his administration's accomplishments and accusing Republicans of trying to return to the policies of President George W. Bush.

"This is exactly when you want to be president," Obama said.  "This is why I ran, because we have the opportunity to shape history for the better."

With polls showing Democrats in serious trouble during an anti-incumbent election year, Obama said that helping Democrats get elected in November is his "focus over the next several months."

"I hope you understand why we're here tonight," Obama told the crowd at producer John Wells's home.  "It's not to take a picture with the president.  We're here to make sure those who took the tough votes are rewarded."

Judd Apatow and actor Taye Diggs joined DCCC Chairman Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), and California Reps. Howard Berman, Brad Sherman, Barbara Lee, Joe Baca, Laura Richardson, Judy Chu and John Garamendi.
The Biggest Target Is Progressivism
J.R. Dunn says the 2010 election is not simply a campaign against Obama.  It needs to be a campaign against liberalism as a whole.

Obama remains the major target, and he deserves the honor.  No president in my lifetime has been as incompetent, as obtuse, or as polarizing.  There's a particular type of incompetence that involves applying serious energy and diligence to doing the wrong thing.  Obama is the master of this style of governance.  Sure, he passed his stimulus bill, his health care plan, his financial regulatory act -- all of which are loathed by the country at large and all of which, without exception, are guaranteed to make the problems they're designed to address worse.  The stimulus stimulated nothing.  Health care costs have risen 20% since O's grand triumph.  The regulatory bill addresses precisely none of the problems that led to the recent slump.

Obama's obtuseness is evident in the endless vacations, the bowing and scraping before assorted potentates, his leaping into events (the Gates imbroglio, the Ground Zero mosque, this latest sideshow act with the backwoods wrestler...uhh, pastor) that are none of his business, and his continual rhetorical fumbles.  A week doesn't go by without a new addition to the list, his whining that his critics "talk about me like a dog" being only the latest.  (Quick, hand me that newspaper...)  A president must be a center of calm and poise amid the whirlwind of events.  Obama is usually just another piece of flotsam.

The word "polarizing" is generally limited to Republican presidents, though, in fact, it could be said to be part of the job description.  But Obama has taken this to new heights -- presidents such as Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush certainly aroused opposition, occasionally well-organized and well-funded.  But they are nothing to compare with Obama, who has ignited a vast political movement of a depth unseen for well over a century.  The Tea Parties are a unique phenomenon, potentially as powerful and earthshaking as the abolitionist movement in the 19th century.  It's not often an individual acts as the trigger for such a movement.  That may well be Obama's major contribution.

So it's quite proper that this election should be a referendum on Obama.  But it can't be limited to that, because Obama is not the threat.  He's only this moment's representation of the threat.  Consider: if you were asked in 2005 who was the major threat among liberal politicians, you would probably have mentioned Hillary Clinton.  A few other names might have come to mind as well -- Pelosi or Dean above all.  But would it have occurred to you to mention the junior senator from Illinois?

The powers that make men presidents -- both real and metaphysical -- liked Barack Obama.  They liked his looks, his voice, the crease of his pants.  So they wrote him a book or two, cleaned up his rťsumť, and pointed him toward the top.  I imagine they were as surprised as anyone else at how quickly and easily it went.  I doubt they were expecting such results in 2008 -- maybe in 2016 or 2020.

The point is that the same can happen to anyone.  Obama, with all his manifest flaws, was transformed not only into presidential material, but into a candidate for messiah.
Continue reading here . . .
Monarchist Liberals Fear The Mob
Daniel Greenfield says liberals [progressives] have never been too fond of democracy.  Even when they win elections, they prefer to treat those victories as "historic events" that are almost supernatural in nature, to avoid dwelling on the fact that what really happened was that the votes were counted, and they racked up more than the other side.  Instead they condescendingly describe their victories as a sign that the country has reached a new level of ethical and intellectual awareness.  Like a kindergarten teacher handing out gold stars, liberals pat the country on the head (at least the right parts of it) for making the right decision.

As liberals see it, their high level of moral and intellectual awareness, and compassion for all creatures great and small, gives them a permanent mandate for social change.  Elections sometimes interfere with the implementation of that mandate, but the mandate itself still goes on.  Liberals canít possibly lose the mandate, since it derives not from the "will of the people", but from the tenets of liberalism itself, a perverted version of Natural Rights, in which the officially oppressed peoples of the United States and the world are entitled to all the wealth redistribution they can get.  As long as they remain faithful to the liberal agenda, then their mandate is irrevocable.

When liberals do lose elections, they donít attribute it to the will of the people, but rather to the racist white patriarchal majority rising up to obstruct their reforms.  The old Communist narrative of revolution vs counterrevolution defines their worldview, not the American narrative in which elected officials are employees, rather than masters or owners, who can be fired or rather not hired back, by the electorate at will during the designated review periods we call elections.

So, American liberals live in perpetual fear of the mob.  Not the mob that controls some of their unions, or the mobs that used to loot and burn cities under the influence of their propaganda -- but the royalist definition of the mob, as the people of the country who imagine that they have a right to have some say in its laws and taxes.

Every time liberals lose an election, whether there is or there isnít a populist movement such as the Tea Party associated with it, they blame the "mob."  Obamaís infamous "clinging to their guns and religion" line all too accurately sums up how liberals envision that mob.  Liberal pundits pen pieces on the dangers of populism.  Liberal cartoonists begin depicting the American people as crazy and dangerous.  All it takes is a lost election, and suddenly liberals flash back some two centuries to sound like the Royalists of the 1770s, worried that all these populist mobs are going to make it impossible to run the country.

In only two years, the liberal press has gone from patting the country on the head for the wisdom and maturity of electing Obama, to hitting it on the nose with a newspaper for kicking out his congress.  Itís not that they canít make up their mind, itís that, as in Soviet elections, they limit the role of the people to ratifying the decisions of their leaders, and grow very outraged when the people overstep their boundaries, and actually begin throwing out the leaders instead.  The people are supposed to show up at designated events to cheer their leaders, not storm the Bastille or tear down the Berlin Wall.

Liberal pundits typically describe "the mob" as anti-intellectual.  But thatís only because they were actually stupid enough to believe that the likes of JFK, Bill Clinton or Barack Obama were intellectuals.  But "the mob" isnít anti-intellectual, itís anti-organizational.  And JFK, WJC and BHO were organization men.  They were not noted for their deep and penetrating intelligence, but for their ability to recite memorized speeches and summon up the vibe of a "New Age" in which everyone would be happier and better taken care of than ever before.  And in which liberals would no longer have to feel ashamed of America.

Liberalism is not intellectual, itís organizational.  It creates and expands organizations that are meant to help the public, but end up taking power out of their hands.  Liberalismís organizational strategy is essentially a slow paced coup against the American electorate.  And like most tyrants, liberals have to live in fear of the mob showing up at their palace gates.  The transfer of power from the electorate to the bureaucracy, the unions and the associated non-governmental organizations is supposed to prevent that from happening, but it will take time to completely disempower "the mob."  Because the mills of the bureaucracy grind slowly and the coup still isnít complete.

While they may fancy themselves to be intellectuals, the last time liberals had an original idea was around 1906.  Everything else is just the clumsy implementation.  Like 21st century Fourierists, they keep fiddling with inherently unworkable economic, political and social models -- while blaming all their setbacks on the opposition.  Itís never the ideologically influenced model that fails, itís always the skeptics and the rebels and the greedy capitalists and counterrevolutionaries who get in the way.  The difference between an intellectual and an idiot, is that the former can recognize when heís wrong.  That makes liberalism, the sad ideology of idiots who are never wrong, theyíre just not "messaging" correctly.

So liberals can never ask for help, even when they need it.

Continue reading here . . .
Barack Obama And The Paradox Of Progressivism
Paul Mirengoff encourages his readers with a philosophical bent to take the time this weekend (it will require about an hour) to read Peter Berkowitz's excellent essay "Obama and the State of Progressivism, 2011."  Peter links the political difficulties Obama has encountered to the "paradox of American progressivism, old and new," a paradox "rooted in the gap between its professed devotion to democracy...and its belief that democracy consists in a set of policies independent of what the people want."

The original progressives, exemplified by Herbert Croly, acknowledged the paradox.  Thus, Croly wrote that "any increase in centralized power and injurious to certain aspects of traditional American democracy."  But "the fault," Croly stated, "lies with the democratic tradition" and the fact that "the average American individual is morally and intellectually inadequate to serious and consistent conception of his responsibilities as a democrat."  Thus, the "erroneous and misleading" democratic tradition "must yield before the march of a constructive national democracy."

The new progressives, exemplified by Obama, refuse publicly to speak this way.  It seems clear, though, that Obama shares Croly's view, which he expressed behind closed doors in his famous characterization of working-class voters (to a wealthy San Francisco audience) as "cling[ing] to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like a way to explain their frustrations."

Peter also connects Obama's "determined effort to push dramatic transformation under the cover of moderation, and pragmatism, and post-partisanship, and his claim to speak on behalf of the people while aggressively promoting programs at odds with majority wishes" to three schools of academic thought.  They are John Rawls' "deliberative democracy" theory, Richard Rorty's perversion (as I see it) of pragmatism, and "empathy."  All were, or have become, intellectually dishonest attempts to equate progressivism with justice and, as Peter explains, to override, in the people's name, their expressed preferences.

The academic concept of "empathy," which is so shallow that it's shocking to think of it as a school of thought with any traction, featured prominently in Obama's statement of why he nominated Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court.  Although Sotomayor had famously touted the virtues of the special empathy possessed by "the wise Latina," she repudiated this line of thought during her confirmation hearing, as did Elean Kagan later on.

There is no doubt, however, that Sotomayor's brand of empathy lies at the heart of much progressive thinking about the law.  That Sotomayor and Kagan backed away from such views when they were "on stage," and that Obama himself did not use the word "empathy" in touting Kagan, is further evidence of the paradox of progressivism.
You Don't Ever Want A Crisis To Go To Waste
In an assault on the 1st Amendment, Rep. Robert Brady (D-PA) will introduce legislation this week that will criminalize inflammatory language.  I wonder if Brady is referring to Obama's inflammatory rhetoric (see Today's ObamaFact).  I doubt it.

And in an attack on the 2nd Amendment, far left Rep. Carolyn McCarthy (D-N.Y.), pounced on the shooting massacre in Tucson Sunday, promising to introduce legislation as soon as Monday targeting the high-capacity ammunition the gunman used.  Gun control activists cried it was time to reform weapons laws in the United States, almost immediately after a gunman killed six and injured 14 more.
In Defense Of American Exceptionalism
Herman Cain says there is no denying it: America is the greatest country in the world.  We are blessed with unparalleled freedoms and boundless prosperity that for generations have inspired an innovative and industrious people.  America is exceptional.

American Exceptionalism is the standard that our laws reflect the understanding that we are afforded certain God-given rights that can never be taken away.  We know that God, not government, bestows upon us these inalienable rights, and because of that, they must not be compromised by the whims of man.  This makes us a unique nation, a nation that remains, as President Ronald Reagan once said, "a model and hope to the world."

Unfortunately, some politicians have either forgotten or chosen to ignore the glory of our founding.  In April 2009, Barack Obama told a reporter in Strasbourg, France: "I believe in American exceptionalism, just as I suspect that the Brits believe in British exceptionalism and the Greeks believe in Greek exceptionalism."  In saying this, Onama implied that American Exceptionalism is nothing terribly special and instead simply chalked it up to the romanticism of patriotism.

Americans know better.  We see American Exceptionalism not as an empty cry for nationalism, but instead, the blessings of God that keep our nation strong, independent, and free.  We see the American story as one of tenacity and triumph, not as one inherently flawed and in need of rewriting.  We recognize the times we have stumbled but are assured that it is not due to weakness of our foundation, but instead, the imperfection of mankind.

Most importantly, conservatives see America as exceptional because of our shared belief in the dignity and creativity of the individual.  We know that it is innately human to work, to risk, and to dream.  We understand that these virtues, coupled with the conditions American Exceptionalism provides, allow us to enjoy the economic and social mobility that other countries envy.  Liberals lament that such success wasn't guaranteed.

At its very core, progressivism rejects American Exceptionalism.  Progressives view the Constitution as a roadblock, as they seek an unlimited federal government with more authority than the states and more power than the people.  Because they strive for a limitless federal government, they are willing to sacrifice the rugged individualism that has made this nation exceptional in exchange for the collective salvation they believe a vast government provides.  And the darling of the progressive movement is, of course, Barack Obama.

Let me be clear, Obama, America is the greatest nation on Earth.  We are not just any other nation, and we are certainly not analogous to our friends in Europe and elsewhere.  Our exceptionalism is forever ingrained in our founding documents that spell out exactly the roles of the federal government in relation to individual rights and states' rights.

Truth is eternal, and simply ignoring the truths of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution won't make them go away.  And frankly, there are enough Americans, including me, who love it and our country far too much to allow our exceptionalism to be bartered for further expansion of an already out-of-control federal government.
The Nation: The Fifty Most Influential Progressives Of The Twentieth Century
 The very, very left-wing rag, The Nation, has selected their top 50 "Progressives."

This guy jumped out at me because Robeson is the person that sent Frank Marshall Davis to Hawaii on a mission to "communize" the dockworker's union in post-World War II Hawaii.
Davis moved to Honolulu from Chicago in 1948 with his second wife Helen Canfield, a white socialite, at the suggestion of his friend the actor Paul Robeson, who advised them that there would be more tolerance of a mixed race couple in Hawaii than on the American mainland. Robeson, of course, was the well-known black actor and singer who served as a member of the CPUSA and apologist for the old Soviet Union. Davis had known Robeson from his time in Chicago.

Davis, in his own writings, had said that Robeson and Harry Bridges, the head of the International Longshore and Warehouse Union (ILWU) and a secret member of the CPUSA, had suggested that he take a job as a columnist with the Honolulu Record "and see if I could do something for them." The ILWU was organizing workers there and Robesonís contacts were "passed on" to Davis, Takara writes.

Takara says that Davis "espoused freedom, radicalism, solidarity, labor unions, due process, peace, affirmative action, civil rights, Negro History week, and true Democracy to fight imperialism, colonialism, and white supremacy. He urged coalition politics."

Poems from Davis are in the book "Black Moods" which was edited by John Tidwell, a University of Kansas professor and expert on Davis' writings. He confirmed to Cliff Kincaid that Davis joined the Communist Party but that he publicly tried to deny his affiliations.

Asked why Takara thought Obama didn't identify Frank in his book by his full name, she replied, "Maybe, he didn't want people delving into it."

Stanley Dunham, Obama's grandfather, was friends with Davis, a bohemian libertine who drank heavily and loved jazz -- both had roots reaching back to Kansas and had families of mixed races -- and the black writer took an interest in Obama.

"Our grandfather ... thought (Frank) was a point of connection, a bridge if you will, to the larger African-American experience for my brother," Maya Soetoro-Ng, Obama's half-sister, said during a recent interview.

Sources and links here . . .
Comments . . .

©  Copyright  Beckwith  2009 - 2011
All right reserved