Obama just received a critical endorsement, The Communist Party USA.
The Communist Party USA leader, Sam Webb, explains why he will continue to support Obama and Democrats in 2012. The Communist Party USA has consistently supported and infiltrated the Democratic Party.
Also note, Sam Webb, the leader of the party, called Obama a friend back in 2008.
Sam Webb Via Peopleís World:
It is obvious that there is a growing feeling of frustration and even anger among supporters of the Democratic Party with its performance over the past two years.
AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka, speaking for the labor movement, strongly expressed this unhappiness in some recent speeches.
I am disappointed too with some aspects of the Obama administrationís domestic and foreign policy.
But I donít forget that this administration governs in a very hostile political environment in which the right is laboring overtime to wreck its initiatives at every step of the way.
In addition, there are the structural pressures of governing in a capitalist economy and state.
Then there are conservative pressures coming from some congressional Democrats and members of the administration.
Everything canít be explained away by the objective context, however. The president and his administration can be faulted for a number of policy decisions.
But the main question from a strategic point of view is this: Does it make any difference, from the standpoint of the class and democratic struggles, which party gains political ascendency?
Some Ė though not the labor movement nor other mass organizations of the American people Ė say no, it doesnít.
Some even go a step further and say a Democratic victory creates popular illusions, which in turn weaken the peopleís struggles. And the only way out of this vise is to form a third party now.
Communists donít agree with either one of these views. In our view, the differences between the two parties of capitalism are of consequence to class and democratic struggles.
Neither party is anti-capitalist, but they arenít identical either. Differences exist at the levels of policy and social composition. And despite the many frustrations of the past two years, the election of Barack Obama was historic and gave space to struggle for a peopleís agenda.
If, on the other hand, the Republicans had been victorious in 2008 the character of class and democratic struggles would have unfolded very differently. Our movement would have been on the defensive from Day One, the Democrats would be running for cover, and the Republicans would have an unfettered hand in their efforts to liquidate the welfare state, roll back the rights revolution of the 1930s and 1960s, and crush the peopleís movement Ė labor in the first place.
As for the wisdom of a third party, we have always advocated the formation of an independent peopleís party at the core of which are the working class and labor, racially and nationally oppressed people, women, youth, immigrants, seniors, gay and straight, etc. It is essential for any deep-going social change. But its realization depends on more than our desire, more than our political-ideological attitude. Millions who have to be at the core of this party still operate under the umbrella of the Democratic Party, albeit increasingly in an independent fashion.
Moreover, to separate ourselves at this moment from these forces would be contrary to our strategic policy of building maximum unity against right-wing extremism now and in next yearís elections.
Now that doesnít mean that we give up our advocacy of an independent peopleís party, but we also understand that its formation is dictated by concrete political realities and strategic necessities. Nor does it mean that we hit the mute button when the Obama administration takes positions that we donít agree with. Just as we show no hesitation in supporting, and fighting for, the administrationís progressive initiatives, we should have no compunction about taking issue with the administration when it takes positions that we donít agree on.
Which is what we have done.
When someone says we are not critical of the administration what they usually mean is that our criticism isnít as sweeping and categorical as they would like.
We make criticisms, but we do it in a certain context and with a certain strategic objective in mind. We are keenly aware of the fact that the agenda of the far right is to bring this administration and country to its knees, with a heavy dose of racism, lies and economic sabotage, setting the stage for a full blown return to power of the most reactionary, racist, anti-labor, anti-women, homophobic and militarist grouping in U.S. politics.
We want no part of that. We donít have any illusions about the Democratic Party, but we donít have any illusions about the Republican Party either.
Furthermore, we are also aware of the undeniable fact that no other party besides the Democratic Party stands a chance of beating the GOP next year.
Iím sure Obama will win in 2012 now.. yeah right.
Couldn't have been a better endorsement for a more deserving fellow.
Couldn't be much clearer than that. They recognize the need to set aside individual differences ,and vote enbloc to achieve their goals. I think we delude ourselves by calling for different candidates to run and saying your not gonna vote if your personal favorite doesn't get the nomination. Pick one, who is electable and stand behind him or her 100%. We can hammer out individual differences later. Eye on the prize!
Although not quite as grand a scale as Pol-Pot , he did in fact dupe the people into beliving his rhetoric! Could you imagine if he got more than 80% of the vote ? Pol-pot was rounding them up for massacre on day 2, re-education on day 3!