Police Officer Preparation & Law Enforcement Resource - Archive

Submitted with no comment. If this is a repost, this should have been a sticky, IMHO.

American Socialists Release Names of 70 Congressional Democrats in Their Ranks
Posted by Jim Hoft on Friday, August 13, 2010, 4:16 PM
Gateway Pundit (http://gatewaypundit.firstthings.com/2010/08/american-socialists-release-names-of-70-congressional-democrats-in-their-caucus/)

The Socialist Party of America announced in their October 2009 newsletter that 70 Congressional democrats currently belong to their caucus.
This admission was recently posted on Scribd.com:

American Socialist Voter–
Q: How many members of the U.S. Congress are also members of the DSA?
A: Seventy

Q: How many of the DSA members sit on the Judiciary Committee?
A: Eleven: John Conyers [Chairman of the Judiciary Committee], Tammy Baldwin, Jerrold Nadler, Luis Gutierrez,
Melvin Watt, Maxine Waters, Hank Johnson, Steve Cohen, Barbara Lee, Robert Wexler, Linda Sanchez [there are 23 Democrats on the Judiciary Committee of which eleven, almost half, are now members of the DSA].

Q: Who are these members of 111th Congress?
A: See the listing below

Co-Chairs
Hon. Raúl M. Grijalva (AZ-07)
Hon. Lynn Woolsey (CA-06)

Vice Chairs
Hon. Diane Watson (CA-33)
Hon. Sheila Jackson-Lee (TX-18)
Hon. Mazie Hirono (HI-02)
Hon. Dennis Kucinich (OH-10)

Senate Members
Hon. Bernie Sanders (VT)

House Members
Hon. Neil Abercrombie (HI-01)
Hon. Tammy Baldwin (WI-02)
Hon. Xavier Becerra (CA-31)
Hon. Madeleine Bordallo (GU-AL)
Hon. Robert Brady (PA-01)
Hon. Corrine Brown (FL-03)
Hon. Michael Capuano (MA-08)
Hon. André Carson (IN-07)
Hon. Donna Christensen (VI-AL)
Hon. Yvette Clarke (NY-11)
Hon. William “Lacy” Clay (MO-01)
Hon. Emanuel Cleaver (MO-05)
Hon. Steve Cohen (TN-09)
Hon. John Conyers (MI-14)
Hon. Elijah Cummings (MD-07)
Hon. Danny Davis (IL-07)
Hon. Peter DeFazio (OR-04)
Hon. Rosa DeLauro (CT-03)
Rep. Donna F. Edwards (MD-04)
Hon. Keith Ellison (MN-05)
Hon. Sam Farr (CA-17)
Hon. Chaka Fattah (PA-02)
Hon. Bob Filner (CA-51)
Hon. Barney Frank (MA-04)
Hon. Marcia L. Fudge (OH-11)
Hon. Alan Grayson (FL-08)
Hon. Luis Gutierrez (IL-04)
Hon. John Hall (NY-19)
Hon. Phil Hare (IL-17)
Hon. Maurice Hinchey (NY-22)
Hon. Michael Honda (CA-15)
Hon. Jesse Jackson, Jr. (IL-02)
Hon. Eddie Bernice Johnson (TX-30)
Hon. Hank Johnson (GA-04)
Hon. Marcy Kaptur (OH-09)
Hon. Carolyn Kilpatrick (MI-13)
Hon. Barbara Lee (CA-09)
Hon. John Lewis (GA-05)
Hon. David Loebsack (IA-02)
Hon. Ben R. Lujan (NM-3)
Hon. Carolyn Maloney (NY-14)
Hon. Ed Markey (MA-07)
Hon. Jim McDermott (WA-07)
Hon. James McGovern (MA-03)
Hon. George Miller (CA-07)
Hon. Gwen Moore (WI-04)
Hon. Jerrold Nadler (NY-08)
Hon. Eleanor Holmes-Norton (DC-AL)
Hon. John Olver (MA-01)
Hon. Ed Pastor (AZ-04)
Hon. Donald Payne (NJ-10)
Hon. Chellie Pingree (ME-01)
Hon. Charles Rangel (NY-15)
Hon. Laura Richardson (CA-37)
Hon. Lucille Roybal-Allard (CA-34)
Hon. Bobby Rush (IL-01)
Hon. Linda Sánchez (CA-47)
Hon. Jan Schakowsky (IL-09)
Hon. José Serrano (NY-16)
Hon. Louise Slaughter (NY-28)
Hon. Pete Stark (CA-13)
Hon. Bennie Thompson (MS-02)
Hon. John Tierney (MA-06)
Hon. Nydia Velazquez (NY-12)
Hon. Maxine Waters (CA-35)
Hon. Mel Watt (NC-12)
Hon. Henry Waxman (CA-30)
Hon. Peter Welch (VT-AL)
Hon. Robert Wexler (FL-19)

I was so amazed by this "data" that I tracked down the info to its source, a document where the organization described itself and its members. Unbelievable. (Unless these members of Congress don't agree with the organization listing them as Socialists.) You know, even Fox will steer away from referring to people as Socialists, because of its derogatory connotation. After all, we fought an entire Cold War over whether Socialists or Capitalists provided the better system. And the Socialist systems collapsed within themselves. All those people who romanticize that system didn't and don't have to live in it or work in it.

Well, you know what they say about history repeating itself.

Well, you know what they say about history repeating itself.

You know why they try to keep the idea alive?

Because they think those societies failed because the wrong people were in charge. The Soviets, the Eastern Europeans, the North Koreans, the Cubans... were all governed by people less intelligent, less benevolent than our current crop of leaders. Those others were too backward to understand and effectively administer the true path of socialism... at least, that's what they say.

What they won't admit, and what they think we don't know... is that none of it is about economics or politics.

It's about power.

It's about the ability to impose their will on us. Does anyone here really think that a single person on that list actually cares about social justice or economic equality? They don't give a damn about labels like sociallists or fascists, or capitalists, or what-have-you. They care about getting reelected, and maintaining or extending their power and influence, nothing else. Socialism is merely a path to a goal.

Supposedly attributed to a wag in the Nixon Administration: "Power corrupts, but absolute power is actually kind of neat".

It's about power.

It's about the ability to impose their will on us. Does anyone here really think that a single person on that list actually cares about social justice or economic equality? They don't give a damn about labels like sociallists or fascists, or capitalists, or what-have-you. They care about getting reelected, and maintaining or extending their power and influence, nothing else. Socialism is merely a path to a goal.

Supposedly attributed to a wag in the Nixon Administration: "Power corrupts, but absolute power is actually kind of neat".

Hmmmm, as much as it pains me to admit this, Curt, that's a brilliant observation. LOL. My whole academic background is economics, with a concentration in comparative economic systems, so I tend to assume people wanting to run other people's lives (at least some) have taken the time to examine the pros and cons of different ends of the spectrum. I'm used to sitting in seminars and debating foreign policy with people who honestly examine that with rigor, so I assume it applies to that as well. But, to be honest, I know you're abso-fricking-lutely right, all most these people care about IS power.

And the Nixon quote? Never heard it, but LOVE it, LOL ~

Some of those names on the list don't surprise me, but the fact that this list has been around ... and un-publicised in Conservative (or ANY) circles ... for several months actually did.

That is why it is here, now.

I'm surprised too, Creek.

They don't scare me. The people that scare me are the ones who elect them to office. Think about what that says about our society.

they don't scare me. The people that scare me are the ones who elect them to office. Think about what that says about our society.

i could not agree with you more, rds

You know why they try to keep the idea alive?

Because they think those societies failed because the wrong people were in charge. The Soviets, the Eastern Europeans, the North Koreans, the Cubans... were all governed by people less intelligent, less benevolent than our current crop of leaders. Those others were too backward to understand and effectively administer the true path of socialism... at least, that's what they say.

What they won't admit, and what they think we don't know... is that none of it is about economics or politics.

It's about power.

It's about the ability to impose their will on us. Does anyone here really think that a single person on that list actually cares about social justice or economic equality? They don't give a damn about labels like sociallists or fascists, or capitalists, or what-have-you. They care about getting reelected, and maintaining or extending their power and influence, nothing else. Socialism is merely a path to a goal.

Supposedly attributed to a wag in the Nixon Administration: "Power corrupts, but absolute power is actually kind of neat".

Exactly. Rep sent!

They don't scare me. The people that scare me are the ones who elect them to office. Think about what that says about our society.

As long as sheeople continue to vote to keep themselves enslaved and ignore voting records and history in favor of feel-good and white guilt, we as a nation are going to deserve everything they hand to us... not that some of us won't push back, as we are Constitutionally allowed.

As long as sheeople continue to vote to keep themselves enslaved and ignore voting records and history in favor of feel-good and white guilt, we as a nation are going to deserve everything they hand to us... not that some of us won't push back, as we are Constitutionally allowed.

I think it's more than that. We've become a society that thinks its entitled and people vote for anyone who promises to give them the most. Where that money is coming from, they don't think about.

The middle class tax cuts are a prime example. They keep cutting taxes for people to the point that a family of 4 making $50K a year pay no taxes. And if they make less, they get paid for it under the Earned Income Tax Credit. That's the biggest bunch of BS to come down the road, but that's what the people wanted.

Hell, when I was in the Army and making $2500 a year, I paid some taxes. In fact, I've never gone a year w/o paying income tax in my life, even when I didn't make squat. My dumb**** son in law, the truck driver, made just over $30K last year. With his two kids, they only had about a thousand withheld all year long, but they got a $6500 refund. That was 55K in welfare. Little wonder the deficit keeps climbing, but people think that's just great. And pity the politician who stands up against it, Democrat or Republican.

My father in law is a typical Democrat. He thinks he's entitled to get anything he can squeeze out of the VA whether he needs it or not. But there are millions out there just like him, they think the government owes them something and they keep electing politicians who will give it to them.

We're a pitiful lot, IMO.

I think it's more than that. We've become a society that thinks its entitled and people vote for anyone who promises to give them the most. Where that money is coming from, they don't think about.

The middle class tax cuts are a prime example. They keep cutting taxes for people to the point that a family of 4 making $50K a year pay no taxes. And if they make less, they get paid for it under the Earned Income Tax Credit. That's the biggest bunch of BS to come down the road, but that's what the people wanted.

Hell, when I was in the Army and making $2500 a year, I paid some taxes. In fact, I've never gone a year w/o paying income tax in my life, even when I didn't make squat. My dumb**** son in law, the truck driver, made just over $30K last year. With his two kids, they only had about a thousand withheld all year long, but they got a $6500 refund. That was 55K in welfare. Little wonder the deficit keeps climbing, but people think that's just great. And pity the politician who stands up against it, Democrat or Republican.

My father in law is a typical Democrat. He thinks he's entitled to get anything he can squeeze out of the VA whether he needs it or not. But there are millions out there just like him, they think the government owes them something and they keep electing politicians who will give it to them.

We're a pitiful lot, IMO.

+ 1 Billion. I too have family members who think the same way. In the usual "them and us" tone, they'll say, " the government owes this and that to me, and stick it to the man" and I say in return, "I AM the government; I am the man. I am the person government gets their money from and I was the small business owner others liked to stick it to." It doesn't come from some endless pot of gold at the end of a rainbow. It's amazing how many people actually think that.

The middle class tax cuts are a prime example. They keep cutting taxes for people to the point that a family of 4 making $50K a year pay no taxes. And if they make less, they get paid for it under the Earned Income Tax Credit. That's the biggest bunch of BS to come down the road, but that's what the people wanted.



It's tough to house and feed a family of 4 on $50k/year. Figuring for food, mortgage, utilities, car payments...
But you're right, they shouldn't receive back more than they pay in.

I'm to the point where I just say f**k it. The whole damn system is going to crash, and sooner rather than later. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them, and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for, that my dear friend, is the beginning of the end.

Case in point: 30,000 people show up for federal housing assistance in Atlanta. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wMHJYlbFTbk&feature=related

These idiots think this money is just free. Well what one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving. This is unsustainable.

It's going to end, sooner rather than later, and painfully.

It's tough to house and feed a family of 4 on $50k/year. Figuring for food, mortgage, utilities, car payments...


Yep, if you think you have to live in a 2000 sq ft house and drive two relatively new cars, have a big screen TV, etc. Relatively speaking, I raised my family on less than that and paid taxes. The difference was I bought a house I could afford, drove cars within my price range, etc. etc. I never lived in a house bigger than 1200 sq. ft. until I retired. At that point I could well afford a big house.

They quit building houses around here that are less than 2K sq ft.... Nobody wanted them. They built a new development near me and the houses are all 2.5K to 4K sq. ft. I watched young families moving in with little kids and wondered how they could afford it? When I was most of their ages, I couldn't have afforded a house like that. Well, apparently they couldn't either because a lot of them went up for sale a couple of years later for less than they paid for them.

That's back to the entitlement argument I'm making. God forbid people have to wait until they can afford something before they buy. Most families making $50K are up to their butts in debt (credit card especially) and that's why it's tough to get by. I read that the average credit card debt in this country is $20K. I don't have any credit card debt and neither do any of my friends so a lot of people have more than that. Again, entitlement, I deserve whether or not I can afford it so I put it on credit and pay double digit interest on the money. And then expect people to feel sorry for them and blame it on the awful banks that gave them the credit cards and forced them to sign the CC agreement.:rolleyes5:

I agree with a lot of what you said.

I won't mention what my/our income is other than it's more than $50k. Even at that, my family and I live modestly because I saw what was coming and I wouldn't allow us to get to the point we would have to worry.

My house was $110,000 and is 1183 square feet. When looking for a home I chose quality and affordability over size and "curb appeal". It was a well built home, and while it needed some updating here or there, the expensive stuff had already been done: maintenance free siding and insulation, new roof, etc. We bought in October 2008, and re-financed in December because interest rates dropped substantially. We had a down payment and did NOT get the FTHB credit.

It is now 2010. Being self employed, my income is down 25% from 2008. It sucks, BUT all it really means for us at this point is less money going into the savings account. We can still afford our house just fine, our vehicles are paid off, and I can still put food on the table for my son. Other than our home we have about $700 in credit card debt, that's it.

We buy "nice things" when we can afford them, and we use our credit out of necessity, not desire. The majority of the aforementioned credit card debt was from an unplanned vehicle emergency. We don't touch our savings unless absolutely necessary - which at this point has never happened.

I too know way too many people who bought more than they could afford and leveraged themselves to death on credit/home equity/whatehaveyou. We may not have the Taj Mahal of homes, but we're not about to lose it either. :)

A buddy of mine who "gets it" told me just a few weeks ago: "You don't get rich by looking rich."

wisco, you're the exception to the rule. From other posts you've made I assumed this was likely the case. But so many people are those I described and they are the ones voting for these people. They make dumb life decisions and then expect others to bail them out and they don't expect to have to pay for any services they get.

It's like a disease in this country and they keep electing politicians who will enable them.

Yep, if you think you have to live in a 2000 sq ft house and drive two relatively new cars, have a big screen TV, etc. Relatively speaking, I raised my family on less than that and paid taxes. The difference was I bought a house I could afford, drove cars within my price range, etc. etc. I never lived in a house bigger than 1200 sq. ft. until I retired. At that point I could well afford a big house.

They quit building houses around here that are less than 2K sq ft.... Nobody wanted them. They built a new development near me and the houses are all 2.5K to 4K sq. ft. I watched young families moving in with little kids and wondered how they could afford it? When I was most of their ages, I couldn't have afforded a house like that. Well, apparently they couldn't either because a lot of them went up for sale a couple of years later for less than they paid for them.

That's back to the entitlement argument I'm making. God forbid people have to wait until they can afford something before they buy. Most families making $50K are up to their butts in debt (credit card especially) and that's why it's tough to get by. I read that the average credit card debt in this country is $20K. I don't have any credit card debt and neither do any of my friends so a lot of people have more than that. Again, entitlement, I deserve whether or not I can afford it so I put it on credit and pay double digit interest on the money. And then expect people to feel sorry for them and blame it on the awful banks that gave them the credit cards and forced them to sign the CC agreement.:rolleyes5:

Oh My God, there's actually someone else out there that thinks one should live BELOW their means? Your post could've come from my fingers verbatim. I see the same thing here in the greater DC area. Something to add to that is all the expenses people incur from uncontrolled telecom costs like broadband, unlimited text, unlimited minutes, unlimited satellite, even the 2 yr old having a cell phone. Nothing wrong with it....I'm pretty much a libertarian that wants people to do have any choices they want....but then they want unemployment benefits extended yet another 3 months, and the mortgage bailout, etc., etc. Though I can well afford it, I keep limits on all those telecom "black holes" and still have basic cable, just because I was raised to be frugal, and because I have most of my fun doing outdoor sports. :) But I look around and see absolutely no one showing any constraint on those particular costs. I've done a lot of work in hi-tech, ran the largest program at AOL in the late 90s, but I still shake my head at how much people will allow unlimited texting from their kids to blow their budgets out of the water. And then want people like me to bail them out. Ok, rant over :)