A new kind of investigative reporting was unveiled at The New York Times on Monday. A story
about the communist connections of a major politician was plastered
across page 19 of the paper. Democratic mayoral candidate Bill de
Blasio, just endorsed by President Obama, was the subject of a long
story about his support for the Communist Sandinistas in Nicaragua in
the 1980s.
Whatever the reason for the scrutiny, the paper has opened the door
to additional investigations of Democratic Party politicians, including
Obama himself.
The story represents vindication for the late Senator Joseph McCarthy
(R-WI), who gave rise to the term,
“McCarthyism,” a search for
Communist connections and anti-Americanism that was considered
objectionable by progressives collaborating with enemies of the U.S.
McCarthyism, it seems, is now in vogue at The New York Times.
There’s no reason to stop with de Blasio. Trevor Loudon’s new book The Enemies Within: Communists, Socialists and Progressives in the U.S. Congress,
looks at dozens of other Democratic Party politicians who call
themselves progressives and have Communist connections that go even
deeper than that of de Blasio.
Salon, whose editor has endorsed de Blasio as a “real progressive,” calls the Times article on de Blasio an “anti-lefty hit piece.” By the liberal Times? What is going on here?
“References to his early activism have been omitted from his campaign
Web site,” the Times said about de Blasio, in a revelation that could
have also applied to Barack Obama’s relationship with Communist Frank
Marshall Davis, and his run for the presidency.
So what we have here is a cover-up of the first order.
In de Blasio’s case, the paper undertook investigations that would
have made Senator Joe McCarthy proud. It said, “…a review of hundreds of
pages of records and more than two dozen interviews suggest his time as
a young activist was more influential in shaping his ideology than
previously known, and far more political than typical humanitarian
work.”
This is simply incredible, as well as admirable, on the part of the
Times and its reporter, Javier C. Hernandez. The Communist background of
a major political figure has suddenly become newsworthy. The paper even
noted that de Blasio went on an illegal honeymoon to Communist Cuba.
It appears that his real “honey” was Fidel Castro. No wonder he is engaged in a cover-up.
Despite the Times’ investigative work, it is clear that more scrutiny
is needed, even of his family connections. The Times says de Blasio’s
mother, “then working at the Office of War Information in New York, was
accused of being a Communist for attending a concert featuring a Soviet
band.” It’s doubtful that attending a Soviet concert is all there is to
this particular subversive connection.
Bringing the story back to de Blasio, the paper added that he
“studied Latin American politics at Columbia and was conversational in
Spanish, grew to be an admirer of Nicaragua’s ruling Sandinista party,
thrusting himself into one of the most polarizing issues in American
politics at the time.”
Trying to explain the situation at the time, the paper said, “The
Reagan administration denounced the Sandinistas as tyrannical and
Communist, while their liberal backers argued that after years of
dictatorship, they were building a free society with broad access to
education, land and health care.”
Of course, the Sandinistas were indeed puppets of the Soviets and the
Cubans, and remain so to this day, except that the Soviets have become
the Russians and the late Hugo Chavez of Venezuela emerged as one of
their modern-day mentors, in addition to the Castro brothers.
This is not completely an old news story, since the Sandinistas have
returned to power in Nicaragua. Indeed, the Communists are on the rise
throughout Latin America.
The Times added that “de Blasio became an ardent supporter of the
Nicaraguan revolutionaries. He helped raise funds for the Sandinistas in
New York and subscribed to the party’s newspaper, Barricada, or
Barricade. When he was asked at a meeting in 1990 about his goals for
society, he said he was an advocate of ‘democratic socialism.’”
The Times said de Blasio did most of his work on behalf of the
Sandinistas through the Quixote Center in Maryland, a group I came
across while writing about the wars in Central America for Human Events
in the 1980s. A spin-off, the Christic Institute, filed a frivolous
lawsuit against supporters of the Nicaragua freedom fighters. You can
still see my 1987 debate with Daniel Sheehan of the Christic Institute on C-SPAN.
When I noted the Communist links of the Christic Institute during the
debate, Sheehan’s predictable response was: “Joe McCarthy.” His
frivolous lawsuit was thrown out of court in a case that I described as
“legal terrorism” against anti-communists.
The FBI file
on the Christic Institute is helpful in analyzing its political
contacts, such as then-Senator John Kerry, used in order to make support
for the anti-Sandinista, pro-freedom cause into a “scandal.”
The Quixote Center was “founded by Catholic leaders,” as the Times
points out, but these “leaders” were on the far left and dedicated to
the belief that communism and Christianity could mix. It is also known
as liberation theology.
De Blasio also raised money for the Nicaragua Solidarity Network, the
Times said. “In 1991, at one of his final meetings with the Nicaragua
Solidarity Network, he argued that the liberal values the group had
defended were ‘far from dead’ around the world, with blossoming
movements in places like Mexico, the Philippines, El Salvador and
Brazil, according to minutes of the meeting,” the Times reported. “He
spoke of a need to understand and build alliances with Islam, predicting
it would soon be a dominant force in politics.”
This alliance with Islam is, of course, typical of many leftists,
such as Carlos the Jackal, the terrorist trained by the KGB who
converted to Islam and became devoted to Osama bin Laden.
Promoting a Marxist alliance with Islam, in view of 9/11 and the
anti-American terrorism around the world, is something that takes on
ominous and frightening implications.
Such talk is highly relevant today because, as mayor, de Blasio could
dismantle the New York Police Department’s aggressive campaign to
uncover jihad plots targeting the citizens of that city and the nation.
But Joan Walsh of Salon hails his “bold stands on police controversies.”
He is the frontrunner for mayor and has the endorsement of Barack
Obama, who says, “Progressive change is the centerpiece of Bill de
Blasio’s vision for New York City, and it’s why he will be a great mayor
of America’s largest city.”
As for de Blasio himself, today he, too, “describes himself as a progressive,” the Times reports.
His endorsements
include not only Obama and the Clintons, but also such figures as
Senator Charles Schumer (D-NY), George Soros, editor of The Nation
Katrina vanden Heuvel, Alec Baldwin, Jeffrey Sachs of Columbia
University, and former ACORN head Bertha Lewis.
Following up on the Times investigation, the CBS affiliate in New
York confirmed, “De Blasio’s official biography on his campaign website
makes no mention of his activism.”
Activism? Is that what organizing for communist revolution has become?
In any case, why would he want to hide his “progressive activism” on
behalf of the Communists? Perhaps the connections go far beyond what the
paper itself calls items on the “social justice” agenda.
In fact, the paper said he gave them a recent interview and that de
Blasio said his views then—and now—“represented a mix of admiration for
European social democratic movements, Mr. Roosevelt’s New Deal and
liberation theology.”
So a mix of communism and Christianity is still appealing to him.
At the bottom of his campaign website, one finds the category of “transparency,” where we find “hosts of campaign-sponsored events,” but nothing about his Marxist background.
It would appear that the Times has uncovered a Pandora’s box of connections that the candidate never wanted to be discovered.
What else is he hiding? And after de Blasio is completely exposed, can we turn our attention to President Obama?