No doubt, some will dismiss the newly revealed connections between the Obama administration, Patrick Gaspard, Bertha Lewis, and ACORN as "guilt by association." Yet it seems to me that the evidence points to something more significant than that. We are talking about a persistent and shared political-ideological alliance between President Obama and the complex of community, labor, and party organizations controlled by ACORN. (See especially "Life of the New Party" for more on New Party ideology.) Again, the Gaspard issue is new and needs further investigation and consideration. Yet preliminary indications are that the Gaspard-ACORN-Bertha Lewis-New Party-WFP-SEIU ties are significant, and tell us something disturbing about the political ideology and intentions of President Obama. In particular, the connection between Gaspard, Lewis, the New Party, and the Working Families Party ought to draw our attention back to what may ultimately be the most important Obama-ACORN tie of all, his time with Chicago’s New Party.
Read it all. You can tell a lot about a man (or woman) by looking at the company he keeps.
And, I would like to point out that "keeps" is in the present tense, not the past tense. These people from the "past" still surround Obama now that he is POTUS. This is not a coincidence, and Kurtz is absolutely correct that this information is incredibly significant, whether the legacy media decide they will look at it or not.
Why? Because it tells us where Obama is really trying to take this country, and what his real agenda is. Nothing is more relevant than that.
Read Kurtz's other articles ("Something New Here," and "Life of the New Party.") on Obama and his questionable associations; associations that, when taken as a whole, are not only extremely revealing, but should be of concern to all Americans--and should have been something that was explored in minute and repetitive detail before this guy was elected to any position of importance.
Now, ask yourself why this simple investigative journalist task was never done (except by Kurtz) and why it never made big news? Because this is precisely the kind of important information that is needed to determine the character of a man.
I never attribute to malice, what can be explained by sheer stupidity; but in this case, I am beginning to believe that there was a lot of malice aforethought by a lot of people in order to hide, obscure and/or delete any information that might dent the pre-fabricated and carefully polished image of the new messiah.
Or, I could just be paranoid.
I guess the truth will be apparent when we arrive at Obama's final destination.