Obama's Cabinet of radicals
By Diana West
Published: Friday, Oct. 12, 2012, 9:00 p.m.
I tweeted recently about shocking news in The Daily Caller that Attorney General Eric Holder, as a Columbia University student and leader of the Student Afro-American Society (SAS), participated in the armed takeover of a vacant campus ROTC office. The takeover lasted five days in the spring of 1970. The online news site added: “Department of Justice spokeswoman Tracy Schmaler has not responded to questions from The Daily Caller about whether Holder himself was armed — and, if so, with what sort of weapon.”
Holder, himself, has acknowledged participating in a separate takeover of a college dean's office until SAS demands were met — for starters, transformation of the ROTC office into the Malcolm X Lounge. The Columbia Daily Spectator of April 23, 1970, published the group's reasons, including: “Columbia's general contempt toward the beliefs of Black students,” “Columbia's lack of concern for the welfare of Black people,” “the general racist nature of the American society” and “the right of Black self-determination.”
That same semester, Holder's Afro-American student group also had declared its “full support of the Black Panther Party as a vanguard organization for the liberation” of black people, the Columbia paper reported on March 12, 1970. Earlier, New York City police had arrested 21 Black Panther Party members, charging them with plotting to bomb various New York establishments, including a department store and a police station. The SAS, other campus revolutionary groups and leftist professors were quick to sponsor “teach-ins” and raise bail for the “Black Panther 21.”
So about that tweet of mine: “Holder's radical past comes out. Jaw-dropping. Even lawless campus thuggery no bar to becoming AG. Then, seven delayed-reaction minutes later, it dawned: “Oh, I forgot — we already have an old Panther supporter as SecState!”
Sure enough, back in the spring of 1970, while Eric Holder was occupying buildings and supporting Black Panthers in New York City, Hillary Rodham was actively monitoring and supporting the defense of eight Black Panthers accused of murder and torture in New Haven. Quite a nexus of revolutionaries, the Obama Cabinet.
Anyone else from the barricades? Too old for the New Left, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta nonetheless has leftist credentials, including a long-term association with Hugh De Lacy, a Communist Party member and contact of notorious communist agents. As a U.S. representative, Panetta wanted most-favored-nation status for the USSR and the Eastern bloc, and he opposed Ronald Reagan's anti-Sandinista policy.
Have these top Obama administration leaders at Justice, State and the Pentagon ever disavowed or even explained their affinities for violent revolutionaries and sworn enemies of the Constitution? Have they ever been asked? No.
A radical left message lives and beats at the heart of the Obama administration. It makes me wonder: Will these chickens ever come home to roost?
Diana West is the author of “The Death of the Grown-up: How America's Arrested Development Is Bringing Down Western Civilization” and blogs at dianawest.net.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.