Since the Dems have not spoken out against "violent protest," we may be looking at a very nasty summer in 2012. Here is why.

(Note: this is a developing story, on my part. Because of its import, I wanted to post it, even before I was finished. As you read, keep a picture of the Occupy Movement in mind. It really is not a huge movement in this country, as of yet, in spite of the effort of the media to the contrary. But, it is something the Democrats see as worthy of co-opting. My original post was entitled "What Obama does not want you to know." It contained this caveat written more than two years ago: "Our advice for you is to copy these statements, keep them in mind and work to support or defeat the outgrowth when it becomes clear just what he had in mind" ( May 20, 2009). Well, it looks as if that time is in our immediate future - that is, if Obama can pull off co-opting the Occupy movement. - Editor (10/15/11)

*******

In May of 2008, we have the first of several quotes telling us just how radical this bunch of incoming politicians are.

MICHELLE OBAMA: "Barack knows that we are going to have to make sacrifices; we are going to have to change our conversation; we're going to have to change our traditions, our history; we're going to have to move into a different place as a nation."

On July 2, 2008, Obama had this to say: "We cannot continue to rely only on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we've set. We've got to have a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded."

You can actually hear him say these very words at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Df2p6867_pw. As I remember, the quote comes after 120 on the video. You should know that by July 16, the written text of this speech deleted the words in red. Why the deletion? Isn't that obvious?

Below is a second quote that does not fit into our sense of reality. He spoke these words at the signing of H.R. 1388 (Ameriicorps) and had the youth of his world in mind. You can find it at WhiteHouse.gov .

I’ve met countless people of all ages and walks of life who want nothing more than to do their part. I’ve seen a rising generation of young people work and volunteer and turn out in record numbers. They’re a generation that came of age amidst the horrors of 9/11 and Katrina; the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan; an economic crisis without precedent. And yet despite all this, or more likely because of it, they have become a generation of activists possessed with that most American of ideas – that people who love their country can change it.

Americops did not turn out to be the civilian force Obama had intended. Obama saw a "generation of activists" only because he, himself, was/is a social reformer. He knows the gullibilities of our youth and he believed he could enlist the "services" of those young people who idolized him. That adulation is gone, however. What has taken its place? Discontent. The Occupy Movement holds the potential to become Obama's civilian army, if he can figure out a way to co-opt the movement, that is. As things stand at present, Occupy is as disappointed in Government as it is in Wall Street. Van Jones believes that "Occupy" can be occupied by his socialist buds. More and more Democrats are "getting on board" with the co-opting effort, as well. In fact, there is a divided Democrat party aspect to all this.

Yes, there is talk of a "third party," one that embraces the disappointment of the radicalized Left. One that is officially anti-capitalist. One that might threaten the existence of the Democrat Party as we know it. Read about it here.

On September 30, Van Jones told MSNBC "I think everybody should hold onto your seats. October is going to be the turning point when it comes to the progressive fight back."

Jones is driving the notion of a third radicalized party. He is the that brags about a "progressive fight back." Maybe Van Jones is "The Man," instead of Obama?!

The Van Jones quote is not a prediction so much as it an analytical statement. "Occupy" began in September, maybe sooner in Europe. But, it was already a social event at the time Van Jones made his statement. I believe the demonstrations (they are not "riots" at this time) are spontaneous events that run the risk of being co-opted by the socialist forces waiting in the shadows. If you have paid attention to a number interviews, the young people being question seem to be of one mind in defending the notion that Occupy is not a "movement with a strong sense of direction." The radical Left might sees an opportunity in joining along side a movement that has no direction. Understand that disorganized discontent lends itself, handily, to forceful rebellion.

Side bar:

Proletariat Blog was ahead of me on this> Read the researched article written in March of 2009 here.

.... I notice that "Proletariat Blog" does not have a pundits name attached to it. The man or woman is, obviously, concerned for his/her personal well being. I know that Washington DC comes to this blog once in a while. One of my stat counters gives me that information. A little unnerving. Proletariat Blog has been around since 2004. He has very interesting material.