Friday, March 9, 2012

Anita Dunn ("I ♥ Mao") Behind Fluke's Fame

How does a woman who can't quite scrape together $10 a month to buy her own contraception come up with the scratch to be represented by a high-end PR firm with offices in Washington, New York, and Albany?

Sandra Fluke, the woman who thinks you should provide her with free contraception, has somehow acquired the services of PR firm SKDKnickerbocker, whose managing director is none other than Obama's former White House Communications Director, Anita Dunn.

Dunn scurried from the White House in December of 2009, after Glenn Beck broadcast a video of Dunn revealing (in an address to graduating high school kids) her strong admiration of Mao Tse Tung (Dunn video starts at 4:09 below):

Mao's Communist "political philosophy" resulted in the deaths of about 70 million people, many of whom were slaughtered in political purges and the rest of whom starved to death as Mao fundamentally transformed China.

Dunn's political opponents (that is to say, Obama's political opponents), included, most notably, Fox News.

The link between Dunn and Fluke was revealed last night by former (apparently) Obama booster Bill O'Reilly, who opined that "this whole deal comes back to the White House, at least indirectly.”

H/T: Jeff Poor @ The Daily Caller



  1. Like Trestin said, she is a plant. That's how they do it - from the Scopes Monkey trial to Roe v. Wade, they pay someone to sow the seed of discord and use that flash point to push their agenda further.

    Mao's communist philosophy was bought and paid for by the Fed, by the way, as they set up the Soviet Union. Chang Kai Sheck was being pushed to fight the Japanese and not the communists within his own country. He put it this way: the Japanese are a disease of the skin, but communism is a disease of the heart. The US, for reasons that don't make sense with our "official" history, pulled the rug out from Chang Kai Sheck and backed Mao deliberately.

    David Rockefeller commented in the NY Times that Mao did a swell job with the Cultural Revolution. You see, the super-rich like communism because it ties up an entire country for them and they don't have to bother with competition, they deal with the government directly.

  2. Marxists that stick together form utopias together.

  3. @Mom -- That is indeed how they do it.

    Based on my current knowledge, I'm not willing to lay blame for Mao on the U.S.

    I'd say that Japan's imperialist expansion indirectly gave Mao the boost he needed to defeat Chiang.


    In America's effort to defeat Japan, Germany, and the other Axis powers, the U.S. allied herself with whatever leaders were willing to join in the fight against the Axis powers, the U.S.S.R. included, following the ancient tradition of "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" (at least temporarily). Victory for the U.S. was far from a foregone conclusion and, indeed, the U.S. was anxious that both Mao and Chiang Kai-Shek fight the Japanese.

    To that end, the U.S. went to considerable trouble and expense to supply both Mao and Chiang with aid and arms, and both of them did fight the Japanese. Japan was not exactly a friend of China, after all: the late 30s saw the Rape of Nanking and many other monstrous atrocities by the Japanese. Mao was the more willing of the two, but Chiang did relent under advisement and support from many, including not only Americans and other foreigners but other Chinese warlords as well.

    While the U.S. occupied herself with her our survival during WWII (and mighty glad I am that we did survive), Mao gained the upper hand in China and ran Chiang into the island of Taiwan. Could that have been predicted? I don't know. Probably some people saw it coming.

    I do know, however, that the U.S. gov't strongly backed Chiang's gov't there. But America was still getting educated about communism. It was well after the war that Mao revealed his true colors (in terms of wholesale atrocity), which came as a surprise to many soft-headed American progressives and American Communist Party members in the U.S. gov't and intelligentsia, many of whom had still not removed their blinders to Stalin's atrocities, so great was their faith in Communism as the great reverser of poverty and injustice--just as many of today's progressives have convinced themselves that the North Koreans are living in some kind of "free health care" worker's paradise. It wasn't until the 50s that Communism truly became a dirty word in the U.S., and that, as you well know, isn't an attitude that penetrated very deeply in many areas nor lasted very long. Joe McCarthy is still derided, along with the U.S. military leaders who did understand the threat of communism better than other segments of society.

    What we don't know, and what we will never know, is what would have happened to China if their civil war had continued and Mao and Chiang had battled it out to the bitter end. How much damage would that have done to China, and what would the results have been?

    My two cents . . . .

  4. @Odie -- Now that's a bumper sticker!

  5. Actually, the USG knew all about communism as it set up Bolshevikism in Russia. The Chairman of the NY Fed, William Boyce Thompson gave the Bolsheviks in Russia one million dollars to spread the message of communism. (Look it up in the Washington Post) He also organized a Red Cross "mission" to Russia during this time to distribute Bolshevik propaganda, including seminars complete with "lantern shows", really cutting edge. His mission included pretty much nothing but bankers from Wall Street. Why would they do this? How much more convenient is it to lock up an entire country and deal with a central government? The resources and cheap labor can be exploited. So communism was nothing new to those in the know in the US.

    Fast forwarding to China and Japan, who have always been enemies..but the real history is so much more involved than what we are told. We do know that Chiang would have won had his supplies not been cut off. That's a fact. During WW2, the US was allied with Russia, and they turned on Chiang because Russia supported Mao. There is a famous story about how Shek had a huge numerical advantage over the communists, but had run out of ammo. The US had switched sides on him. If you want the real details this is a good article, which connects the dots between the media, the tax-exempt foundations, and our government in regard to China:

    1. @Mom -- Thanks for the link. I read Perloff's article with interest. I think you and I may agree more than we disagree.

      At first view, I don't argue in general with the facts Perloff presents (there's plenty I'd need to look up); it's his interpretation of those facts that don't seem consistent with what I do know. And I don't buy his argument that "Washington had full foreknowledge of the Pearl Harbor attack."

      I see that all parties involved in the war were trying to manipulate situations to their own ends. That's to be expected. Stalin was a formidable adversary, all the more so because he was able to convince--at least for a time--Churchill, Roosevelt, and Truman that he had his trustworthy side as an ally. The U.S.S.R. was hardly an open society, and Stalin could--and did--hide pretty much whatever he wanted to hide. Moreover, Stalin obviously had plenty of help from Soviet agents and spies embedded in the U.S. gov't and even U.S. military as well as help from a great many well-meaning American communists and progs who considered communism to be the universal panacea for the Great Depression. Particularly in the 30s, government and academia (read publishing) were riddled with communists, whom we can hardly attribute with serving an authentic American purpose, though many believed that they were.

      Obviously Stalin planned to reap huge benefits from America's war efforts in Asia, and, to a great extent, he succeeded in those aspirations.

      This is a a great tragedy but, war being the chaotic bloodletting that it is, we cannot reasonably expect that every one of America's wartime aspirations could have resulted in victory. As Perloff points out, China was not without friends in the U.S. military and government, and to blame the U.S. for the damages of that war--which we did not start--is a step too far for me.

    2. I'm coming at this from a different perspective is all. I have waded through a lot of old newspaper clippings to proof a lot of this to myself. As far as the Pear Harbor attack goes, the evidence that I find for it mounts all the time. I take the word of the officers in charge to the politicians any day. The McCollum memo circulated in October of 1940 is a documented fact. It contained eight action steps, which were followed. The end of the memo stated : "Japan could be led to commit an overt act of war". Some try to say that the memo was a suggestion to avert war, but as with all documents like this - it's best to read them for yourself:

      But what bothers me more than the Japan stuff is the Hitler stuff. Listen to the words of Louis McFadden, chairman of the US House Banking committee:

      “After WWI, Germany fell into the hands of the German International Bankers. Those bankers bought her and they now own her, lock, stock and barrel. They purchased her industries, they have mortgages on her soil, they control her production; they control all her public utilities. The International German Bankers have subsidized the present government of Germany and they have also supplied every dollar of the money Adolf Hitler has used in his lavish campaign to build up a threat to the government of Bruening. When Bruening fails to obey the orders of the German International Bankers, Hitler is brought forth to scare the Germans into submission. Through the Federal Reserve Board over thirty billions of dollars was pumped into Germany…You have all heard of the spending that has taken place in Germany…modernistic dwellings, her great planetariums, her gymnasiums, her swimming pools, her fine public highways, her perfect factories….All this was done with our money. All this was given to Germany through the Federal Reserve Board. The Federal Reserve Board has pumped so many billions of dollars into Germany that they dare not name the total.”
      – Rep. Lewis T. McFadden (D PA), Chairman of the House Banking and Currency Committee, 1931, (spoken before Congress eight years before Hitler invaded Poland and duly entered into the Congressional Record.)

      Germany would have been an impoverished nation had not the Fed pumped billions of dollars into Germany. It's hard to fathom all this, but to the Bible believing Christian, it makes perfect sense.

  6. I knew something was up. College students don't just show up to testify before congress without having some important connections.

  7. @Trestin -- Or get phone calls from the president . . . .