On the evening of January 11, 1996, while Mitt Romney was in the final years of his run as the head of Bain Capital, Barack Obama formally joined the New Party, which was deeply hostile to the mainstream of the Democratic party and even to American capitalism.
Recently obtained evidence from the updated records of Illinois ACORN at the Wisconsin Historical Society now definitively establishes that Obama was a member of the New Party. He also signed a “contract” promising to publicly support and associate himself with the New Party while in office.
Minutes of the meeting on January 11, 1996, of the New Party’s Chicago chapter read as follows: Barack Obama, candidate for State Senate in the 13th Legislative District, gave a statement to the membership and answered questions. He signed the New Party “Candidate Contract” and requested an endorsement from the New Party. He also joined the New Party.
Consistent with this, a roster of the Chicago chapter of the New Party from early 1997 lists Obama as a member, with January 11, 1996, indicated as the date he joined.
More at the link. Kurtz tried to expose Obama's leftist political affiliations prior to the 2008 election, but he was ignored by the media as the Obama campaign worked furiously to deny his radical ties, and cover them up.
I am sure Kurtz will be ignored again, but there are much louder megaphones available today to conservative voices than there were four years ago, and there are more ears receptive to hearing how such a well-spoken man - whom we were assured, by the media, would govern as a moderate - could make such a hard Left turn.
Time to compare and contrast our two candidates, perhaps?
So while Romney was running Bain Capital, Obama joined a leftist third party controlled by ACORN and dedicated to turning the United States into a massive, European-style welfare state. If Romney’s background at Bain is a fit topic for discussion, so is Obama’s New Party tie.
The vetting of Obama has finally begun in earnest. And I think stories like Kurtz's will find a larger and more interested audience than the Times's tall tales of bullying and horse-dressing...