Obama Is Now Showing His True Colors as a Radical

Obama Is Now Showing His True Colors as a Radical

Posted By Leon de Winter On April 2, 2010 @ 12:00 am In Column 2, Culture, Iran, Israel, Media, US News | 122 Comments

Barack Obama’s presidency marks a revolutionary change in America’s relations with the Middle East. This is not an accident, and it is not the consequence of reckless Israeli behavior.

In his two autobiographical books, Obama appears as a postmodern, left-of-center intellectual. The books were taken in the media at face value, and although they contain some insights into his progressive agenda, the depth of Obama’s connections to neo-Marxist ideologues was only touched upon in passing. The media left it at that, and when he was campaigning, the mainstream media refused to research these ideological alliances.

As a community organizer, Barack Obama was heavily influenced by the theories of Saul Alinsky [1], who was a non-partisan neo-Marxist focused on the non-violent transformation of civil society. In Germany, a similar model was called der Marsch durch die Institutionen — “the long journey through the institutions.”

Alinsky’s most important work is Rules for Radicals, published in 1971, a year before his death. Its central theme is the question of how to organize individuals into revolutionary masses and gain control of society. The opening lines of Rules for Radicals are:

What follows is for those who want to change the world from what it is to what they believe it should be. The Prince was written by Machiavelli for the Haves on how to hold power. Rules for Radicals is written for the Have-Nots on how to take it away.

Barack Obama is the student Alinsky could only have dreamed of tutoring.

Smoothly, Obama executed Alinsky’s strategy: look and sound like a moderate member of civil society, but at the same time prepare silently for a structural transformation. Obama knew he should run as an African-American candidate, as a law professor, as a respectable left-of-center member of the mainstream establishment, but essentially he was an Alinsky candidate all the way.

In October 2008, it was revealed [2] that the Los Angeles Times had a video which seemed to show Barack Obama at an event with the radical anti-Israel Palestinian Rashid Khalidi. But the newspaper refused to make the video’s content public, supposedly to protect its source. Think about this for a moment. It is doubtful whether the newspaper would have made the same defense if the presidential candidate had been a conservative. The protection of the individual source would have been pushed aside for the argument that the public had to be informed of a matter of urgent national interest.

In this case, candidate Obama had to be protected. Why? If Obama had simply expressed himself neutrally or the event was just a friend’s party for Rashid Khalidi, the Times would have happily distributed the video. Almost certainly, the explanation for the secrecy with which the Times has handled the tape can only lie in its sensitive content. Otherwise, the Times’ careful behavior is nothing but inexplicable. What could that video contain? There is no need to guess. It can only be anti-Israel remarks made by Obama at a party of a close, radical, Palestinian friend.

Rashid Khalidi is one of the central figures in America’s left-wing, anti-Israel academy. The Khalidis and the Obamas shared the same circle of radical intellectual friends in Chicago, among whom the former terrorists William Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn were prominent members. Barack and Rashid  had a solid friendship, being employed as professors at the University of Chicago together. They regularly met for meals with wives and kids.

But when Obama started running for president, he had to cut off or even deny his life as an Alinsky radical (he pretended to know Ayers only in passing as just “a guy who lives in my neighborhood [3]“), and the media cooperated, ignoring Obama’s life as an ideologue and radical professor. The possibility that an African-American could become president was more important than collecting information about his politics, his beliefs, his ideas, his connections, and his friendships. Alinsky couldn’t have planned it better.

Not only is the the Los Angeles Times video still under lock and key at the newspaper, we also have no clue what Obama has written in his student papers, as they are also locked away.

We do know what his spiritual mentor, Jeremiah Wright, told him during the twenty years that the Obamas were members of Wright’s congregation. Wright married Barack and Michele and baptized their children. Wright is a screaming anti-American and anti-Semitic racist, a successful exploiter of “black rage” who earned a small fortune with his radical diatribes.

Why would a decent mainstream law professor grace this extremely provocative and anti-Semitic preacher with his presence? How can you ally yourself for twenty years with such a man and get away with it? Well, Obama and his campaign advisors showed their brilliance; in order to silence the threat of his former pastor — an uncontrolled man who had to be neutralized –  Obama gave his “race speech [4]” in March 2008. In it, he turned the threat of his alliance to Wright into an accentuation of his candidacy as an African-American. And the media complied.

Harry Reid was right: “He [Reid] was wowed by Obama’s oratorical gifts and believed that the country was ready to embrace a black presidential candidate, especially one such as Obama — a ‘light-skinned’ African American ‘with no Negro dialect, unless he wanted to have one,’ as he said privately. Reid was convinced, in fact, that Obama’s race would help him more than hurt him in a bid for the Democratic nomination,” Mark Halperin and John Heilemann write in Game Change.

The true character of the candidate that the American public elected was hidden from scrutiny by smooth-marketing geniuses like David Axelrod, who was able to create a ring of safety around Obama based on the deadly weapon the Obama team could point at his critics: the race card. This is a weapon that, at the moment, is widely used.

During the campaign, Obama’s life in Chicago as a member of the radical left was left mainly untouched by the American media. America desperately needed a bipartisan black president. Instead, it elected a neo-socialist Alinskyite.

Obama masterfully hid his true colors when running for office, but they are slowly reappearing in his policies. He is soft on leftist dictators, soft on Islamic tyrannies, and radically negative toward big companies, which he openly denounces. He recently verbally trashed the complete health insurance industry in America in a violent speech worthy of Venezuela’s Hugo Chavez. Obama never shed his radical convictions when he entered the White House, but he knows he has to be careful and pretend he is a moderate left-of-center politician, totally at ease with the system of capitalistic civil society. But he, as an historic figure, now can transform the economic and social fabric of the leading nation on earth from within.

To understand Obama’s ideas about Israel and the Palestinians, one should understand the ideas of his close friend Rashid Khalidi. According to Khalidi, Israel is “a state that exists today at the expense of the Palestinians.” Israel “fails to meet the most important requirement: justice.” In an interview in 2000, when he and Obama could still meet freely and  exchange ideas about racism, colonialism, and imperialism over dinner, Khalidi said that Israel was a “racist” state, a state that was “basically an apartheid system in creation.”

Obama is getting the assistance of left-wing Jews, for whom the Jewish state is a shameful reminder of their tribal ghetto-ancestry, of dancing Chassidim, and of outdated religious-colonialist ideas over promised lands that cause innocent Arab Muslims to suffer and to blow themselves up.

This is the present situation. It doesn’t make sense to hide the truth. The president of the United States despises Israel. Obama has constructed one of history’s most impressive political careers while hiding his true convictions. But these are now beginning to show in his denial of Palestinian brutality, Iranian apocalyptic ambitions, Chinese devastation of Tibet, the liberating and emancipating qualities of the free market, and Israel’s right to defend itself.

If Obama is Israel’s best friend, it is time for the Jewish state to look for others.

Max Baucus on Obamacare’s hidden agenda – redistribution of wealth

Thursday, March 25, 2010
Posted by: Hugh Hewitt at 5:08 PM

Max Baucus is the Chair of the Senate Finance Committee, and the Democrat most responsible fo Obamacare’s final shape other than Nancy Pelosi.

In an unusual speech on the Senate floor moments ago, Max Baucus declares that the “healthcare bill” to be  “an income shift, it is a shift, a leveling to help lower income middle income Americans.”  Baucus continued, “[t]oo often, much of late, the last couple three years the mal-distribution of income in America is gone up way too much, the wealthy are getting way, way too wealthy, and the middle income class is left behind.  Wages have not kept up with increased income of the highest income in America.  This legislation will have the effect of addressing that mal-distribution of income in America.”

Max Baucus on Obamacare’s hidden agenda – redistribution of wealth

Baucus’ candor is appreciated, though the fact that he waited until the bill passed to announce the real agenda behind the massive tax hikes isn’t a profile in courage.  And the seniors on fixed income who are about to lose Medicare Advantage would laugh at Baucus’ pseudo-populism.

Posted in Abortion, American Fifth Column, B Hussein Obama, Barack Hussein Obama, Barack Obama, Biden, Bill Ayers, CNN traitors, defeat liberalism, Democrat Communist Party, Democrat corruption, Democrat george soros, democrat half truth, Democrat issues, democrat John McCain, democrat lies, democrat muslim, democrat polls, democrat scandals, Democrat Shadow Government, democrat socialists, democrat spying, DEMOCRATIC CONVENTION, Democratic Corruption, Democratic majority, democratic media, Democratic Party, Democratic socialism, Democratic Socialists of America, Democratic traitors, Democrats & The Left, Democrats and AARP, democrats and acorn, democrats and CNN, Democrats and drilling, Democrats and Earmarking, democrats and global Warming, democrats and illegal immigration, Democrats and labor unions, Democrats and Subprime mortgages, Democrats and talk radio, Democrats and taxes, Democrats and the media, Democrats being stupid, democrats cheating, democrats socialized medicine, Democrats' Nepotism, Dennis Kucinich, Dianne Feinstein, Earmarking, earmarks, Evangelical Left, Fifth Column, Fifth Column Left, get tough on liberal media, get tough on liberals, get tough with democrats, Harry Reid, Healthcare, Hillary Clinton, Hillary Clinton Socialist, Hollywood liberals, Homeland Security, Hussein Obama, Impeach, In The News, Islam, islam fundamentalist, Islam sympathizers, Islamic immigration, Joe Biden, John Kerry, John Murtha, Left wing churches, Left-wing, left-wing ideologues, Leftist Claptrap, leftist fund, Leftist parties, leftist universities, leftist wacko, leftists, leftwing billionaire George Soros, Max Baucus, Nancy Pelosi, National Debt, Nazi Pelosi, Obama, Obama Czars, Obama Jackboots, Obama-Pelosi-Reid, Obamacare, partial birth abortion, Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act, Pelosi Land, Radical Politics, Rahm Emanuel, Saul Alinsky. Leave a Comment »

Obama’s Civilian National Security Force

Civilian National Security Force

BY Herschel Smith
2 months, 3 weeks ago

So Obama wants to quit relying on the U.S. military alone to implement U.S. national security objectives. Okay, in contemporary slang, The Captain’s Journal is “down with that.” So he’s going to get the State Department playing on the same side as the military? Er … maybe not.

View the video vey disturbing


“Just as powerful, just as strong, and just as well funded.” So the astute observer and deep thinker might reflect for a minute and be compelled to pose several questions (although the MSM won’t).

  1. How will this Civilian National Security Force (hereafter CNSF) be just as powerful as men with guns, artillery, ordnance, war ships and aircraft?
  2. What will make the CNSF “just as strong” as the U.S. Marine Corps?
  3. How will this CNSF implement national security policy?
  4. Since the 2009 budget includes just over half a trillion dollars for defense spending (The Captain’s Journal supports this, and calls for even more), and since it is judged that this CNSF be “just as well funded” as the military, where will this half a trillion dollars come from?
  5. Finally, if he didn’t really mean that this CNSF would be the beneficiary of half a trillion dollars (to do with we don’t know what), then why did he say so?

At any rate, these questions seem to be compelled by the proposal. The best bet, however, is that the MSM won’t pose a single one of them (but we do get to add another snappy sounding category to our stable of articles – Civilian National Defense Force).

CAIR Cheers “Thought Crime” Bill Passage

CAIR Cheers “Thought Crime” Bill Passage

Of course, we already have thought crime in America. When public figures and media talking heads (you know who I’m talking about — almost everybody, Left and Right) relentlessly purvey polite fictions about Islam as a religion of peace instead of having the courage to challenge the American Muslim community, we have thoughtcrime. Challenge the American Muslim community? Yes — to confront the elements of Islam that the jihadists are using to justify violence and formulate positive ways to neutralize their capacity to be used in such a way. In other words, to institute large-scale programs — transparent, sincere, and verifiable ones — to teach against the jihad ideology and Islamic supremacism in American schools and mosques. This would actually empower the reformers these people claim to support, since no reform can begin until one is ready to admit that something needs reforming.

But the Matthews and Dobbses and Hannitys and Becks of the world would rather play pretend. They’d rather tell their viewers fantasies and fictions rather than deal with harsh realities, because to do otherwise would be to commit thoughtcrime. CAIR and its ilk have already been quite successful in casting any honest discussion of the elements of Islam that are being used today by the jihadists to justify their actions as “anti-Muslim,” “Islamophobic,” “bigoted,” “hateful,” etc. And the fearless free media cowers in terror.

In reality, however, it is not anti-Muslim, “Islamophobic,” bigoted or hateful simply to point out what Muhammad taught, according to the earliest Islamic sources, and what the Qur’an says, as interpreted by the mainstream Sunni schools of jurisprudence, and what Islamic law says, and what the record of Islamic history is. How could such a thing be hateful, or loving, for that matter? It is what it is. The fact that almost no major media types will dare to look at this material squarely shows how effective the Orwellian mau-mauing has been. Thoughtcrime is real, and few are willing to commit it.

And now the House of Representatives of the United States of America has joined the cowering crowd, passing a bill that, if it becomes law (as it likely will once a Democratic president is in office in 2009), will make it illegal to discuss the root causes of the problem that threatens to destroy Europe within our lifetimes, forces every Israeli to leave his home every day not knowing if he will return, and was responsible for the largest mass murder ever on American soil (no, the perp wasn’t Cho Seung Hui). That CAIR loves this bill and has worked for it is no surprise — it is the same sort of thing as their Flying Imams lawsuit. That one would make Americans too afraid to report a Muslim acting suspiciously in an airport or on a plane, effectively giving jihad terrorists a free hand. This one could make quoting bin Laden and asking peaceful Muslims to stand up against jihad terrorism more effectively in both words and deeds into a crime — that of “Islamophobia,” as the mau-mauers have dubbed it. It’s funny how the noble and glorious words of the Qur’an become “hate speech” when I simply quote them — it reminds me of a wonderful short story by Jorge Luis Borges about which I’ll be writing more soon — but that is what I do, and that is an accusation I have often received.

Here is a WND story shedding some light on how this bill criminalizes thoughts. The article deals mostly with Christians and moral issues, but obviously since CAIR is on board so energetically they clearly see its usefulness to stifle free inquiry into the elements of Islam that need reforming.

The ever-vigilant Pamela over at Atlas Shrugs (thanks to News4U) has the details:

I warned against the thought crimes bill here. I even said “I can just see CAIR scampering to get this passed.” They will wield this legislation like a club. Well it passed the House and CAIR is ecstatic. Here is the CAIR alert;

CAIR PRAISES HOUSE PASSAGE OF ANTI-HATE CRIMES BILL(WASHINGTON, D.C., 5/3/2007) – The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) today congratulated the US House of Representatives on its passage of the Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act.

To see how your U.S. representative voted, go here: http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2007/roll299.xml

CAIR has supported the act since 2005 and last week renewed its call for the community to urge elected officials to pass the measure.

SEE: Support the Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2007

The Senate now must consider its version of the bill, known as S. 1105.

If passed, the law would allow the Attorney General to provide federal assistance to local law enforcement to aid investigations of crimes motivated by “…prejudice based on the actual or perceived race, color, religion, national origin…” of the victim.

The White House has indicated that it will most likely veto the measure if it reaches the President.

The ‘Fifth Columnization’ of America

The ‘Fifth Columnization’ of America
By Frank Salvato
May 4, 2007

The Progressive-Left’s American Fifth Column is most often epitomized by the militant, bullhorn toting activist who, when not examined thoroughly, seems to be advocating for one “civil right” or another. We see them at the pro-illegal immigration protests, the anti-gun protests, the anti-war protests, anywhere a group of people can lay blame at the feet of government and especially the Bush Administration. But the American Fifth Column’s tentacles spread much wider and delve much deeper into our history and our society and recent events illustrate this as fact, rather than fiction.

The American Fifth Column is born out of Socialist/Communist ideology where the citizenry grows dependent on the government while the government increasingly legislates itself more control over the people.

In the perfect Fifth Column world, everyone is equal and possesses an artificially elevated sense of self-worth, the competitive spirit is equalized through taxes and legislated oversight of private business and societal boundaries — including boundaries in speech and action — are enforced through a shadow set of laws known as political correctness, a set of laws that undermine the authority of the Constitution.

The American Fifth Column is embodied by the politically correct multicultural one-world movement and encompasses all of the Progressive-Left buzz word initiatives, such as “diversity,” “public good,” “it takes a village,” “global village” and so on.

Through the artificial equalization of our society the Fifth Column strives to achieve the Balkanization of the United States through the celebration of diversity while inducing the surrender of individual choice within those Balkanized communities to governmental entities; divide and conquer.

When successful, the efforts of the Progressive-Left’s American Fifth Column achieve the neutering of the American spirit, the end of our celebrated melting pot where pride in individuality, whether ethnic, religious or social, gave way only to pride of country; e pluribus unim. It transforms pioneers into cogs in a machine for the “greater good” and feminizes our society, this feminization giving way to a society of defenseless victims who are completely reliant on government for their survival.

Recent events have driven me to opine about this societal cancer infiltrating our country under the guise of “progressive ideology,” among them the Virginia Tech shootings.

As the mainstream media reported how Cho Seung-Hui reloaded his two weapons multiple times during his murderous rampage one question kept emerging as the only question that needed to be asked in the nauseatingly repetitive after-the-fact analysis: While he was reloading, why didn’t someone pick up a chair and beat the hell out of him?

I’ll admit that Hui’s first shooting of the day involved too few to invoke a mass response and I give credit to the resident assistant who came to the first female victim’s defense. But when he stormed the more populated classrooms of the lecture hall why didn’t someone stand-up to this cretin? Why was a septuagenarian holocaust and Soviet Bloc survivor the only one to stand up to Hui, effectively saying, “Not while I can do something about it!”

It can be argued that the lack of response from the majority of people in Hui’s gun sights were the products of over forty years of the Fifth Column’s artificially induced sense of self-importance and societal feminization. They had all been transformed into defenseless victims incapable of thinking about confrontation; incapable of understanding that there was an alternative to slaughter and that alternative was standing up to Hui the aggressor.

Imagine if after Hui started shooting his weapons that thirty people started throwing everything that they could find at him in unison while charging the sorry excuse for a human being. Logic mandates that Hui wouldn’t have fell so many victims because he wouldn’t have had free reign to wreck havoc. Evidence to this fact is in that all of the students in 76-year old Professor Liviu Librescu’s classroom lived.

So, why did Hui’s victims and potential victims cower in fear as Hui methodically chose his victims for slaughter? Because our society has been conditioned through the propaganda of the Fifth Column to believe that violence and/or violent acts, in all cases, are unacceptable.

The American Fifth Column’s relentless and visionless opposition to the military efforts in Iraq stand as another glaring example.

I stand as one of the few voices who refuses to back down in the face of the Fifth Column’s relentless insistence that weapons of mass destruction was the onus for President Bush’s decision to assemble a coalition of willing nations to topple Iraqi strongman Saddam Hussein. This insistence, for the overwhelming part, is in error and it has been mischaracterized unmercifully in order to advance their politically correct, one-world efforts to equalize the United States on the world stage.

Ingenuous people will admit that after being reminded of the reasons given for action in Iraq — Saddam Hussein’s genocide of his own people and his blatant violation of the cease-fire agreement that allowed him to live at the end of the Gulf War — it would have been unthinkable to have allowed this madman to go unchallenged.

Yet, the American Fifth Column denounces the Bush Administration, condemns the military actions taking place on behalf of and authorized by a freely elected Iraqi government and insists on arguing the least tangible of all the points given for military intervention in Iraq, WMD, even though regime change in Iraq was mandated by Congress as US policy under the Clinton Administration.

Question for the Progressive-Left Fifth Column: When did genocide become acceptable to you?

Perhaps the most disturbing avenue the Fifth Column has cultivated is within our education system. From grade school through college, the education establishment, bolstered by the political activists and social engineers of the agenda-driven National Education Association, has the government mandated opportunity to poison the minds of our children, to brainwash our country’s youth.

Nary a day goes by when there isn’t a story espousing the political indoctrination by the likes of a Ward Churchill or a Jay Bennish, “teachers” — and I use the word loosely — who impose their political beliefs on their students while usurping the parental birthright to bequeath familial core values to their children.

School systems lorded over by busy-body Progressive-Leftists increasingly employ text books that rewrite history at our nation’s expense. Parents are kept from attaining full access to programs mandated by our schools that promote questionable adult content in the form of what is termed sex education under the heading of “diversity” and “cultural awareness.” And some public school systems are promoting the “understanding” of Islam by forcing students to become “Muslim for a day,” in direct contradiction of the Progressive-Left’s belief in separation of church and state.

As the Fifth Column Progressive-Leftists make inroads into our society, our education system and our state and federal governments, the overwhelming majority of Conservative lawmakers can’t find their spines long enough to demand action against elected officials who have certainly become nothing less than enemies of the State.

Not one Conservative lawmaker — in leadership or otherwise — has called for investigations into whether or not treason charges should be brought against or at least resignations be extracted from:

— House Speaker Nancy Pelosi: For her non-authorized and unconstitutional contact with the leader of a State sponsor of terrorism in a time of war in direct violation of the Logan Act. And for then declaring that she was “too busy” to meet with US General David Petraeus when he came to Washington to brief Congress on the current situation on the ground in Iraq.

— House Whip Steny Hoyer: For his contact with leadership of the terrorist organization The Muslim Brotherhood, a radical group who actively works to promote the creation of a global Islamic Caliphate as it aids and abets terrorist organizations such as al Qaeda, Hezbollah and Hamas, among others.

— Representative John Murtha for blatantly lying to the American people about not receiving a briefing from General Petraeus when Murtha received a personal briefing via telephone from the General for almost 30 minutes

— Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid: For his declaration “The war is lost,” a statement that most certainly aided and abetted the propaganda campaign of terrorist organizations with which the United States is currently at war.

While the Fifth Column chalks up victory after victory, inching further and further toward controlling not only the House and Senate but the White House and Supreme Court as well, conservative lawmakers can’t even find the outrage to charge treason and demand resignations when elected Fifth Columnists are successfully aiding our enemy, steering our country into the abyss of military defeat and toward the human indignity that is Socialism.

But perhaps the most blame for the mess we’re in lies with the American people, specifically the conservatives among us. While the insanity of the third party route and the casting of protest votes is incredibly clear to those who understand the threat of the Fifth Column, those pale in comparison to the most damaging shortcomings of the conservative movement: personal inaction and abdication of responsibility.

Today’s conservatives — especially today’s Republican Party (and there is a difference) — are very good at talking the talk but they are incredibly bad at walking the walk. While they extol the greatness of Ronald Reagan they repeatedly violate Reagan’s Rule not to air party problems in public so that the opposition can benefit from that knowledge.

So too are they delinquent in actually practicing what they preach.

How many of you have taken pen to paper and written a soldier serving in Iraq?

How many have sent a care package to afford one of them a little piece of home?

How many of you have actually written to your elected officials expressing your dismay or congratulating them on a job well done?

How many of you have advanced financial support — be it $1 or $1,000 — to the new media outlets that you patronize and who have without fail carried the water to the elephant while the mainstream media has served its big money special interest donors in the defeat of America?

How many of you have given of yourselves to promote the fact-based education of those around you so that our country would be a more educated and thus a better place to live?

What have you done to make sure there is an American Heritage to pass on to your children and your children’s children?

The time is shortly after 9:28am ET. The date is September 11, 2001. You are on-board Flight 93 and the al Qaeda hijackers have just made their move to commandeer the aircraft. After a few cell phone calls you come to understand that the World Trade Center is for all practical purposes gone and that the Pentagon has been attacked, all through the use of suicide missions that piloted aircraft as weapons into their targets.

Question: Do you have the courage, do you have the conviction, do you have what it takes to charge the cockpit, to confront the hijackers, knowing full well that you, in all probability, are going to die? Or are you one of the many who cowered in the back of the plane waiting to be slaughtered.

Hint: If you answered in the negative to any of the above questions, get to the back of the plane. Some of us have real work to do in order to save this country.


Frank Salvato is the managing editor for The New Media Journal. He serves at the Executive Director of the Basics Project, a non-profit, non-partisan, 501(C)(3) research and education initiative. His pieces are regularly featured in over 100 publications both nationally and internationally. He has appeared on The O’Reilly Factor. He hosts The New Media Journal on BlogTalk Radio and is a regular guest on The Right Balance with Greg Allen on the Accent Radio Network and The Captain’s America on WWPR AM1490 in the Tampa Bay area, as well as an occasional guest on The Bruce Elliott Show on WBAL AM1090 in Baltimore and numerous radio shows coast to coast. His organization, Basics Project, is partnered in producing the first-ever national symposium series on the threat of radical Islamist terrorism. His pieces have been recognized by the House International Relations Committee and the Japan Center for Conflict. Mr. Salvato is available for public speaking engagements. He can be contacted at newmediajournal@comcast.net.