Allen West Op-Ed Defends Calling Democrats 'Communists'

Rep. Allen West (R-Fla.) is out with an op-ed this week again defending his claim that a number of House Democrats are actually members of the Communist Party.

"My colleagues in the Congressional Progressive Caucus have taken umbrage with my equation of their ideals with those of communists," West writes in the The Hill. "Why? Why shouldn’t we have this discussion? What part of their agenda are they trying to hide?"

West told a town hall meeting earlier this month that "there's about 78 to 81 members of the Democrat Party who are members of the Communist Party," referring to their membership in the Congressional Progressive Caucus. He's since doubled down, claiming that his classification of progressive lawmakers as communists was accurate.

The Florida Republican spends the majority of his op-ed defending his argument that progressives are simply communists by another name.

"Specific 'party' affiliation is not the point of the discussion -- it is rather affiliation with a set of ideals," West writes. "Conservatives adhere to the ideals of individual responsibility and freedom, limited government, a free market and a strong defense. Those on the liberal left adhere to a collective ideal, directed and controlled by a centralized government to guarantee and enforce social and economic justice."

West continues: "You can call this what you wish. The esteemed scholar and author Mark Levin calls it 'statism.' In our lifetime, the unpalatable and pejorative brands 'socialist' and 'communist' have been replaced with the more user-friendly 'progressive' term."

While West continues to argue that his equating progressivism to communism is simply an exercise in examining political ideology, his decision to label his colleagues as "communists" hasn't come without consequences beyond a verbal rebuke from Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.). Earlier this week, West was booted from an NAACP event at which he was previously set to deliver the keynote address.

Read the entire op-ed at The Hill.

Here's a look at some other notable statements from West:

Also on HuffPost:

Comments

[lenny87brown]

06:42 PM on 05/01/2012

Face it. Liberals who espouse these "progressive" ideals will refuse to recognize these same ideals as socialism or communism. Instead count on them to grab a phrase or a word or two from history in an attempt to vilify the messenger. Never mind the application of these phrases has been lifted entirely out of context. Assured that they are always right, beyond reproach and immune from intelligent discourse about their flawed ideas, progressives will continue to push this country to a new Marxist regime and wonder in astonishment how this could have happened.

[acorus]

04:54 PM on 04/30/2012

mccarthyism alive and well, ensconced in the three-piece suits of the republican party. well now, should this come as any surprise, 'tduring an election year where their most promising candidate is mitt romney? grasping for straws in the name of strawmen, won't do the trick...

[richnerd]

01:38 PM on 04/29/2012

The Tea Party now has its very own Flava Flav.

[GWBear]

12:44 PM on 04/27/2012

Why is nobody holding this guy accountable for his cracker jack comments? This guy is NUTS!! What he does is illegal and immoral, as it is not only gross slander, but is a type of hate speech.

[tomtrenner7]

12:53 AM on 04/28/2012

Really, Have you looked at the Progressive Party? Just mad because the cat is out of the bag!

[HonorCourageCommitment]

11:12 PM on 04/26/2012

Why don't you liberals see what the majority of our military thinks of our Anti-American, Anti-Military Commander In Chief. And this from a MILITARY news source simply reporting the FACTS. Read the comments:

http://militarytimes.com/blogs/battle-rattle/2012/03/19/behind-the-cover-anti-obama-marines/

[RichLagunaLiberal]

01:04 AM on 04/27/2012

You said it, HCC. It's OUR military. As such, regardless what some of these enlisted men and women think, they are sworn to follow the lawful commands of their Commander-in-Chief, President Barack Obama. If they do not, they will be dishonorably discharged and/or jailed.

So unless you're trying to agitate a military coup against our President, your point and your link are moot.

[HonorCourageCommitment]

12:15 AM on 04/29/2012

It's also important to note the distinction between the Enlisted oath and the Officer's oath.
The Officers oath is as follows:
“I, _____ (SSAN), having been appointed an officer in the Army of the United States, as indicated above in the grade of _____ do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign or domestic, that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservations or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office upon which I am about to enter; So help me God.”
(DA Form 71, 1 August 1959, for officers.)
Now you can still be charged with Sec. 894 Art. 94 of the UCMJ, directly which is mutiny or sedition for disobeying the lawful orders of the Commander In Chief. Emphasis goes to lawful orders.

[intranautt]

10:50 PM on 04/26/2012

An individual can sing onstage with a hologram of a performer, deceased in real life, and Mr. West can have his hologram of Joe McCarthy, standing right by his side.

[l78lancer]

10:00 PM on 04/26/2012

""Why? Why shouldn’t we have this discussion? What part of their agenda are they trying to hide?""
------------------------------------------------->

Why? For the same reason no one would waste time to discuss anything else that is stupid, wrong and totally misinformed. You said it, you prove it. What you will find is that it's hard to have an argument by yourself.

[HonorCourageCommitment]

10:30 PM on 04/26/2012

Or because they have no defense against the allegations that their ideologies are no different than Communist ideologies. Exactly the response from someone without an argument. There is no response, 178lancer.

[l78lancer]

02:18 AM on 04/27/2012

The origins are different. The definitions are different. The ideologies are different. If he is serious about a conversation, he is either intellectually shallow, lazy, or picking a fight where there is none. There is nothing to defend against.

[oldww2guy]

03:22 AM on 04/27/2012

GUS syndrome at work here.

[Appleton]

02:35 PM on 04/26/2012

Rep. West's ignorance is astonishing in its range and depth. As for his op-ed, I offer the following:

1. Rep. West's controversial statement had nothing to do with equating the ideals of the Progressive Caucus with those of the Communist Party. He simply asserted that its members are Communists. Don't understand that distinction, Rep. West? Look it up.

2. Mark Levin is not an "esteemed scholar." He is a polemicist. Don't understand the difference, Rep. West? Look it up.

3. The term "progressive" is not an invention in our lifetime, unless Rep. West is over 100 years old. The Progressive Party was formed in 1912 by Theodore Roosevelt, a Republican.
Don't know the history of the term, Rep. West? Look it up.

[l78lancer]

10:05 PM on 04/26/2012

Very well articulated and laid out. Unfortunately West and people who support him read little and understand even less.

Fanned.

[Dkbny]

01:32 PM on 04/26/2012

Progressive refers to progress... Moving forward. Conservative is more akin to conserve, or keep the same. Conservatives are afraid of progress, want to let the world pass us by.

[valluhree]

12:33 PM on 04/26/2012

West, just stop. I really can't stand you.

I propose we buy a whole bunch of "coexist" bumper stickers and send them all to his office.

[HonorCourageCommitment]

01:18 PM on 04/26/2012

"A progressive in Texas." You got beat up in high school, didn't you?

[LDF]

05:39 PM on 04/26/2012

Boy, you really are unaware, aren't you. Even I, a Wisconsinite, know that the is a long and proud history of progressive Texans. They may be a minority . . . but they exist.

[HonorCourageCommitment]

10:35 PM on 04/26/2012

valuhree, just stop. Texas really can't stand you.

[valluhree]

04:56 PM on 04/27/2012

Oh, how original.

[ABandApart]

12:23 PM on 04/26/2012

The data says that our entire government top to bottom is so far to right, with so little daylight between R's and D's that we are close to becoming a one-party nation. Obama is farther right than any D President of the last 100 years, and farther right than some R Presidents.
Unless West has data that says otherwise (and I know he doesn't), he should just leave this one alone and walk away.

[essy1]

11:43 AM on 04/26/2012

It is degrading to discuss anything that comes out of Allen West's mouth.

[Dkbny]

01:29 PM on 04/26/2012

Whatever comes outa his mouth should just be flushed... Because it is all s**t.

[drdrepublican]

11:41 AM on 04/26/2012

Thank goodness someone has the intestinal fortitude to call the Liberal Democrats who they really are. Communist Party doctrine states that members of their party may use the cover of the either being a Democrat, the US Peace movement, the Gay Liberation movement, an environmentalist or a Progressive to mask the true agenda of the Communist Manifesto to control the United States. The Party platform opposes the drilling in Alaska at all cost and the protection of women reproductive rights not because they respect women but to control world population. The Communist Party does not believe that the threat of terrorism can be resolved by war. The slogan of Workers of the World Unite is a proxy for the unions and Communist believe that American Capitalism is a by product of American Imperialism. The policies of the Communist Party and the Modern day Democrats are identical...

We salute you Mr. West and support you...

[ConfuciusSay-]

02:25 PM on 04/26/2012

Intestinal fortitude? Well, it's from the intestines, I guess.

[RichLagunaLiberal]

02:53 PM on 04/26/2012

You, dr, are a bonifide, geniune, easy-to-dupe id giot. Just keep letting the wealthy make you pay their taxes. They'll continue to laugh at you behind your back everyday. And don't forget, dr to vote for your wealthy repuglican representatives. And keep believing that they've got your best interests at heart because you're just like them. LOL!!

[drdrepublican]

03:23 PM on 04/26/2012

Unfortunately taxpayers like me who paid 38% last year, 28% this year have to support people like President Obama who paid 20%, his buddy Warren Buffet who owes the federal government 1 billion in back taxes and Jeffery Imelt the Obama Jobs Czar who's company GE pays none....

[Eric Graff]

11:39 AM on 04/26/2012

There MIGHT be commies in government but I know west's an OREO

[JDZSB]

11:32 AM on 04/26/2012

When it walks like a duck, looks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, odds are that it is a duck. The progressives in this country have taken over the Democratic political party and they are what we, in the 40's and 50's would call communists. Alan West has it right.

[rtaylor1974]

01:00 PM on 04/26/2012

The Reds are coming... The Reds are coming... !!

[tomjefferson2005]

03:38 PM on 04/26/2012

JDZSB: "When it walks like a duck, looks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, odds are that it is a duck." .........................>>>> REPLY: Ducks don't walk, they waddle. Wikipedia: New Deal: The New Deal produced a political realignment, making the Democratic Party the majority (as well as the party that held the White House for seven out of nine Presidential terms from 1933 to 1969), with its base in liberal ideas, the white South, big city machines, and the newly empowered labor unions and ethnic minorities. The Republicans were split, either opposing the entire New Deal as an enemy of business and growth, or accepting some of it and promising to make it more efficient. The realignment crystallized into the New Deal Coalition that dominated most presidential elections into the 1960s, while the opposition Conservative Coalition largely controlled Congress from 1937 to 1963. The "First New Deal" (1933) dealt with diverse groups, from banking and railroads to industry and farming, all of which demanded help for economic recovery. A "Second New Deal" in 1934–36 included the Wagner Act to promote labor unions, the Works Progress Administration (WPA) relief program, the Social Security Act, and new programs to aid tenant farmers and migrant workers. By 1936 the term "liberal" typically was used for supporters of the New Deal, and "conservative" for its opponents.

[RichLagunaLiberal]

01:20 AM on 04/27/2012

Excellent post, tjefferson. It's too bad not one conservative bagger will read it. Research has proven that they lack the capacity, interest or intelligence to finish reading a post of your length...even if that post supports their ideology.

They've been weened on soundbites courtesy of FoxFauxNewz, Limpbauls, et el.