Anita Dunn Praises Mao Zedong

October 19th, 2009 By: Michael van der Galien | Tags: , , , , , ,

If you thought that every radical member of the Obama administration would’ve been exposed by now, I’m afraid you’re wrong. You see, it seems that White House Communications Director Anita Dunn is one of Mao Zedong’s biggest fans:

“You’re going to make choices, you’re going to challenge, you’re going to say why not. You’re going to figure out how to do things that have never been done before. But here’s the deal, these are your choices, they’re no one else’s. In 1947, when Mao Tse Tung was being challenged within his own party on his plan to basically take China over – Chiang Kai Shek and the nationalist Chinese held the cities, they had the army, they had the air force, they had everything on their side, and people said how can you win, how can you do this, how can you do this against all of the odds against you, and Mao Tse Tung said: ‘you’ll fight your war and I’ll fight mine’.

“And think about that for a second. You don’t have to accept the definition of how to do things and you don’t have to follow other people’s choices and paths. It is about your choices and your paths. You fight your own war. You lay out your own paths. You figure out which is right for you. You don’t let external definition define how good you are eternally. You fight your war, you let them fight theirs.”

It’s ironic that she also calls Mother Theresa one of her favorite two politicians, because Theresa wasn’t a politician and because one gets the strong impression that Dunn only mentioned her to balance her adoration for Zedong.

It’s sick, of course. Mao killed 70 million Chinese. During peace time. He’s one of the worst dictators of the 20th century, and perhaps even in the entire history of mankind. And Dunn considers him her “favorite political philosopher”?

What makes this story even more interesting is the fact that Dunn recently declared war on Fox News. Fox, she said, spreads lies about the Obama administration and, when called on them, refuses to retract them.

We all know the above to be nonsense – the only reason Dunn attacks Fox is because the White House can’t “control” the news network the way it controls other networks.

Most shocking about this news isn’t that Dunn takes Mao as an example, but that she is the umptiest member of the Obama administration who has been exposed as a radical leftist. And Obama and his allies continue to get away with their radicalism because the MSM refuses to cover it.

Watch the video:
YouTube Preview Image
YouTube Preview Image

Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Technorati
  • SphereIt
  • NewsVine
  • TailRank
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon

This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.

  1. Dave
    October 19th, 2009 at 19:04
    Reply | Quote | #1

    The White House is pathetic. Looks like the freedom of speech is under attack. Welcome to the United States of Communism!

  2. redfish
    October 19th, 2009 at 19:16
    Reply | Quote | #2

    I wonder which of her choices, Mao or Mother Theresa, Christopher Hitchens likes better

  3. wulfmankarl
    October 19th, 2009 at 21:30
    Reply | Quote | #3

    Anita Dunn Admits to being Mao Zedong’s Concubine!

    http://02e56fa.netsolhost.com/blog1/index.php/2009/10/19/white-house-comm-director-anita-dunn-was

    The Joey Panto Show

  4. Adam
    October 20th, 2009 at 21:19
    Reply | Quote | #4

    The Obama administration seeks to control the media in any way possible. Anita Dunn admited in an interview during the campaign that they controlled everything the media said about Obama, and now they seek to use intimidation to control those who oppose their agenda. – http://is.gd/4sDKe

  5. flying
    October 21st, 2009 at 06:52
    Reply | Quote | #6

    PLEASE RECOGNIZE THE REAL MAO!
    HE IS REALLY A GOOD GUY!
    DON’T balme him!

  6. David
    October 21st, 2009 at 20:28
    Reply | Quote | #7

    The National Tea Party on 9/12 was not enough, it is time for a blockade of the Capital

  7. Freedom Fighter
    October 28th, 2009 at 15:46
    Reply | Quote | #8

    Oh noes! She used an example and a quote from a historical event! Clearly she must be a fascist commie. All this proves is that unlike you lot, she has picked up a book at some point in her life.

Comments are closed.

PoliGazette Comments Policy

PoliGazette encourages comments from all viewpoints, especially those that disagree. Comments submitted must, however, adhere to the following standards. Comments that violate these standards may be edited or deleted without notice at the sole discretion of the editors. Commenters who repeatedly or egregiously violate these standards or who attempt to argue publicly with editors regarding the comments policy may be banned from commenting further.

(1) Comments should address the substantive content of the post. Comments that repeatedly or blatantly misrepresent the content of the post or of others' comments are not welcome. Comments that respond to something other than which the contributor or commenter may have said are irrelevant and should not be posted.

(2) Comments should avoid vulgarity as well as racial, ethnic, religious, or sexual bigotry.

(3) Comments should not personally attack the character, personal integrity, or professional reputation of any PoliGazette contributor or of other commenters.

(4) Comments should reflect the contributions of the commenters themselves and should not include extensive cut-and-paste reproductions of others' words except insofar as necessary to supplement the commenter's own arguments. Link spam, trackback spam, and propaganda spam will be instantly deleted.

(5) Public figures are considered open to all substantive criticism of their policies and statements. Comments that present objectively false factual information about public figures (i.e. "Obama is a Muslim") or that attack public figures by attacking their families are not welcome. Comments that merely repeat slogans for or against a candidate without engaging in substantive comment are not welcome.

Questions or challenges to these policies or their application should be directed to the editors by email only.