 |
|
| Browse | Ask | Answer | Search | Join/Login |
|
|
||||
|
Birthers again?
No, truthers, this time right in Obama's administration. Obama's "green jobs" czar Van Jones got caught with his 9/11 truther pants down, signing a petition suggesting it was an inside job.
Jones now says the petition "does not reflect my views now or ever," even though he won't explain how his name appeared on the petition with names like Ed Asner and Janeane Garofalo who apparently have no objections to their names being the 2004 petition. It's also come out that Jones called Republicans "a**holes" just prior to joining the administration, and blamed "white polluters" for poisoning minority communities. Is there some reason Obama can't properly vet anyone or do these appointments really reflect his views and character? Does anyone in this technologically savvy administration even know how to Google? |
||||
|
||||
 Originally Posted by speechlesstx
Breitbart.tv Obama Czar's SHOCK ADMISSION: 'Green Jobs' Goal is 'Complete Revolution' Away From 'Gray Capitalism' So... the guy is a Truther who believes that our own government caused 9/11, a racist (reverse racism is still racism), an anti-capitalist (as per the link above), and an all-around jerk who calls half of all Americans "a-holes". He fits right in at the Obama White House.
Do these appointments really reflect his views and character?
Elliot |
||||
|
||||
|
Van Jones doesn't subscribe to those truther beliefs anymore if he ever did .
And he now doesn't really believe that Republicans are a$$holes . And the President doesn't subscribe to the preaching of Rev Wright who's church he was a member of ,sat in ,and took is wife and daughter to for 20 years. Perfect together |
||||
|
||||
|
Originally Posted by spitvenom
Or do you think that a member of the government, in charge of part of our economy, who wants to destroy our economy, isn't important? It would be kind of like Brad Childress hiring a defensive coach who didn't know anything about defensive football and wanted the game of football to be outlawed. Don't you think that would be important for the Minnesota fans to know? Elliot |
||||
|
||||
|
Originally Posted by spitvenom
But on a better note Adrian Peterson (number 1 pick of our draft by me) is poised to have a monster year!! That is news.
|
||||
|
||||
|
He isn't the secretary of defense he makes green jobs. That was his job before the Admin picked him. So obviously he know how to do that. Where do you get that he wants to destroy the economy. Because of what he said over 20 years ago. Give me a break. But keep reaching one day you might actually grab something. |
||||
|
||||
|
I didn't have a chance to make my 1st choice . I would've picked Larry Fitzgerald. But I got Steve Jackson and Peyton Manning .I have to wait 4 weeks for Marshawn Lynch's suspension to end to have my backfield tandem .But I'm in decent shape. Got to work on my bench. |
||||
|
||||
|
Originally Posted by spitvenom
Van Jones however, I predict will be out by this time next week. Shame we don't have a congress that would do something about all these czars (that will have control of billions of dollars) being appointed without any confirmation process at all. |
||||
|
||||
|
Originally Posted by tomder55
|
||||
|
||||
|
As for Van Jones ; spit in a way is right. If we get too distracted by the side shows we may loose sight of the ringmaster . My biggers problem with him is the expanding preference of the President to by-pass oversight by assigning the tag czar to people who will have administrative functions . If that is the way the executive dept is to run ,then Congress should eliminate the depts of the executive branch run by the cabinet and eliminate funding from the budget. |
||||
|
||||
|
Originally Posted by excon
Mostly because Bennett was a fool. But he wasn't the first "Drug Czar". The term "drug Czar" was actually coined by... of all people... Joe Biden in 1982, with the appointment of Carlton Turner to the position of Director of the Drug Abuse Policy Office. Under Reagan, the "drug czars" were Carlton Turner and Ian McDonals, both of whom were heads of the Drug Abuse Policy Office. Bill Bennett was put in place by Bush I, as the first director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy. Then came Bob Martinez, in the same position. Here's the kicker, though, excon... from 1993 on, the Director of National Drug Control Policy was made into a Cabinet Level position... which meant that from 1993 on (beginning with Lee Brown), the Director of National Drug Control Policy had to be approved by Congress. When the term "drug czar" was used, we were referring to a congressionally approved member of the executive branch of government. Obama's 40+ new "Czar" positions are NOT cabinet level positions and do NOT go through congressional approval. Elliot |
||||
|
||||
|
Apparently not only is Van Jones a truther despite his denials to the contrary ;
He is so into the movement that he was on an organizing committee of the Truthers for a rally in San Fran 2002 demanding a Congressional inquiry into the alleged 9-11 conspiracy. San Francisco March To Demand Congressional Inquiry Of 911 |
||||
|
||||
|
Originally Posted by tomder55
``We knew there was another event going on, but the timing of the court decision is what dictated when the protest was held,'' said Van Jones, a San Francisco civil rights lawyer who helped coordinate the protest march.
|
||||
|
||||
|
He got in because the President overrode any concern Secret Services may have had... just like all the flakes the President has brought into his inner cirecle of advisors.
Getting back to the big picture . This guy Van Jones has his fingers on very big purse strings($80 billion in stimulus money for starters ). Transcript: Voices of Power with Van Jones - washingtonpost.com He has made no bones about his plot to incementally turn the "green " trojan horse fad into his utopian visions for the "redistribution of all the wealth," ... and "the engine for transforming the whole society."
One of the things that has happened I think to often to progressives is that we don't understand the relationship between minimum goals and maximum goals. Right after Rosa Parks, refused to give up her seat, if the civil rights leaders had jumped out and said, OK, now we want reparations for slavery, we want redistribution of all wealth, and we want to legalize mixed marriages, had that had been there, if they would have come out with a maximum program the very next day, they would have been laughed at. Instead they came out with a very minimum program, you know, we just want to integrate these buses. The students a few years later came out with a very minimum program. We just want to sit at the lunch counter, but, inside that minimum demand was a very radical kernel that eventually meant that from 1954-1968, you know, complete revolution was on the table for this country and I think this green movement has to pursue those same steps and stages. Right now we're saying we want to move from suicidal gray capitalism to some kind of eco-capitalism where, you know, at least we're not, you know, fast-tracking destruction of the whole planet. Will that be enough? No, it won't be enough. We want to go beyond ex-systems of exploitation and oppression altogether. But that's a process and I think what's great about the movement that beginning to emerge is that the crisis is so severe in terms of joblessness, violence and now ecological threats that people are willing to be both very pragmatic and very visionary. And so the green economy will start as a small subset and we're going to push it and push it and push it, until it becomes the engine for transforming the whole society.
I got a hunch about a Raiders running back and it ain't D-McFadden
|
||||
Not your question?
Ask your question
View similar questions
| Question Tools | Search this Question |
Add your answer here.
View more questions Search
|
