Van Jones

What's In Your Tea?

by Lance Thompson

 
The Obama administration, their surrogates, and their media servants have gone to great lengths to tie the Tea Party to dimwits, extremists, terrorists, those who incite violence against the government.  These are serious charges, and would be enough to discredit any political party–unless that political party is the Democrats, and they control the White House and the Congress. 
 
Dimwits?  Does the Tea Party have any members who believe the island of Guam, (the eroded tip of an undersea volcano) could sink under the weight of too much military hardware? Democrat Congressman Hank Johnson of Georgia expressed that very concern when questioning Admiral Robert Willard, commander of the US Pacific Fleet.  Nancy Pelosi’s campaign to pass health care reform included the famous call-to-action, “We have to pass the bill to find out what’s in it.”  This may not be dimwitted, since it turns out to be true.  Only now are we coming to know the true nature of health care reform–after it’s been passed into law.  Homeland Security Chief Janet Napolitano told the nation that after the terrorist bomber Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab was thwarted by alert airline passengers last Christmas, that “the system worked.”  If so, it was the system of American citizens looking out for themselves while their government looked the other way.  If dimwits taint a party, the Dems better clean house. 
 
Extremists?  The Dems believe the Tea Party is extreme because its members hold the Constitution to be sacred, believe in the right of free assembly and free speech, and make their views known to their representatives.  Does the Tea Party have anyone who cites Mao Tse Tung as a philosophical model, as White House Communications Director Anita Dun, Obama car czar Ron Bloom, or Obama “green czar” Van Jones have done?  You can’t get more extreme than Mao–runner-up to Stalin for greatest mass murderer in history.  If extremism earns demerits, the Dems have cornered the market.
 
Terrorists?  The Tea Party has no terrorists, either avowed, accused, or convicted.  But the Obama administration battled long and hard to free terrorists from Guantanamo Bay; afford terrorists the rights of American citizens; give terrorists access to American courts (and by rules of evidence, American sources of intelligence); normalize relations with state sponsors of terrorism such as Venezuela, Iran and Cuba; and to redefine terrorist acts as “man-caused disasters.”  If there are no terrorists in the Obama administration, there are certainly strong supporters.
 
Inciting violence against the government?  There have been no acts of violence against government tied to the Tea Party.  Their rhetoric is strong, but no stronger than the threats the Democrats have hurled against the American people in the last few years.  In May, 2008, California Congresswoman Maxine Waters threatened a government takeover of the American oil industry. Of course, such an extreme threat pales in comparison to the actual government takeover of banks, car companies, and all health care–all of which have happened since the Democrats took over two branches of government in November 2008.  Democrats are enraged by Sarah Palin’s words to Tea Partiers, “Don’t retreat, reload.”  Compare that mere phrase to the partisan piling on of debt to unsustainable levels; to Justice Department abrogation of investigations into ACORN voter fraud, Black Panther voter intimidation, not to mention the corruption charges against New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson; to the circumvention and contravention of the Constitution that goes further every day. 
 
The Democrats cannot defend their own actions, so they attack and demean and accuse the most vocal opposition they face.  The Tea Party points out where they are wrong and demand redress and satisfaction.  This is the way American democracy has always worked–until the Democrats came to power.  Now protest, once lauded by Speaker Nancy Pelosi as the highest form of patriotism, is seen as subversive.  To resist is unAmerican.  To demand one’s rights is tantamount to crime. 
 
The Democrats must discredit the Tea Party before November, for no other force poses a greater threat to their hold on power.  The campaign to silence these patriots will be no less widespread, savage, or unscrupulous than that to pass health care reform.  Choose sides and prepare for battle. 
 
I’m going to put the tea pot on to boil.

 

If It Quacks, It Must Be A Marxist

by  Rose Pedenko and Tanya Simon 

In American politics, the fringe groups of the left, right and center sooner or later end up accusing the sitting President of the United States of being a Nazi, a Marxist or a Communist.  Such references are usually punctuated by cartoons of the luckless leader sporting a Hitlerian moustache, a fuzzy beard and wild smoky hair, or perhaps even a handlebar moustache below a leering look.  By way of example, if you Google “Bush and Hitler” you get well over nine million hits. 

Until now, it was semi-amusing to blow off steam with this kind of partisan ram-rodding.  It seemed harmless because “everyone does it.”  And we would laugh it off because we knew in our hearts that all the jabbing was no more than satire run amok.  That was then. 

This is now: 

In the frenetic months leading up to the 2008 presidential election, conservative pundits railed against Barack Obama’s questionable alliances, specifically Bill Ayers, Tony Rezco, George Soros, and the Reverend Jeremiah Wright.  Sean Hannity of FoxNews initiated an unrelenting and unyielding charge against the candidate’s suspicious leftist associations, tracing the dubious connections as far back as Obama’s childhood.  But the powerful and fawning mainstream media were able to block, distort, distract, and disengage from what Hannity and others tried to present as nothing more than a smear campaign against their chosen one.  They were blinded by Obama’s shining smile and the opportunity to make politically correct history.  History has been made, but it’s been extraordinarily incorrect. 

Try as they might, the conservative talking heads barely put a chink in the armor the MSM had dressed Obama in since his rousing 2004 speech at the DNC.  That was the day, nigh, the moment, when the lights went on in the heads of the leftist power elite -- that here was the malleable shining star who could and would make the changes they so desperately tried to effect since the last Great Depression.  “Last” you say?  Yes, because creating the second Great Depression is the aim of this administration: to crush the hearts and minds of the citizenry until we accept their brand of redistributive change. 

Conservatives in both public and private life who speak on behalf of our Constitutional rights and against this maelstrom have been ruthlessly branded by lefties, liberal journalists, RINOs, and the press with just about every hostile and threatening moniker.  It’s not unlike the way the Nazis slapped the yellow cut-out Star of David on Jews throughout Germany and in countries overrun by the Third Reich.  The Jews of Europe had no one to speak freely on their behalf without fear of retribution, and that silence contributed to the destruction of European Jews. 

Today, an American – a white knight – has charged forth to expose the brutish attempts to wreck our country.  He is working hard to help with the recovery of conservatism and lead the counterattack to save the former “United” States of America.  That knight is Glenn Beck. 

Practically from his debut he has been the object of extreme ridicule (the usual thread-worn defense mechanism of liberals).  He’s been called a circus clown, a raging alcoholic, a moron, or, as Stephen King referred to him, “Satan’s mentally challenged younger brother.”  But this time the sticks and stones are bouncing off his proud chest like the proverbial shit hitting the fan -- and it’s landing square on the smug faces of Bill Maher, Keith Olbermann, Chris Matthews and David Letterman.  And the sludge is coming in the form of stratospheric ratings for Glenn Beck and Fox News. 

Beck has repeatedly pointed out that Obama’s message has been unambiguous with respect to his revolutionary intentions.  Beck’s exhortations were not innuendo or speculation but direct, factual quotes and video footage of then candidate Obama which would hold up in any court of law.  But Americans, largely shielded by the utopian fantasies of the leftist media, did not, or wished not, to hear or see the truth. 

Even David Von Drehle has proffered in Time Magazine, albeit in a backhanded way, “…Whom do you trust?  Either the corrupt, communist-loving traitors on the left are causing this, or it's the racist, greedy warmongers on the right, or maybe the dishonest, incompetent, conniving media, which refuse to tell the truth about whomever you personally happen to despise.” 

At the Huffington Post, Camille Paglia recently wrote, “The mainstream media's failure to honestly cover last month's mass demonstration in Washington, D.C. was a disgrace. The focus on anti-Obama placards (which were no worse than the rabid anti-LBJ, anti-Reagan or anti-Bush placards of leftist protests), combined with the grotesque attempt to equate criticism of Obama with racism, simply illustrated why the old guard TV networks and major urban daily newspapers are slowly dying. Only a simpleton would believe what they say.” 

Green jobs adviser, Van “Republicans are a bunch of assholes” Jones, resigned purportedly so as not to distract from Obama’s agenda.  Gosh, we wonder why.  And then this past week, Obama’s Mao-worshipping Communications Director, Anita Dunn, has also resigned.  Two down, and several Marxists (dots that Beck has already connected) to go, are waiting in the wings, eager to sacrifice themselves for their greater god, uh, good. 

Over the last few months, Beck has ingenuously presented facts and pointed questions about everyone surrounding Barack Obama and those within his inner sanctum.  You just can’t make this stuff up, and everyone knows it.  Beck is smart, but even he could not concoct the shocking pyramid of leftists with direct access to the most powerful man on earth.  The presidential minions have been given ample opportunity to refute possible misstatements of fact or opinion, but they have instead chosen to ignore the commentary in the mistaken belief that their silence would be interpreted as not lending credence to those facts and opinions.  

It is no secret – and no surprise to conservatives – that Obama & Co. (the duplicitous Democrat-controlled Congress) are forging the chains of socialistic enslavement of the American People, and pulling our country apart at the seams.  But Beck’s relentless search for the truth is growing exponentially, so much so that the upcoming American Revolt of 2010 already is being felt around the world. 

The freedom that we cherish, which was born from the precepts and principles of our sacred Constitution, is a “one size fits all” gift from our founding fathers – from those individuals who put their lives on the line and holding that line against oppression.  No one person or group is granted either more or less — everyone is equal in freedom. 

And so we conclude: “If it walks like a Marxist, quacks like a Marxist, looks like a Marxist, you can bet it’s not a duck.”

"The Only Communist to Ever Become a Czar"

The resignation of "green jobs" czar Van Jones over the weekend drew little attention from mainstream media (even the New York Times admitted they were late on the piece) with the exception of those who were outraged that such an extraordinarily accomplished man -- author of a best-selling novel with a law degree from Yale to boot -- could be vilified so egregiously and forced to resign prematurely. Sure, he's made a few nasty comments about Republicans, admitted to converting to Communism (while in prison!) in the 1990s, and signed a petition to investigate the involvement of the Bush administration in the attacks on September 11. But come on, a Yale Law degree! And a best-selling novel! Aren't those ample qualifications to work at the White House?

I would suspect that Jones' very own mentor, Karl Marx, were he alive and writing today, would not have a difficult time being accepted to Yale on the grounds of "academic diversity" and would remain on the New York Times' Best-sellers list for years. After all, Columbia invited Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to speak for those very reasons, and the Communist Manifesto isn't exactly the least popular item on reading lists across the country, I hear.

The amazing thing to me is that he is being defended by the Left despite these revelations. They often cite his apologetic tone for signing the petition or becoming a communist, and instead focus on his passionate pursuit of creating “green jobs” that will, admittedly, need to be created to compensate for the millions of jobs inevitably destroyed if current environmental legislation is passed in the Senate. He is, of course, a victim of a “smear campaign” being propagated by the Right, not to be confused with the smear campaigns of the Left brought against people like, as a random example, Joe the Plumber, who has absolutely no role in government but instead had the audacity to challenge future-president Barrack Obama. The result of his confrontation with the candidate was an investigation into his past personal and financial records to determine if he was in fact as indigent as he had initially claimed. If only the White House dug this deep when appointing czars, the whole situation with Mr. Jones may have been avoided entirely.

ht - James Taranto

Charlie Crist Could Learn a Lesson From Van Jones

Florida Gov. Charlie Crist may find a lesson in the Van Jones story. Be careful who you appoint, when they mess up it may come back on you.

Republicans in Florida have been furious with the Governor since he embraced President Obama on stage in March. But Crist didn’t stop there. He rallied behind Obama in support of the stimulus package and raised taxes.

If Crist’s recent appointee, Sen. George LeMueix does poorly in the Senate, that could spell trouble for Crist, who opted out of a second term as governor to pursue the Senate seat himself.

Crist pulled Republican’s from all across the state to interview for the Senate seat. Its been reported that Crist kept multiple lists of possible appointees. One list of legislators --and another list of everybody else.

Here's a snapshot of “everybody else” on the same list as LeMueix --

Jim Greer, Chairman of the Republican Party of Florida; close Crist advisor.

Greg Truax, businessman and close advisor to Crist.

Nancy Watkins, businesswoman and fundraiser.

Al Austin, businessman, fundraiser and CEO Austin Companies.

Michael Pinson, fundraiser and CEO of Pinson Communications.

Al Hoffman, fundraiser and CEO of WCI Industries.

Yes, all lapdogs. Every single one.

 

 

Van Jones 2 - Here come the excuses

Okay, I got the first half of my prediction right. Jones has resigned. Now we wait on the excuses and the accusations of racism. Now we get told why his failure was our fault. Conservatives are to blame because we are so closed-minded. We simply haven't reached the level of intellectual enlightenment that would allow us to realize what a gem we had in Van Jones. If only we could have opened our minds and put our innate prejudices aside, we would have been blessed by Jones' visionary brilliance.

Yeah, right. Blah, blah, blah. Yadda, yadda, yadda.

Liberals are so predictable.

more at http://commonconservativesense.com

Taking bets - how long for Van Jones?

Does anybody care to prognosticate about the imminent departure of Czar Van Jones?

My prediction – He will not make it through September, and it will be blamed on racist conservatives who couldn’t stomach a black man in a position of power.

Any takers?

more at http://commonconservativesense.com

Obama vs. America - Part 2

Marxism is the extreme of socialism, whereby the state owns and controls all the means of production and thereby the entire economy of the state. Most forms of Marxism share the idea that capitalism is based on the exploitation of workers by the owners of the means of production. Marxism takes a view of history according to which class struggle, the evolving conflict between classes with opposing interests, structures each historical period and drives historical change. Marxist economics is based on the idea that capitalism is by nature exploitative and conflict driven, and will ultimately fail on its own. This failure will be brought about by a worker revolt against the ruling class, with the ultimate outcome being a classless society.

Liberalism in America has, over the last fifty years or so, successfully created the notion that there are two Americas. The haves and the have nots, the greedy rich and the oppressed poor. It is the working definition of class struggle and conflict. Liberalism has taught that the rich gained their wealth on the backs of the poor, by taking advantage of their effort and insuring that they were not able to rise out of their poverty. Liberalism has purported to be the means by which the poor and oppressed will gain equality with the wealthy. However, liberal policies attempt to force this not by adding wealth to the poor, but by taking wealth from the wealthy. If Joe Liberal has $10 and Bob Capitalist has $100, liberalism wants to take $90 from Bob, so that Joe and Bob are equal. Equal they are, but neither is better off. In fact they are both worse off, because now Bob no longer has the resources to invest so that he and Joe can gain wealth, or at least have a chance to gain it. The state is the only winner. Liberalism has been an abject failure in the arena of effective policies that work to elevate the condition of the poor and society in general. But it has been very, very successful in creating the class struggle and conflict which is necessary to move to the next step.

Enter Barack Hussein Obama, ultra liberal and radical, with an agenda to remake America. Marxism is big on state ownership of all means of production. So far there is at least partial state ownership of the major banking institutions, insurance companies and  automobile manufacturers. The current push is for state ownership of our health care system, or about 15% of the entire economy. Obama is closely aligned with labor unions (more us vs. them mentality) as is the democratic party in general. He is unashamed of his philosophy for wealth redistribution. (remember Joe the Plumber?) He is friendly with unrepentant domestic terrorist William Ayers. He is a disciple of Saul Alinsky. For twenty years he belonged to a church where Rev. Jeremiah Wright frequently and openly bashed America. Now he has appointed over 30 czars who are unelected and unaccountable to anybody but him. One of those czars is Van Jones; Green Jobs Czar. Van Jones has an interesting past. He was arrested in 1993 at the L. A. riots after the Rodney King incident. He was arrested again in 1999 in Seattle during the World Trade Organization protests. Note this excerpt from a Nov. 2005 interview in the East Bay Express: While describing his jail experiences, he said, "I met all these young radical people of color -- I mean really radical, communists and anarchists. And it was, like, this is what I need to be a part of."  Jones already had a job in Washington, DC and had rented an apartment there. He decided to stay in San Francisco even though he already had his plane ticket. "I spent the next ten years of my life working with a lot of those people I met in jail, trying to be a revolutionary. I was a rowdy nationalist on April 28th, and then the verdicts came down on April 29th," he said. "By August, I was a communist." In 1994, he and other young activists formed Standing Together to Organize a Revolutionary Movement, or STORM, a socialist collective which held study groups on the theories of Marx and Lenin and dreamed of a multiracial socialist utopia.  (emphasis is mine)

Is Obama a Marxist? I don't know. Let me rephrase the question - if it was a felony to be a Marxist, would there be enough evidence to support an indictment against him? Maybe.

Pay attention to what he does, his associations, and his appointments - not just what he says.

Another question - just for kicks, let's say you were a committed Marxist, and that you had a vision of a Marxist America. Let's assume you had the means, the time, and were patient. Just how would you go about making your vision a reality?

More at http://commonconservativesense.com

Syndicate content