• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Another radical Czar reveals more of Maobama

Sandhusker

Well-known member
http://freedomeden.blogspot.com/2009/08/van-jones-and-glenn-beck.html

Klein provides information on White House czar Jones' radicalism.

He was a founder and leader of the communist revolutionary organization Standing Together to Organize a Revolutionary Movement, or STORM. The organization had its roots in a grouping of black people organizing to protest the first Gulf War. STORM was formally founded in 1994, becoming one of the most influential and active radical groups in the San Francisco Bay area.

STORM worked with known communist leaders. It led the charge in black protests against various issues, including a local attempt to pass Proposition 21, a ballot initiative that sought to increase the penalties for violent crimes and require more juvenile offenders to be tried as adults.

The leftist blog Machete 48 identifies STORM's influences as "third-worldist Marxism (and an often vulgar Maoism)."

Speaking to the East Bay Express, Van Jones said he first became radicalized in the wake of the 1992 Rodney King riots, during which time he was arrested.

"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."

"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.' I spent the next 10 years of my life working with a lot of those people I met in jail, trying to be a revolutionary," he said.

Trevor Loudon, a researcher and opponent of communism who runs the New Zeal blog, identified several Bay Area communists who worked with STORM, including Elizabeth Martinez, who helped advise Jones' Ella Baker Human Rights Center, which Jones founded to advocate civil justice. Jones and Martinez also attended a "Challenging White Supremacy" workshop together.

Martinez was a long time Maoist who went on to join the Communist Party USA breakaway organization Committees of Correspondence for Democracy and Socialism, or CCDS, in the early 1990s, according to Loudon. Martinez still serves on the CCDS council and is also a board member of the Movement for a Democratic Society, where she sits alongside former Weathermen radicals Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn.

Good grief.

Jones is a perfect example of why Obama has decided to circumvent the Constitution and employ a strategy of appointing czars, to avoid accountability and increase his personal power.

Robert Byrd calls Obama's czars dangerous.

Robert Byrd, the longest serving senator in history, criticized President Obama's appointment of numerous White House advisors, also called "czars," saying the presence of the czars gives the president too much power.

These czars report directly to Mr. Obama and have the power to shape national policy on their subject area. So far, Mr. Obama has recruited czars on health reform, urban affairs policy, and energy and climate change. Unlike Cabinet secretaries, they do not have to be approved by Congress.

In a letter to Obama on Wednesday, Byrd, a Democrat, said that the czar system "can threaten the Constitutional system of checks and balances," Politico reported. Byrd added that oversight of federal agencies is the responsibility of officials approved by the Senate.

"As presidential assistants and advisers, these White House staffers are not accountable for their actions to the Congress, to cabinet officials, or to virtually anyone but the president," Byrd wrote. "They rarely testify before congressional committees, and often shield the information and decision-making process behind the assertion of executive privilege. In too many instances, White House staff have been allowed to inhibit openness and transparency, and reduce accountability."

Byrd has been a longtime critic of policies that concentrate power in the executive branch.

Do you think someone like Van Jones, a self-avowed communist, would have been approved by Congress?

As Byrd points out, as a czar, Jones is only accountable to Obama. Congress is shut out.

It's disturbing that Obama would want someone as radical as Jones to be part of his administration.

Very revealing.
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
What about this one Sandhusker.

mark lloyd is the new FCC "Diversity Czar", and he speaks of what Chavez did with the media, and how the "Incredible Democratic Revolution" in Venuzuela worked to shut down media opposition.


http://www.foxnews.com/video2/video08.html?maven_referralObject=8711717&maven_referralPlaylistId=&sRevUrl=http://www.foxnews.com/glennbeck/index.html
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Obama continues to surround himself with radicals, self confessed socialists, even communists - and yet people will deny that Obama is a socialist himself. The level of self-imposed ignorance and stupidity is mindboggling. I simply don't understand it.
 

RobertMac

Well-known member
These are anti-capitalist radicals who's goal is to eliminate free-market capitalism. We now have the Federal government and big business working together to eliminate small business and, thereby, free-market capitalism. Where in any of the "so called" stimulus legislation is there help for small business?
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
When you look at the people Obama has sorrounded himself with, not just in the past but right now, I don't see how anybody can deny that he is not a radical scary SOB.
 

RobertMac

Well-known member
Sandhusker said:
http://freedomeden.blogspot.com/2009/08/van-jones-and-glenn-beck.html

Klein provides information on White House czar Jones' radicalism.

He was a founder and leader of the communist revolutionary organization Standing Together to Organize a Revolutionary Movement, or STORM. The organization had its roots in a grouping of black people organizing to protest the first Gulf War. STORM was formally founded in 1994, becoming one of the most influential and active radical groups in the San Francisco Bay area.

STORM worked with known communist leaders. It led the charge in black protests against various issues, including a local attempt to pass Proposition 21, a ballot initiative that sought to increase the penalties for violent crimes and require more juvenile offenders to be tried as adults.

The leftist blog Machete 48 identifies STORM's influences as "third-worldist Marxism (and an often vulgar Maoism)."

Speaking to the East Bay Express, Van Jones said he first became radicalized in the wake of the 1992 Rodney King riots, during which time he was arrested.

"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."

"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.' I spent the next 10 years of my life working with a lot of those people I met in jail, trying to be a revolutionary," he said.

Trevor Loudon, a researcher and opponent of communism who runs the New Zeal blog, identified several Bay Area communists who worked with STORM, including Elizabeth Martinez, who helped advise Jones' Ella Baker Human Rights Center, which Jones founded to advocate civil justice. Jones and Martinez also attended a "Challenging White Supremacy" workshop together.

Martinez was a long time Maoist who went on to join the Communist Party USA breakaway organization Committees of Correspondence for Democracy and Socialism, or CCDS, in the early 1990s, according to Loudon. Martinez still serves on the CCDS council and is also a board member of the Movement for a Democratic Society, where she sits alongside former Weathermen radicals Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn.

Good grief.

Jones is a perfect example of why Obama has decided to circumvent the Constitution and employ a strategy of appointing czars, to avoid accountability and increase his personal power.

Robert Byrd calls Obama's czars dangerous.

Robert Byrd, the longest serving senator in history, criticized President Obama's appointment of numerous White House advisors, also called "czars," saying the presence of the czars gives the president too much power.

These czars report directly to Mr. Obama and have the power to shape national policy on their subject area. So far, Mr. Obama has recruited czars on health reform, urban affairs policy, and energy and climate change. Unlike Cabinet secretaries, they do not have to be approved by Congress.

In a letter to Obama on Wednesday, Byrd, a Democrat, said that the czar system "can threaten the Constitutional system of checks and balances," Politico reported. Byrd added that oversight of federal agencies is the responsibility of officials approved by the Senate.

"As presidential assistants and advisers, these White House staffers are not accountable for their actions to the Congress, to cabinet officials, or to virtually anyone but the president," Byrd wrote. "They rarely testify before congressional committees, and often shield the information and decision-making process behind the assertion of executive privilege. In too many instances, White House staff have been allowed to inhibit openness and transparency, and reduce accountability."

Byrd has been a longtime critic of policies that concentrate power in the executive branch.

Do you think someone like Van Jones, a self-avowed communist, would have been approved by Congress?

As Byrd points out, as a czar, Jones is only accountable to Obama. Congress is shut out.

It's disturbing that Obama would want someone as radical as Jones to be part of his administration.

Very revealing.
Connecting the dots...
Van Jones is on the board of the Apollo Alliance.
The Apollo Alliance helped write the stimulus bill.

Why would an admitted communist work within the Constitution or work to protect the Constitution. Communist are anti-capitalist, anti-Constitutionalist, anti-American, the way America is today...Is this what Obama meant when he said he was going to "fundamentally transform America"?????
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Sandhusker said:
http://freedomeden.blogspot.com/2009/08/van-jones-and-glenn-beck.html

Klein provides information on White House czar Jones' radicalism.

He was a founder and leader of the communist revolutionary organization Standing Together to Organize a Revolutionary Movement, or STORM. The organization had its roots in a grouping of black people organizing to protest the first Gulf War. STORM was formally founded in 1994, becoming one of the most influential and active radical groups in the San Francisco Bay area.

STORM worked with known communist leaders. It led the charge in black protests against various issues, including a local attempt to pass Proposition 21, a ballot initiative that sought to increase the penalties for violent crimes and require more juvenile offenders to be tried as adults.

The leftist blog Machete 48 identifies STORM's influences as "third-worldist Marxism (and an often vulgar Maoism)."

Speaking to the East Bay Express, Van Jones said he first became radicalized in the wake of the 1992 Rodney King riots, during which time he was arrested.

"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."

"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.' I spent the next 10 years of my life working with a lot of those people I met in jail, trying to be a revolutionary," he said.

Trevor Loudon, a researcher and opponent of communism who runs the New Zeal blog, identified several Bay Area communists who worked with STORM, including Elizabeth Martinez, who helped advise Jones' Ella Baker Human Rights Center, which Jones founded to advocate civil justice. Jones and Martinez also attended a "Challenging White Supremacy" workshop together.

Martinez was a long time Maoist who went on to join the Communist Party USA breakaway organization Committees of Correspondence for Democracy and Socialism, or CCDS, in the early 1990s, according to Loudon. Martinez still serves on the CCDS council and is also a board member of the Movement for a Democratic Society, where she sits alongside former Weathermen radicals Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn.

Good grief.

Jones is a perfect example of why Obama has decided to circumvent the Constitution and employ a strategy of appointing czars, to avoid accountability and increase his personal power.

Robert Byrd calls Obama's czars dangerous.

Robert Byrd, the longest serving senator in history, criticized President Obama's appointment of numerous White House advisors, also called "czars," saying the presence of the czars gives the president too much power.

These czars report directly to Mr. Obama and have the power to shape national policy on their subject area. So far, Mr. Obama has recruited czars on health reform, urban affairs policy, and energy and climate change. Unlike Cabinet secretaries, they do not have to be approved by Congress.

In a letter to Obama on Wednesday, Byrd, a Democrat, said that the czar system "can threaten the Constitutional system of checks and balances," Politico reported. Byrd added that oversight of federal agencies is the responsibility of officials approved by the Senate.

"As presidential assistants and advisers, these White House staffers are not accountable for their actions to the Congress, to cabinet officials, or to virtually anyone but the president," Byrd wrote. "They rarely testify before congressional committees, and often shield the information and decision-making process behind the assertion of executive privilege. In too many instances, White House staff have been allowed to inhibit openness and transparency, and reduce accountability."

Byrd has been a longtime critic of policies that concentrate power in the executive branch.

Do you think someone like Van Jones, a self-avowed communist, would have been approved by Congress?

As Byrd points out, as a czar, Jones is only accountable to Obama. Congress is shut out.

It's disturbing that Obama would want someone as radical as Jones to be part of his administration.

Very revealing.

I searched for Van Jones on the internet and found that in is younger years he was a radical revolunionary. Took up the cause when Rodney King was assualted and beat by the LA police. Van was arrested and then all charges were dropped. As you will see if you do the search you will find out the man has tried to get involved with fondations and created fondations to help troubled youth better themselves and become productive citizens in their community. Could be he has done more good than bad. The statement posted by Sandy came from Van's whenyounger. Looks like life has tempered him as has life tempered us all.

Here is some information about his early life:

Jones started his career as a staunch critic of capitalism; his outrage over the Rodney King verdict radicalized him to the point where he declared himself a communist and actively began protesting police brutality[18]. He later got involved with Standing Together to Organize a Revolutionary Movement (STORM), a collective which "dreamed of a multiracial socialist utopia". Frustrated keeping coalitions together to make positive social change, Jones "discarded the hostility and antagonism with which he had previously greeted the world, which he said was part of the ego-driven romance of being seen as a revolutionary." "Before, we would fight anybody, any time," Jones says of his tranformation. "No concession was good enough; we never said 'Thank you.' Now, I put the issues and constituencies first. I'll work with anybody, I'll fight anybody if it will push our issues forward. ... I'm willing to forgo the cheap satisfaction of the radical pose for the deep satisfaction of radical ends"[18]. Jones ended his involvement with STORM (and STORM officially dissolved in December 2002)[19].

By the late 1990s, Jones began promoting capitalism as he transformed into an environmentally friendly capitalist. He emerged as one of the foremost champions of green business, entrepreneurship and market-based solutions. In his 2008 best seller The Green Collar Economy, Jones contended that invention and investment will take us out of a pollution-based grey economy and into a healthy new green economy[15]. Jones wrote:
 

RobertMac

Well-known member
hurleyjd, the very nature of the environmental movement is to bring business and personal lifestyle under government control...that does not promote capitalism or personal freedom!
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
RobertMac said:
hurleyjd, the very nature of the environmental movement is to bring business and personal lifestyle under government control...that does not promote capitalism or personal freedom!

Robert mac about twenty five or so years ago a coal fired plante was built in the area of MT Pleasant Texas to generated electricy. After operating a few years the COPD problems in people increased 300%. To me there is no better reason to clean up the air than to give people their health back. Results have already been seen in switching to the clean diesel. The older diesel created acid and the lakes were more acid. After the new diesel the lakes acidity has lowered. And I also think that some of the soil had been becoming less acid. In my area we are having legumes make a comeback in areas where they were at one time. This is not from any effort at reseeding but from hard seeds from years and years back. This is just some things that I am aware of in my area and most is from articles in local newspapers from times past. The legume resurgent is only my observation from my own ranching operations.

If we had listened to this person and tried to implement is ideas then we might be more engery dependent now.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amory_Lovins
 

RobertMac

Well-known member
hurleyjd said:
RobertMac said:
hurleyjd, the very nature of the environmental movement is to bring business and personal lifestyle under government control...that does not promote capitalism or personal freedom!

Robert mac about twenty five or so years ago a coal fired plante was built in the area of MT Pleasant Texas to generated electricy. After operating a few years the COPD problems in people increased 300%. To me there is no better reason to clean up the air than to give people their health back. Results have already been seen in switching to the clean diesel. The older diesel created acid and the lakes were more acid. After the new diesel the lakes acidity has lowered. And I also think that some of the soil had been becoming less acid. In my area we are having legumes make a comeback in areas where they were at one time. This is not from any effort at reseeding but from hard seeds from years and years back. This is just some things that I am aware of in my area and most is from articles in local newspapers from times past. The legume resurgent is only my observation from my own ranching operations.

If we had listened to this person and tried to implement is ideas then we might be more engery dependent now.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amory_Lovins
There is a difference between being good stewards of the environment and the environmental movement!
 

TexasBred

Well-known member
hurleyjd said:
RobertMac said:
hurleyjd, the very nature of the environmental movement is to bring business and personal lifestyle under government control...that does not promote capitalism or personal freedom!

Robert mac about twenty five or so years ago a coal fired plante was built in the area of MT Pleasant Texas to generated electricy. After operating a few years the COPD problems in people increased 300%. To me there is no better reason to clean up the air than to give people their health back. Results have already been seen in switching to the clean diesel. The older diesel created acid and the lakes were more acid. After the new diesel the lakes acidity has lowered. And I also think that some of the soil had been becoming less acid. In my area we are having legumes make a comeback in areas where they were at one time. This is not from any effort at reseeding but from hard seeds from years and years back. This is just some things that I am aware of in my area and most is from articles in local newspapers from times past. The legume resurgent is only my observation from my own ranching operations.

If we had listened to this person and tried to implement is ideas then we might be more engery dependent now.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amory_Lovins

Hurley is that the power plant on lake Monticello??

Why does Monticello, a 30-year-old plant, deserve recognition as one of POWER's Top Plants of 2006? Because TXU has been blending Powder River Basin (PRB) coal with local lignite at the plant for the past decade, and steady reductions in air-pollutant emission rates have been the result. That positive experience has made the company confident enough to propose building nearly 9,100 MW of new coal- or lignite-fired capacity in Texas by 2010 at a cost of $10 billion. Read on to share some of the lessons that TXU has learned about handling PRB coal safely.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
TexasBred said:
hurleyjd said:
RobertMac said:
hurleyjd, the very nature of the environmental movement is to bring business and personal lifestyle under government control...that does not promote capitalism or personal freedom!

Robert mac about twenty five or so years ago a coal fired plante was built in the area of MT Pleasant Texas to generated electricy. After operating a few years the COPD problems in people increased 300%. To me there is no better reason to clean up the air than to give people their health back. Results have already been seen in switching to the clean diesel. The older diesel created acid and the lakes were more acid. After the new diesel the lakes acidity has lowered. And I also think that some of the soil had been becoming less acid. In my area we are having legumes make a comeback in areas where they were at one time. This is not from any effort at reseeding but from hard seeds from years and years back. This is just some things that I am aware of in my area and most is from articles in local newspapers from times past. The legume resurgent is only my observation from my own ranching operations.

If we had listened to this person and tried to implement is ideas then we might be more engery dependent now.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amory_Lovins

Hurley is that the power plant on lake Monticello??

Why does Monticello, a 30-year-old plant, deserve recognition as one of POWER's Top Plants of 2006? Because TXU has been blending Powder River Basin (PRB) coal with local lignite at the plant for the past decade, and steady reductions in air-pollutant emission rates have been the result. That positive experience has made the company confident enough to propose building nearly 9,100 MW of new coal- or lignite-fired capacity in Texas by 2010 at a cost of $10 billion. Read on to share some of the lessons that TXU has learned about handling PRB coal safely.

Yes that is one of them, I think the swepco has a plant in the area also. The health problems were some time back. Could be they have improved the emissions. Would they have improved them if they were not forced to?
 
Top