Noted Racist Resigns From Obama CZARS


Van Jones Resigns


WASHINGTON (AP) – President Barack Obama’s adviser Van Jones has resigned amid controversy over past inflammatory statements, the White House said early Sunday.

Jones said in an interview:  “On the eve of historic fights for health care and clean energy, opponents of reform have mounted a vicious smear campaign against me,” Jones said in his resignation statement. “They are using lies and distortions to distract and divide.”

Did you not sign the 911 Truther petition?  And then claim you didn’t read the document.  You Lied Mr. Jones.

You called Republicans disparaging names.  You claimed white people were poisoning black people.

You Lied Mr. Jones and You Got Caught!

This is one small victory in the war against the Obama socialism.  These are the people that Obama said to judge him by.  These are the people that surround Obama, giving him advice, charting his policies.  It’s very clear now that Obama has a socialist agenda.  The nationalization of the Auto industry, the Banking industry, the Insurance industry and if given the chance, Obama would take over the Health Care industry and Talk Radio.

The battle lines are drawn.  The attacks on free expression in the media.  The attempt to silence talk radio.

The attempt to use school children to push your socialist policies.


This is one small victory to rid the government of political rubbish.  More has to be done.

Wake Up America


Take Our Country Back


What’s for Dinner?


Grilled Ono and Garden Salad

A Victory Dinner (Not Government Approved)


10 Responses to “Noted Racist Resigns From Obama CZARS”

  1. hippieprof Says:

    OK – I am here seeking reasonable, rational discussion on the issues facing us. I don’t think this is the way to do it – rather, we need to approach it from a position of mutual trust and respect.

    I blogged on that subject this very afternoon. You will find it here:

    If you would like, take a look and make a comment back, either there or here.

    Seriously, what I am seeking is rational conversation.

    — hippieprof

    • manhattanteaparty Says:

      Actually, I trust Ozero %110. I trust him to be the American hating neo-Marxist that he is. I trust him to attempt the centralization of power into his hands regardless of what it will do to the economy. I trust him to lie through his teeth to get want he wants ala the so-called Stimulus Bill. (Where are the jobs?) I trust Ozero to sell-out American allies to her enemies like Chavez, Iran, North Korea, Cuba, Russia, etc… That is when he is not apologizing for American history, culture and people.

      Yes, I’m a trusting person.

  2. manhattanteaparty Says:

    I hope that Czar “Population Control” Holdren is next on Glenn Beck’s list.

    • Kini Says:

      Holdren, Sunstein, Emanuel, Lloyd, and a whole host of questionable characters. This whole process of CZARS has been used by both parties, but this is the worst case of Executive abuse of power I’ve ever seen. Criminals, tax cheats, and communists, what’s next? Terrorists?

      It’s got to stop.

  3. hippieprof Says:

    So – seriously – does it help your side to just spew venom? Honestly?

    You know, much as I disagreed with Bush I never fell to thgis level of disrespect.

    Why aren’t you willing to meet halfway here?

    — hippieprof

    • Kini Says:

      Why? About as much as the left tries to tear down one of our own. Did you not think that someday we wouldn’t use the same tactics that the left has been using against us for years now.

      Short memories the left has. Let’s review shall we.
      8 years of Bush Hitler, conspiracy 911 theories, trampling on the Constitution, ad nauseam … I disagreed with Bush on many thing, immigration for one. I am a immigrant to this great country. I have seen how socialism controls the lives of people. Once it takes hold, e.g. Obama’s health care plans, it is hard if not impossible to get rid of it.

      The attacks on Sarah Palin, not just her, but her family. The attacks on her children were just over the line. You don’t see anyone on our side bashing Obama’s kids like the left did to Sarah Palin’s kids. And still do by the way.

      Just a few examples, I could go on and on.

      As for Obama, we don’t hate the person, we hate the policies. We are conservatives. We believe in Free Market principals. We believe in less government, not more. Show me a government program that has work, just one…

      Obama is a socialist, a fascist, and he would explode government into every aspect of American business, American life and American Freedom. Again, I’ve lived under socialism. I came here to escape socialism, I will not allow this country to go down that road.

      You want half way? When your side continues to attack us. We’ve been silent for far too long and now buyers remorse is setting in. E.g. Tea Parties.

      There is no halfway with socialism. There either is, or is not.
      You are asking a lot, for little in return.

    • Kini Says:

      I spent some time reading your blog and some of the comments. I dare say you have a naive view on how the world works and how business works in this country.

      Labor Day Reflections – Unions and Card Check – how unholy is that?

      The government spends other peoples money, my money, your money. The government doesn’t earn money. The government prints money, taxes money, but doesn’t have a profit or loss ratio to worry about.

      Labor unions spend enormous amounts of money getting legislation passed in their favor. That’s their membership’s money. This is why “Card Check” is so heavily pushed by the Unions. Their membership is dwindling. Why. Because they have priced themselves out of the market. It is cheaper for large corporations to manufacture overseas. This is why everything in WalMart is “Made In China”.

      Most of the business in this country are small businesses with 100 or less employees. Some in the government want to impose “Card Check” to force these companies to Unionize. That would make the cost of doing business so expensive, the “society” you speak about will no longer be responsible for your success, but your failure. Why, because people will take their business elsewhere. It’s called value. You see it everyday when you go to the supermarket. You purchase what you determine as value for your money.

      Your argument that “society is partially responsible for your success” is completely wrong. Your success is not measured by society giving. It is measured by how many people want to purchase your product. That profit is for you to keep and do with as you want. Reinvestment in your company, charity, infrastructure, health care, whatever. The success or failure of any company is determined by their decisions on how to spend their profits.

      So when GM gets a government bailout, or rather the Unions get the bailout, with taxpayer money. Why should I have to pay for someone else bad business decisions. Their business mistakes are somehow my responsibility? After all these billions of dollars are spent, how will the product improve? So far, their product is way too expensive and inferior to their competition. So, “society is ALSO partially responsible for your failure”, because it’s made better, cheaper, faster elsewhere.

      It is not the role of Government to bailout businesses. It is not the governments responsibility to nationalize businesses and prevent them from failing due to their poor business decisions. Government’s responsibility is to remain within the framework of the Constitution.

      The government cannot run its own business (e.g. social security, medicare, USPS, etc), so why are we letting government take over businesses.

      Bailing out Bad business does not make for better business.

      This is all academic, but you’re a prof…. right?

      • hippieprof Says:


        Believe it or we are now starting to have some of the types of conversation I was talking about. Thank you for taking the time to look what I have written and thank you for responding.

        First – I know very well that some people on my side have attacked those on your side – but you will note that I did call them out in my post as well. We are responsible for vile rhetoric too. The rhetoric isn’t helping us get anywhere, though – in fact the opposite is true.

        I do think it is disingenuous to call Obama a socialist. He is indeed a liberal democrat – and he indeed favors a larger role for government than we currently have – but he also very much believes in the American ideas of freedom and democracy. Calling him a socialist has an emotional “un-American” connotation to it – so I would prefer we concentrate on his policies than on some label.

        Note also that you can’t be both a socialist and a fascist. They are at opposite end of the political spectrum – socialism associated with the left, fascism associated with the right.

        As far as the GM and bank bailouts – can you seriously say you would rather have not had them occur? I suspect our economic situation would be far far worse now had we not bailed them out. Obama didn’t do this because he wanted to – he did it because he had to because the consequences of not acting were too dire.

        I believe in the free market too – but I also believe that it isn’t perfect and needs some regulation and that we need some social safety nets for when it doesn’t work. That is why I am a liberal democrat as opposed to being a socialist. A socialist would abolish the free market – I don’t want that and I really don’t know anyone (outside of a few loonies) who advocate for that.

        For the record, I don’t like the idea of card check either.

        Again, thanks for responding. I really think we have to start listening to each other more and spending less time shouting and calling names. This, however small, is a start.

        — hippieprof

  4. manhattanteaparty Says:

    “They are at opposite end of the political spectrum – socialism associated with the left, fascism associated with the right.”

    That is a historically false statement. Mussolini started out as a socialist, and always remained a man of the left. One can be both socialist leaning and a fascist. Both doctrines are collectivist-statists creeds that exalt the group over the individual.

    In his actions, Obama has yet to demonstrate his alleged committment to American ideals, including liberty. According to him, and other “liberal” Democrats, there is no problem – real or imagined – that can’t be fixed by giving the government more power over the individual. Obama is clearly a Fabian Socialist. He is moving in that direction piecemeal, by he moves in only one direction, and as quickly as circumstances allow.

    Obama’s altruist-collectivist mentality is demonstrated in his speech to school children today. The whole thing has the ” work and serve the Volk,” ring to it. He states that students should choose a career based on how it best serves others. Nowhere does he say, “choose what will make you happy … pursue your own ends, because you, the individual are an end in yourself.” His ethics represents the foundation of the authoritarian state.

    If he really valued American ideals he would not have bailed out any businesses. The money dumped into those losers are a net loss. All he has done is funnell capital away from companies that could have made much better use of it. The bailouts have made the economy worse. When the factors of production (which exist in limited quantity) are controlled by government there must be a decrease in productivity. We all suffer the consequences of these massive malinvestments. Just as we did with the housing bubble that was completely caused by government policies.

  5. hippieprof Says:

    I would agree that there is some argument about the correct place on the political spectrum for fascism – but the argument is between center and right – nobody argues that fascism is a leftist doctrine. How could it be? True socialism emphasizes equality where the society serves to support the weak, while fascism emphasizes social Darwinism in which the weak are culled out by natural selection – these are essentially irreconcilable positions.

    Obama’s speech to the children certainly does not strike me as some sorry of Hitler youth rally. It is about the values of hard work and education. How can anyone really be against those?

    Here is a rather reasoned commentary – from a political moderate:

    Now – are you seriously saying that the bailouts have us in worse economic position? In economics we don’t get to have a control group but I suspect our economy would currently be in ashes had the bailouts not occurred. We would have had a cascading series of failures that would have completely destroyed our economic system. I already said this above: Obama didn’t do them because he wanted to – he did them because he had to.

    Thanks again for the conversation…. I think it is important to continue an honest exchange of views.

    — hippieprof

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: