Sarah Palin Responds To Obama’s Speech

Obama was calling her out when he scornfully mentioned “death panels”. Citizen Sarah posting at Facebook, is right back at him:

After all the rhetoric is put aside, one principle ran through President Obama’s speech tonight: that increased government involvement in health care can solve its problems.

Many Americans fundamentally disagree with this idea. We know from long experience that the creation of a massive new bureaucracy will not provide us with “more stability and security,” but just the opposite. It’s hard to believe the President when he says that this time he and his team of bureaucrats have finally figured out how to do things right if only we’ll take them at their word.

Our objections to the Democrats’ health care proposals are not mere “bickering” or “games.” They are not an attempt to “score short term political points.” And it’s hard to listen to the President lecture us not to use “scare tactics” when in the next breath he says that “more will die” if his proposals do not pass.

In his speech the President directly responded to concerns I’ve raised about unelected bureaucrats being given power to make decisions affecting life or death health care matters. He called these concerns “bogus,” “irresponsible,” and “a lie” — so much for civility. After all the name-calling, though, what he did not do is respond to the arguments we’ve made, arguments even some of his own supporters have agreed have merit.

In fact, after promising to “make sure that no government bureaucrat …. gets between you and the health care you need,” the President repeated his call for an Independent Medicare Advisory Council — an unelected, largely unaccountable group of bureaucrats charged with containing Medicare costs. He did not disavow his own statement that such a group, working outside of “normal political channels,” should guide decisions regarding that “huge driver of cost … the chronically ill and those toward the end of their lives….” He did not disavow the statements of his health care advisor, Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, and continuing to pay his salary with taxpayer dollars proves a commitment to his beliefs. The President can keep making unsupported assertions, but until he directly responds to the arguments I’ve made, I’m going to call him out too.

It was heartening to hear the President finally recognize that tort reform is an important part of any solution. But this concession shouldn’t lead us to take our eye off the ball: the Democrats’ proposals will not reduce costs, and they will not deliver better health care. It’s this kind of “healthy skepticism of government” that truly reflects a “concern and regard for the plight of others.” We can’t wait to hear the details on that; we look forward to working with you on tort reform.

Finally, President Obama delivered an offhand applause line tonight about the cost of the War on Terror. As we approach the anniversary of the September 11th attacks and honor those who died that day and those who have died since in the War on Terror, in order to secure our freedoms, we need to remember their sacrifices and not demonize them as having had too high a price tag.

Remember, Mr. President, elected officials work for the people. Forcing a conclusion in order to claim a “victory” is not healthy for our country. We hear you say government isn’t always the answer; now hear us — that’s what we’ve been saying all along.

- Sarah Palin

A Video Rebuttal To Obama’s Health Care Speech

By Alinsky Rules:

It Had To Be Said

I’m sorry, but after all of the insults that Republicans have had to take for the past eight months from this man, who even when addressing a joint session of Congress can’t restrain himself from attacking the previous administration, who has the audacity to lecture us about civility after he and his cronies insulted and demeaned protesters for months… it’s just not fair to ask Republicans to sit on their hands and bite their tongues when the President gets in front them and continues to spew out lie after demonstrable lie:

So hurray for Joe Wilson, my new hero:

It was Obama’s idea to hold a joint session of Congress on this very divisive issue, and give his eleventy hundredth speech on the subject. It was his idea to continue trying to sell it by offering pie in the sky solutions with no negative consequences. Americans have been educating themselves on the facts of what’s in these health care bills, and are finding out that just because Obama says something, it doesn’t mean it’s true. Republicans in Congress shouldn’t be expected to put up with it.

If this is the beginning of  UK Parliament style proceedings, with lots of yelling and cat calls, so be it. That can be Barry’s  legacy. The man who promised to end divisiveness will go down as the man who’s shameless and audacious lies inspired an uprising not only amongst an alarmed citizenry, but also amongst Washington pols forced to listen to them.

UPDATE:

The apology was almost immediate:

“This evening I let my emotions get the best of me when listening to the president’s remarks regarding the coverage of illegal immigrants in the health care bill,” Wilson said.

“While I disagree with the president’s statement, my comments were inappropriate and regrettable.  I extend sincere apologies to the president for this lack of civility.”

See also:

Drew at AoSHQ

Allahpundit, who isn’t in the mood to make nice, either.

Gateway Pundit

Sharp Right Turn

Cuffy Meigs

Ed Driscoll

Video: Linda Douglas Spins Wildly On Federal Funding For Abortion

The President has said repeatedly that federal funds, by law cannot be used for abortions…

Yeah yeah yeah….The President has said a lot of things that aren’t true.

NEA Appointees Hiding From The Press

Big Hollywood’s Patrick Courrielche reports that  a second conference call has taken place between the art community and Americans for Arts, a non-profit arts organization that has received substantial grants from the National Endowment for the Arts. The NEA and NEH were supposed to be in on the call, as well, but had bowed out at the last minute, perhaps, all too aware of the controversy swirling around the first conference call.

Lee Rosenbaum, a blogger for Artsjournal.com, posted her experience with a meeting that occurred on August 27th and confessed that she also felt “uneasy” about the government’s arts effort.  The meeting invitation (viewable here) went out to all “member local, state, and regional arts agencies, community-based arts organizations, and national partners of Americans for Arts.” Americans for Arts is a non-profit arts organization that has received substantial grants from the National Endowment for the Arts.

As with my conference call, the art group was invited to the meeting to work together to “tackle some of the nation’s toughest issues: education; health; energy and the environment; community renewal; and safety and security.” Also like my call, it included a private citizen moderating the phone call with key White House representatives participating. Kalpen Modi, Associate Director of the White House Office of Public Engagement, was to represent the White House and key representatives from the National Endowment for the Arts were also to participate.

Even more disturbing than learning that the White House and NEA are using the arts to address specific issues, is to learn what was discussed on this new conference call. Rosenbaum mentions that there was much talk of “leveraging federal dollars” to get artists and cultural organizations involved in social-service projects.

Leveraging federal dollars? This is the problem with marrying issue specific topics, like health care and energy, with a group that is funded by tax dollars; it increases the potential of taxpayer-funded propaganda.

Several news outlets have unsuccessfully tried to get a hold of  of the NEA to answer some questions:

With the building evidence of bad behavior by the NEA, you’d think this federal agency would have issued a statement explaining their position on this “brand new” direction for the arts. But as the cliché goes, the silence has been deafening. This taxpayer funded agency and their civil servants haven’t even returned phone calls from legitimate press outlets such as the Boston Globe, Foxnews.com, or the Washington Times.

Even more deafening is the silence on the part of the mainstream media. Documented dishonesty by White House appointed officials should easily draw the ire of our media watchdogs. But the liberal media, historically a protector of the arts, has turned its back on the community of which it adores. Like the Van Jones story, it appears that the blogosphere and conservative media are the only two forums that break news anymore. And the news that they break has dire consequences for those involved regardless of the mainstream media’s blind eye.

What, The New York Times hasn’t jumped on this, yet? What if some laws were broken, as George Will believes, and people are sent to jail over this? Might that be worth a story in the NYTs?

Lynne Munson, the former deputy chairman of the National Endowment for the Humanities is aghast:

I posted previously on how unethical it is to ask potential grantees to engage in politics. And how outrageous it is to do all of this while sitting in your office at a federal agency? Now, to make things worse, the agency has decided to cut itself off from the press. Not only does this look bad — it is wrong. The appointees who are refusing to explain themselves to the press and the public are public servants. Their $100k+ salaries are paid out of the NEA’s $160+ million budget (up $5 million in Obama’s first year).

Heads should be rolling.

Van Jones Returns to Job At Podesta’s Center for American Progress

Didn’t see this one coming…

For fallen White House aides, the rallying cry apparently is John Podesta to the rescue! The Obama administration’s former green jobs czar Van Jones is headed back to Podesta’s Center for American Progress after stepping down from his White House post four days ago amid controversy over his leftist affiliations, the Daily News has learned.

Hey, what kind of mischief can a “senior fellow” at a left-wing think tank get into, right?

Hat tip: Jackstraw

Tea Party Express Attracting HUGE Crowds

As the tea party express  makes its way across the country, it is attracting crowds of thousands everywhere it goes; crowds of citizens who will tell you they have never gone out and protested anything in their lives – “Virgin protesters” as the Fox affiliate in Detroit called them. Look at the size of this crowd in the Detroit area, yesterday, despite several rounds of heavy downpours.

A crowd of 10,000 attended their rally in New Lenox/Joliet, IL on the 7th:

The express rolled into Canton, OH, to another big crowd, today:

Check out the Tea Party Express blog for constant updates of the tour. I think it’s safe to say that  there are huge numbers of Americans who have had enough of the “hope and change”, and they want their dissenting voices to be heard.

UPDATE:

Lucky Bridgeport!

Conservative author and pundit, Ann Coulter, has confirmed her participation at the Tea Party Express rally in Bridgeport, CT this Friday, September 11, 2001 at 1:30pm.  The rally will be held at Baldwin Plaza (behind the courthouse) located at 1061 Main Street in Bridgeport, CT.

Is Obama Creating A Shadow Government?

Via: Redstate

Mark Rudd is a former SDS/Weather Underground member who’s friendly with many of Obama’s radical friends from Chicago. He currently serves on the board of the Movement for a Democratic Society (MDS), the parent body of Progressives For Obama, a leading far left umbrella group that supported Obama’s presidential campaign, and continues to support his Presidency.

Last December,  Trevor Loudon, (the NZ blogger who nailed Van jones) noticed a compelling entry from Rudd’s blog:

Our job now is to organize both inside and outside the Demo party. There’s already a big battle in the Demo party at every level. Here in the New Mexico State Legislature, the progressives are challenging the conservative Dems for leadership; the same is true in Congress. If you can’t stand to work in the party, work on putting mass pressure on issues such as healthcare and jobs and the war from outside.

Here’s my mantra: “Let’s put this country on our shoulders and get to work.”

***

…Leave the military alone because they’re way too powerful. For now, until enough momentum is raised…you have to be able to look like you’re doing one thing but do another. That’s why all these conservative appointments are important: the strategy is feint to the right, move left…Look to the second level appointments. There’s a whole govt. in waiting that Podesta has at the Center for American Progress. They’re mostly progressives…”

Andrew McCarthy had predicted the same thing back in November about Obama’s 2nd level appointments:

I expect the Obama appointment strategy to be two-fold . . . and clever. Step One: Establish the precedent for easy confirmations with ostensibly moderate, center-left nominees who are popular enough in the senate that the RINO bloc will quickly get on board. This would establish a working coalition for Obama in the upper chamber (not just on nominations but on legislation) and discourage the remaining GOP ranks from using the filibuster or other procedural stalls.

Step Two: Obama will move the country leftward with the appointments that really matter in government: the hundreds of second- and third-tier (and below) executive agency appointments — the deputy-secretaries, under-secretaries, and associate-this or -that for policy, etc., who work where the rubber of big government meets the road. They are the ones who implement policy, who have a huge hidden role in making policy, and who control the hiring of the thousands of federal employees who do not require confirmation.

Who could have predicted that Obama’s lurch to the left would go far beyond filling low level cabinet positions with far lefties. Obama has gone over the heads of his Cabinet, and created dozens of new positions, known as czars, creating positions that already have counterparts in the Cabinet…positions that some are saying make up a “shadow government”.

He’s created anywhere from 29 (according to the Politico) to 32 (Glenn Beck) to 44 (American daughter) Czar positions.

One reason for the discrepancy is because of the unclear definition of “Czar”.   Ed Morrissey, argues that a Czar does not have to go through a Senate confirmation, so someone like Cass Sunstein who is currently going through the confirmation process is considered a special adviser to the President, not a Czar. On the other hand, Michelle Malkin has called him a “Czar nominee (who is subject to confirmation hearings)”.

At any rate, there has been an unprecedentedly large number of folks appointed to positions in the executive branch, who do not have any Congressional oversight whatsoever, in Obama’s first nine months as President. So what the heck is going on here?

Anthony Martin of the Examiner believes this “bodes ill for citizens who value liberty and the Constitution”:

I postulated a theory yesterday that maintains Obama is forming a ‘shadow government’ that could, at any moment, replace the Cabinet, Congress, and the Supreme Court.  The sheer number of these shadow government officials strongly suggests that their presence in the White House is more than just a casual, friendly ‘advisory’ relationship with the President.  Rather, the scenario that is developing indicates the attempt by an American President to pull an ‘end-run’ around the legislative and judicial branches of government.

Glenn Beck has hinted at something similarly nefarious on his show.

Michelle Malkin calls them “Czars of Obama’s underworld”,

The Obama administration has created a two-tiered government—fronted by Cabinet secretaries able to withstand public scrutiny (some of them, just barely) and then managed behind the scenes by shadow secretaries with broad powers beyond congressional reach. Bureaucratic chaos serves as a useful smokescreen to obscure the true source of policy decision-making.

She reports today, that a Democrat Rep opposes the Czar system, and has in fact called for their dismissals:

U.S. Rep. Dan Boren said Congress should use the power of the purse to push the Obama administration to remove so-called czars that do not go through a confirmation process.

Responding to questions during a telephonic town hall, the Oklahoma Democrat said he was glad Van Jones, who resigned over the weekend as controversy continued to build over past statements, has left his post.

Senator Byrd came out early against the Czars, writing a letter to Obama, back in February:

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.”

A couple of Republicans jumped on board the anti-Green Czar bandwagon at the last minute to call for Van Jones’ resignation. Maybe some Republican leaders (hello Michael Steele?) could be so bold as to ask for all of their resignations?

Of course, there’s always plan B, as posited by Clarice Feldman at The American Thinker:

Since it appears Congress is yet unwilling to insist on the preservation of its Constitutional prerogatives and the White House unlikely to change course on its own, I take it it’s up to what we call the alternative media to keep plodding ahead and picking off  one by one those Czars who are manifestly unsuitable for these posts. < blockquote>

MORE:

Perhaps it’s wrong to say that Obama is forming a shadow government. As Jackstraw suggests, perhaps the person responsible is a puppetmaster with deep pockets, shaping the agenda from behind the scenes.

Could George Soros Be Behind The Obama Administration’s Disgraceful Treatment Of Honduras?

A lot of people are wondering why the Obama administration is punishing a small country like Honduras for following  its constitution.  The United States has condemned Honduras, rescinded aid to the country and cut off a number of visas sought by Hondurans desiring to visit the United States. The question is – why?  The American Policy Institute expressed the frustration well, here:

Following the removal of Honduran President Manuel Zelaya from office, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was quick to condemn the move, saying it could create a “terrible precedent.”

What terrible precedent did she think might be established?  A Latin American country actually following its constitution?

Despite what you may have heard from Secretary Clinton or read in the press, there was no coup d’etat in Honduras.  Manuel Zelaya, a Hugo Chavez wannabe, was legally removed from office for violating his country’s constitution to extend his power.

Read the entire article if you’re unfamiliar with the story, or need a reminder. And keep in mind, the ouster of renegade Chavez acolyte, Zelaya, took place shortly after the fraudulent reelection of Ahmadinejad in Iran inspired a popular uprising in which untold numbers of protesters were beaten, killed and imprisoned. Obama chose not to “meddle” by making any statements in support of the protesters. Yet the Obama administration didn’t hesitate to “meddle” in the affairs of pro-American, and pro-Democratic Honduras, in essence, taking the side of the region’s bad guys, most notably, Chavez, Ortega, and Castro.

Last Friday,  Obama’s State Dept announced that if  Zelaya, isn’t returned to power in Honduras, the United States won’t recognize the results of that country’s upcoming  free elections.

Again, why?

Honduras’ Foreign Minister Enrique Ortez has charged that as President, Zelaya was involved with drug trafficking from Venezuela into the U.S.:

“Every night, three or four Venezuelan-registered planes land without the permission of appropriate authorities and bring thousands of pounds…and packages of money that are the fruit of drug trafficking,” he said. “We have proof of all of this. Neighboring governments have it. The DEA [U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration] has it,” he added.

Enter George Soros, a man some consider to be the “biggest political fat cat of all time”, and who also happens to be the world’s richest and most influential supporter of drug legalization:

At a U.N. meeting on October 13, 2008, Zelaya had openly called for the legalization of drugs — supposedly to reduce violence — just weeks after the George Soros-funded Latin American Commission on Drugs and Democracy had met to discuss how to pursue such a course of action. The group subsequently released a report calling for a “paradigm shift” on how to handle the illegal drug problem. Billionaire Soros, a long-time funder of campaigns to legalize dangerous drugs, has purchased the services of several former Latin American government officials to push this cause.

Zelaya’s comments were immediately denounced by U.N. Office of Drug Control regional representative José Manuel Martinez Morales, who said such an approach was to “stick our heads under the sand like ostriches and accept the drug trade which is annihilating our youth.”

Last November Zelaya appeared with Soros at a U.N. Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean conference in the Dominican Republic.

What is behind Soros’ s obsession with drug legalization? This revealing Accuracy In Media report from 2004 offers some clues:

The Hidden Soros Agenda: Drugs, Money, the Media, and Political Power

Despite his vision of an “open society,” he operates an unregulated “hedge fund,” open only to the super-rich, and is currently fighting a proposal from the Bush-appointed chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission to regulate and monitor these offshore entities.  House Speaker Dennis Hastert said on national television that no one really knows where the Soros money comes from.

Soros reportedly purchased a major stake in one of Colombia’s biggest banks, at a time when the Drug Enforcement Administration, in its study, “Colombian Economic Reform: The Impact on Drug Money Laundering within the Colombian Economy,”  was documenting how major drug kingpins were taking advantage of the liberalization of the economy to put illicit drug revenue into legitimate businesses. The report stated: “U.S. and Colombian Government authorities have evidence of drug proceeds being deposited in every major bank in Colombia… A Colombian source indicated that many banks and businesses are owned covertly by principal members of the Cali cartel.”

Soros has categorically denied receiving money from drug cartels or any form of criminal activity. The fact remains, however, that at least some of his financial operations have been based offshore, in banking and financial centers that are widely reported to be considered conducive to money-laundering.  The Soros fund is based in the Netherlands Antilles, a self-governing federation of five Caribbean islands. A CIA factbook describes the region as “a transshipment point for South American drugs bound for the US and Europe; money-laundering center.”

***

Soros’ long-time goal has been to subvert the national anti-drug policy of the U.S. Government, to move away from the use of national and global law enforcement resources against the drug trade.

Soros had his eye on Obama back when he was running for the Senate:

Soros has also contributed to Barack Obama, running for the Senate as a Democrat from Illinois. CNSNews.com reports that, “Not only did Soros donate to Obama’s campaign, but four other family members – Jennifer, sons Jonathan and Robert and wife Susan – did as well. Because of a special provision campaign finance laws, the Soroses were able to give a collective $60,000 to Obama during his primary challenge.”

Honduras’s interim President Micheletti has denounced both Chavez’s attempt to turn his country into a satellite of Venezuela and has angrily and publicly noted the drugs flowing through his country from Venezuela with Zelaya’s help. The Honduran government has said that Zelaya’s reinstatement in non-negotiable. They will not have him back under any circumstances. By not bending to the will of the leftists in the region, and the Obama State Dept, Honduras has thrown a huge monkey wrench into the plan to continue funneling drugs from Venezuela through Honduras into the US, and that doesn’t further George Soros’s goal of drug legalization.

Hat tip: Jackstraw

Krauthammer: Van Jones’ History of Radical Politics A Reflection Of Obama

Thank you Charles Krauthammer, this needed to be said.

This was no failure of the vetting process. Van Jones was exactly what Obama had in mind for his green jobs Czar: a community activist cut from the same cloth as himself. Dan Calabrese hit the nail on the head, here:

All Jones did was adjust the focus of the same “career” he’d always had – that of radical left-wing activist – to focus on pushing the latest fashionable excuse for all the same policies the left always wants.

The “revolution” Jones seeks would re-order the entire economy to take state control of private wealth and redistribute it to the hapless proletariat. This is the same agenda the Democratic Party has embraced for more than a generation, offering whatever excuse might sell the idea. They’ve been trying to sell poverty and health care as excuses to do this since at least the 1960s. Even the anti-war movement is, at least in part, about wanting to re-allocate the Pentagon budget for social do-gooder programs administered by the agencies and nonprofits that employ so many of these people.

Now the environment is the excuse to impose massive new taxes and regulations on industry.

It’s all to accomplish the same thing, and that’s why Jones the civil-rights activist became Jones the environmental activist. Every problem that has ever existed is solved by massive taxes and government regulation, and Jones – formidable radical activist that he is – knew how to pivot from issue to issue while really pursuing the same end goal.

More and more Americans are beginning to understand the radical nature of our President, and are finding it very difficult to trust such a man.

Related:

Here’s one such man who asked Rep. Tom Perriello (D-VA) about the constitutionality of Obama’s czars:

Ed Morrissey commented on the public displays of mistrust people are showing for this administration:

Note the standing ovation given to the lecture. Perriello and other Democrats had better start learning something from these reactions, because mistrust is beginning to rapidly increase for this administration.

***

If nothing else, this demonstrates the end of George Bush as a talking point for Democrats. People weren’t really worried that the NSA was listening to their conversations with Aunt Millie. The czars and the government takeovers of health care and energy production, on the other hand, will impact every American in fundamental ways. Bush as a vague and ambiguous bogeyman has been eclipsed by the very real encroachment on liberty that Barack Obama and his czars promise.

Van Jones, Glenn Beck, And The Moral/Intellectual Bankruptcy Of The Left

The facts: Van Jones, a self avowed Communist, black nationalist, truther, Mumia supporter,  Katrina race-baiter, and potty mouth resigned after an increasing number of Americans became privy to his radicalism due to primarily Glenn Beck on Fox News, and the right wing blogosphere.

The Van Jones story only became a story for the MSM when he announced that he was resigning. As many have already noted,  people who only get their news from the MSM,  heard about Van Jones for the first time today. This is the same MSM that was is more than happy to report negative story after story about Sarah Palin during the 2008 election campaign.

In fact, according to Robert Stacy McCain:

…this is the real story: The shameful failure of the MSM to do its job in reporting on the Obama administration.

But it gets worse.

Now, the left, outraged because this charlatan was found out, is after the guy who led the charge. Apparently, like good little Marxists, they were hoping that Jones’ “green” (read Communist) policies could be sneaked in under the public radar. How dare there be whistle blowers out there  informing the public about what’s going on.

Keith Olberman is now soliciting the Kos Kids for dirt on Glenn Beck, which anyone who’s ever listened to Beck knows is absurd because Beck is an open book. He’s confessed  his sins publicly on his radio program, already, you idiots. As RightWingSparkle says:

There isn’t a thing anyone could dig around for and come up with that Beck himself hasn’t put out there on radio or TV.

So what does a *large number of subversives in the leftwing blogosphere do? Why they make  up a vicious rumor, and they spread it far and wide, hoping they’ll convince people that they’re making a valid point about how hurtful spreading hateful lies can be.  The problem here is, of course, that everything that was uncovered about Van Jones was demonstrably true, and he was an adviser to the President with a 60 billion dollar budget, and they’re just spreading a ridiculous lie about a Fox News host. So…um…there’s a big difference.

What a disgusting spectacle: They’re lashing out like babies…taking wild swings at their bete noire du jour, demonstrating even more, for all to see, how morally and intellectually bankrupt they are.

*Correction: I had previously said “what does the leftwing blogosphere do”?, painting with too broad a brush…obviously, not *everyone* in the leftwing blogosphere is taking part in that.

Poll:Who Should Be The Next Czar To Go?

Who should be the next “victim of  a vicious smear campaign”, (otherwise known as exposing victim’s past words and deeds to the light of day)? There are many good subjects to choose from, anywhere from 31 to 44, with more Czar positions  still being planned. I’ve listed the ones I consider to be the most egregious and dangerous.

John Holdren, Science Czar:

Photojournalist, Zombie uncovered Holdren’s disturbing history of advocating forced abortions and sterilizations as seen in the book he co-authored with Paul Ehrlich, Ecosystems:

Indeed, it has been concluded that compulsory population-control laws, even including laws requiring compulsory abortion, could be sustained under the existing Constitution if the population crisis became sufficiently severe to endanger the society. It would even be possible to require pregnant single women to marry or have abortions, perhaps as an alternative to placement for adoption, depending on the society. Adding a sterilant to drinking water or staple foods is a suggestion that seems to horrify people more than most proposals for involuntary fertility control. Indeed, this would pose some very difficult political, legal, and social questions, to say nothing of the technical problems. No such sterilant exists today, nor does one appear to be under development. To be acceptable, such a substance would have to meet some rather stiff requirements: it must be uniformly effective, despite widely varying doses received by individuals, and despite varying degrees of fertility and sensitivity among individuals; it must be free of dangerous or unpleasant side effects; and it must have no effect on members of the opposite sex, children, old people, pets, or livestock.

How does a person like this get the President’s ear on anything?

Carol Browner, Energy and Environment Czar:

Remember this?:

On her last day in office, ( in Clinton administration) nearly eight years ago, Browner oversaw the destruction of agency computer files in brazen violation of a federal judge’s order requiring the agency to preserve its records. This from a public official who bragged about her tenure: “One of the things I’m the proudest of at EPA is the work we’ve done to expand the public’s right to know.”

***

According to testimony in a freedom of information lawsuit filed against EPA by the Landmark Legal Foundation, a Virginia-based conservative legal watchdog group, Browner commanded a computer technician on Jan. 19, 2001: “‘I would like my files deleted. I want you to delete my files.” Not coincidentally, the Landmark Legal Foundation had been pressing Browner to fully and publicly disclose the names of any special interest groups that may have influenced her wave of last-minute regulatory actions. Two days before she told her technician to purge all her records, EPA had gone to court to file a motion opposing the federal court injunction protecting those government documents.

The Washington Times reported back in January of this year:

Until last week, Carol M. Browner, President-elect Barack Obama’s pick as global warming czar, was listed as one of 14 leaders of a socialist group’s Commission for a Sustainable World Society, which calls for “global governance” and says rich countries must shrink their economies to address climate change.

By Thursday, Mrs. Browner’s name and biography had been removed from Socialist International’s Web page, though a photo of her speaking June 30 to the group’s congress in Greece was still available.

Vivek Kundra, Information Czar:

Michelle Malkin reported:

Who thinks putting a shoplifter in charge of the entire federal government’s information security infrastructure is a good idea? The Obama White House has complete confidence in Vivek Kundra, the 34-year-old “whiz kid” named Federal Chief Information Officer (CIO) in March 2009 despite his criminal history. As first reported by Ed Morrissey at HotAir.com, Kundra was convicted of misdemeanor theft. He stole a handful of men’s shirts from a J.C. Penney’s department store and ran from police in a failed attempt to evade arrest. Kundra was a 21-year-old adult at the time of his attempted thievery and attempted escape from the police. From the White House’s pooh-poohing of the incident as a “youthful indiscretion,” you might have thought the digits in his age were reversed.

Mark Lloyd, FCC Diversity Czar:

CNS News reports:

To combat the control of international business and restore government to what he sees as its rightful place in managing public communications, Lloyd calls for a “confrontational movement” to protest the present order and organize a political movement that could force government to rein the businesses in.

“If our republican form of government is perishing because communications – the infrastructure of that republic – is under the yoke of international business how, at last, do we save it?” he asks. “We must build a confrontational movement to reclaim our democracy, a movement committed to active and sustained protest against the present order.”

To do this, Lloyd draws on his experience lobbying the FCC during the Clinton administration, counseling would-be revolutionaries to follow the tactics used by other left-wing movements, such as the followers of Saul Alinsky and the people who ran the campaign to block Republican Supreme Court nominee Robert Bork.

“We understood at the beginning, and were certainly reminded in the course of the campaign,” wrote Lloyd, ”that our work was not simply convincing policy makers of the logic or morality of our arguments. We understood that we were in a struggle for power against an oppenent, the commercial broadcasters ….”

“We looked to successful political campaigns and organizers as a guide, especially the civil rights movement, Saul Alinsky, and the campaign to prevent the Supreme Court nomination of the ultra-conservative jurist Robert Bork,” wrote Lloyd. “From those sources we drew inspiration and guidance.”

Cass Sunstein, Regulatory Czar:

The Examiner reports:

Cass Sunstein is Obama’s regulatory czar. Sunstein believes in a concept called libertarian paternalism. Sunstein has said time and time again that he is troubled by people having too many choices, especially when they can avoid choosing things they don’t like (think Internet.) This paternalism means to guide people to make choices that liberals think are better choices without them knowing there are less choices or that the names of the choices have been changed to favor a different direction. In other words, it’s all about making people you disagree with choose what you want them to choose without them knowing it.

Sunstein’s most odd any yet infamous belief is that animals should be able to sue humans, with humans representing the animals of course. Wouldn’t this be a conflict of interest? Sunstein also believes that hunting should be outright outlawed. With his views on animals it’s not surprising that he thinks farms need much more regulation. He has also equated the farming industry with genocide. This could be especially dangerous if he starts regulating animals into having a trial before they become food.

All of them:

Roger L. Simon wonders if Obama’st “Czar System” might be grounds for impeachment:

Barack Obama’s Czar System – which has recently come under scrutiny for some repellent, even paranoid, statements by his “Green Czar” Van Jones, a onetime “9-11 truther” who calls Republicans “assholes” on television – is an entirely different matter. This is directly an affair of state and seemingly an end run around the Separation of Powers. According to an article recently published at Examiner.com by Patrick McMahon, there are now thirty-one of these czars, covering areas from terrorism to domestic violence. Congress has not vetted a single one of them, as far as I know. Indeed, with only a couple of exceptions (Dennis Ross, etc.), we know who few of them are. Are others as extreme as Mr. Jones? Who knows? All we know is that they are there and that Obama (or someone) approved them. We don’t know exactly what their authority is and what they are supposed to do ultimately. They are a completely new part of our Executive Branch, invented by the President and/or his advisors. Was this what the Framers intended when they created the three branches of our government with all the checks and balances?

Breaking:Van Jones Resigns

Glenn Beck, take a bow.

The news came out Sunday morning, shortly after midnight.

Breaking News on Twitter reported: CNN: White House green jobs czar Van Jones resigns, blames lies and “vicious smear campaign” against him.

Yeah, yeah, yeah…cry me a river, commie.

MORE:

His Statement:

“I am resigning my post at the Council on Environmental Quality, effective today,” Jones said in a resignation letter released by the CEQ late Saturday.

“On the eve of historic fights for health care and clean energy, opponents of reform have mounted a vicious smear campaign against me. They are using lies and distortions to distract and divide,” he said.

“I have been inundated with calls — from across the political spectrum — urging me to ‘stay and fight,’” he continued. “But I came here to fight for others, not for myself. I cannot in good conscience ask my colleagues to expend precious time and energy defending or explaining my past. We need all hands on deck, fighting for the future.

“It has been a great honor to serve my country and my President in this capacity. I thank everyone who has offered support and encouragement. I am proud to have been able to make a contribution to the clean energy future. I will continue to do so, in the months and years ahead.”

Next!

A bold prediction:

In the coming days, right wing smear merchants will be accused of being racists.

The last thing the the hard left wants, is for the American people to know what all the fuss was all about. It’s much better for them to obfuscate, point and call names.

Hat tip: Hot Air Headlines

UPDATE:

Well, that didn’t take long:

Redstate: And just like clockwork, the Van Jones race baiting begins

No one should be surprised at this at all, for apparently it is impossible for conservatives and/or Republicans to oppose anyone who isn’t white without spawning accusations of racism.  As so many have written already in recent months, Obama’s so-called “post-racial” America is…not.  And folks, it isn’t the conservatives and the GOP who brought this on – it is the leftists who cry “RACISTS!” every time something doesn’t go their way.

Here’s a clue, race-baiters:  sometimes a person is just wrong, no matter what their melanin level, and that was clearly the case with Van Jones.  Furthermore, on the czar-hunting front, I personally believe the next one we need to expose is John Holdren, Obama’s “science czar.”  And guess what:  he’s white.

Van Jones Bus Watch

A classic Slublog SluShop

Uh oh, Jake Tapper is reporting:

Asked if controversial White House official Van Jones continues to enjoy the confidence of President Obama given recent revelations about his involvement with those who suggest the Bush administration knew about the 9/11 attacks and allowed them to happen in order to justify a war for oil, White House press secretary Robert Gibbs Friday morning would only say “he continues to work in this administration.”

Or as Ace says, “Present!”

DrewM’s a betting man: I’ve got Sunday night in the “When Will Van Jones Be Publicly Tossed Under The Bus?” pool.

William Teach weighs in with, “Not any time this year”;

as long as the majority of the media ignore who this wackjob is and what he believes. This admin seems to revel at having tax cheats and crazies working for them, and, heck, a good chunk of the Defeatocrat base are Twoofers.

I was thinking that  a Friday night news dump before a holiday weekend would be the ideal time, but what do I know?

UPDATE:

Michelle Malkin reports that some GOP Congresscritters are weighing in, (it’s about dang time):

Sen. Kit Bond urges congressional hearing on Mr. Jones; GOP Rep. Pence calls for resignation

The heat is on.

UPDATE II:

Fox New Poll:

Should Van Jones Keep His Job?

Results so far:

Yes. 3% (1,320 votes)

No. 97% (49,931 votes)

I’m not sure. <1% (139 votes) <Who are these people?!

Total Votes: 51,390

UPDATE:

The winneh!: Resigned Saturday night, reported shortly after midnight, Sunday morning.

MSM AWOL On Van Jones Story

Byron York reports on the Van Jones (non)feeding frenzy:

Total words about the Van Jones controversy in the New York Times: 0.
Total words about the Van Jones controversy in the Washington Post: 0.
Total words about the Van Jones controversy on NBC Nightly News: 0.
Total words about the Van Jones controversy on ABC World News: 0.
Total words about the Van Jones controversy on CBS Evening News: 0.

With the exception of Jake Tapper at ABC, most MSM news outlets are ignoring the story. Amazing, considering recent revelations about his background.

Former Reagan White House Aid, Jeffrey Lord, writing for The American Spectator, even supplied a list of questions they could be asking:

• Who on the White House staff cleared Van Jones?

• What was that person’s connection to Van Jones or Mr. Jones’s political sponsor?

• Who, exactly, was Mr. Jones’ sponsor for this job? How much money did he/she contribute to the Obama campaign?

• Did the Secret Service notify anyone on the White House staff — or the President or First Lady or Vice President Biden — that Mr. Jones had an arrest record on file with police in two cities?

• Did the Secret Service protest any of this, objecting to Mr. Jones’ clearance?

• If the Secret Service did object, who overruled them? The President? The Chief of Staff? Someone else?

• If the answer to this last question is yes, and the Secret Service was overruled by the President or someone else, why did this happen?

• The White House is a busy place. But there are always answers to questions like these.

If the MSM is willing to ask them, that is.

How many more stories are they going to allow conservative blogs, Fox News, and Glenn Beck to scoop them on?

Hat tip: Ace of Spades HQ