I hate to say us Republicans told you so, but as much as it pains me I will just come out and say it. We told you so.
People were tired of hearing about Barack Obama’s radical associations throughout the summer and fall. Some said, “What do Reverend Wright and Bill Ayers have to do with Barack Obama?” Republicans warned voters that when judging someone, it is fair to some degree to judge them by the company they keep.
It wasn’t that Obama knew the anti-American Reverend Wright or started his political career with Bill Ayers – a known terrorist – it was the fact that over and over, Obama was found to be connected with despicable members of our society. Many of you didn’t see it that way. In fact, many of you thought it was a joke that people were even talking about it. Obama even scoffed at John McCain during the third presidential debate for daring to bring it up. “I think the fact that this has become such an important part of your campaign, Senator McCain, says more about your campaign than it says about me,” He said.
Well keep on scoffing liberal know-it-all’s because it hasn’t even been a full year for the president and more radical associations are being exposed in the Obama administration by the day.
Just take a look at some of Obama’s closest advisors, his “czars” as they’ve come to be known. For those of you who don’t know about the czars, they are essentially advisors to Obama that manage various tasks such as the closure of the Guantanamo Bay detention facility or generating “green” jobs. By some estimates, Obama has as many as a few dozen “czars” who advise him.
But there is a major problem with these “czars.” First off, approximately two-thirds of them were not approved by Congress to take the positions granted to them by the president. Normal procedure for a secretary to claim his or her position requires a confirmation hearing from Congress. This is the time when Congress is able to examine the candidates’ resume and determine if they are qualified to take the position the administration has nominated them for.
But many of these “czars” have been able to skip over that process. They were never looked into by anyone except the people who allowed them into Obama’s inner circle – whomever those people happen to be. This, as you may imagine, is a recipe for disaster. But the fact that Obama’s administration is using devious and potentially unconstitutional moves to get people into government is probably the least of the administration’s problems at this point. That’s because it is obvious that some of these people advising the president of the United States are just straight up communists, socialists, 9/11 “truthers,” anti-capitalists or just any other form of flat-out radical.
Take, for instance, “green” jobs czar Van Jones, who was recently pressured into resigning. The man is an admitted communist. He is on tape earlier in the year calling republicans “assholes.” In 2004, he signed a petition supporting the “9/11 truther” movement, which suggested that the terrorist attacks of 9/11 on both the World Trade Center and the Pentagon were carried out not by terrorists, but by our own government.
This is astonishing. There are people dumb enough to believe the government is responsible for 9/11. It is incredible that someone that foolish is allowed to speak to, let alone advise, our president. Not to mention he is a self-admitted communist and he is advising the president on job creation. What’s next? Al Davis advising Bill Belichick on how to run a football franchise?
To me, this nonsense just raises a lot more questions. One of which, is why on earth is the president of the United States listening to a communist radical about anything at all? It’s insane, but it doesn’t stop with Van Jones.
John Holdren, the science “czar,” has proposed things in his book, “Ecoscience: Population, Resources, Environment” such as, “forced sterilization for women after they gave birth to a designated number of children,” and just good old fashion abortion as a method for “population control.”
I don’t remember Obama mentioning that at all during his campaign.
How about Carol Browner? According to Fox News’ Glenn Beck, she is the “global warming ‘czar,’” and was part of Socialist International.
Why is there a socialist advising the president?
Then there’s Ezekiel Emmanuel. According to Beck, he is a health care adviser that is a proponent of a system which puts values on lives based on age and health.
Basically, that’s a way of saying the government should be the ones determining who is fit for health care and who isn’t. Should these people be a part of health care reform?
These are just a few examples of Obama’s current startling associations. If Obama trusts and listens to them it is, at best, an extremely worrisome situation. Clearly, this is no longer a couple of random people in Obama’s life but instead a scary trend that makes it clear Obama wants these people around him. He must agree with their philosophies and ideas to some degree, otherwise why keep them around? It makes me wonder what Obama really envisions when he talks about “change” for America. But most of all, it just makes me wonder what people were thinking when they voted for him.
Alex Perry is a Collegian columnist. He can be reached at [email protected].
George • Oct 11, 2009 at 10:24 pm
Can’t we just keep it simple — Obama is not so bad… keep some pressure on him, but don’t accuse him of such crazy things.
Robert Davis • Oct 8, 2009 at 6:49 am
So far the list of people you hate are liberals, Socialists, Communists, and Democrats. It’s growing by the article. I will share a few quotes, comments, and ponderings.
I find your use of the phrase “liberal know-it-all” ironic in the way you are using it in an article where you say how you “knew-it-all” along. Of course when you talk about republicans it’s brilliance, but towards the “enemy” it’s some kind of insult.
I find it interesting that you use the word “Czars” as some kind of proof that Obama is a communist. I wonder who dubbed them the czars? Could it be the conservative right wingers who want to suggest he’s a communist? To me, and maybe this is just me, that lacks credibility.
“By some estimates, Obama has as many as a few dozen “czars” who advise him.” Oh boy, he listens to people. What a jerk!
“First off, approximately two-thirds of them were not approved by Congress to take the positions granted to them by the president.”
This is the type of accusation you site proof of. I know you like to throw out these Obama is a criminal, commy, destroyer of america rhetoric, but when you make a direct accusation, you need direct proof. Stop screaming at us about how conservative you are, and educate us with actual information.
“But many of these “czars” have been able to skip over that process. They were never looked into by anyone except the people who allowed them into Obama’s inner circle – whomever those people happen to be.”
Same thing… Please, please, attempt to source this information. All you do is say “he’s a jerk cuz he did this because I heard from someone that they are doing bad stuff.” Either find facts, find someone who found facts, or stop writing this kind of drivel.
“That’s because it is obvious that some of these people advising the president of the United States are just straight up communists, socialists, 9/11 “truthers,” anti-capitalists or just any other form of flat-out radical. ”
What’s wrong with being a communist? Do you think a communist can’t have any ideas what so ever? Do you think communists are stupid? Do you think all communists are from Mother Russia and here to take over our country? Same with Socialists. As for it being “obvious”, please sir, do explain. How is it obvious that these people are “straight up”…”any form of flat-out radical”. I think you need to learn what clarity is, because every time you claim that something is clear, what you mean is you’re deciding it is so, and so it is.
I will seperate the 9/11 “truthers”. They are probably wrong. I don’t believe it was the government, but you know what, thinking it was doesn’t make a person an idiot necessarily either. If the top most economist in the world with a nobel prize thinks was a “truther”, would that make his opinion invalid? You may not realize it, but you are coming off as quite the bigot, and a very hateful person.
“Take, for instance, “green” jobs czar Van Jones, who was recently pressured into resigning. The man is an admitted communist. He is on tape earlier in the year calling republicans “assholes.””
John Holdren, the science “czar,” has proposed things in his book, “Ecoscience: Population, Resources, Environment” such as, “forced sterilization for women after they gave birth to a designated number of children,” and just good old fashion abortion as a method for “population control.”
Oh boy, two whole example, when according to you there are dozens of them, and all are “flat-out radical”. As for the Holdren, he’s a scientist. He comes up with possible solutions. Does that mean he the President MUST take them? Does this mean that since many conservative advisers are dead set against homosexuality, and that they believe in the bible which says homosexuals should be killed, that George Bush wanted to kill homosexuals? People are allowed their own opinion. It is America. It’s called discourse.
I don’t really get why you mention Carol Browner who’s apparent only crime is being a Socialist which isn’t a crime. I can only imagine the kind of McCarthyian USA you wish you lived in, and it scares me.
“Then there’s Ezekiel Emmanuel. According to Beck, he is a health care adviser that is a proponent of a system which puts values on lives based on age and health.”
Stop quoting Glenn Beck. Show evidence. Show facts. Do some of the work yourself.
And really? Van Jones called republicans assholes?! That jerk! Let me quote a certain Alex Perry.
“liberal know-it-all” =>not nice
“conservatives are the only ones around with any actual common sense” => not nice
“big government dictatorship” => reference to hitler/stalin, not nice
Apparently, you should never be an adviser to anyone, unless it’s only insulting republicans which makes you a bad person.
“He must agree with their philosophies and ideas to some degree, otherwise why keep them around?”
Well let’s think about this for a second, and step out of the “I hate everything and everyone but myself and people like me” shoes.
While he doesn’t agree with every aspect of what these people think, some parts of many ideals, governments, and philosophies are good and worth thinking about. Many different people come up with many different ideas. It’s good to have many ideas, because then there is more debate, and more chance of formulating great ideas. The alternative is one person who just decides to do what they want. Or he could have 10 people who will just agree with everything he says. Of course I think what you’re saying is “why doesn’t he have conservative advisers only”, but that’s me putting words in your mouth and I apologize.
I get that you’re angry. I get that you’ve been taught to hate a lot of people. You need to calm down. You need to put down your pencil. You need to think, how am I coming off? You need to go to your find/change button, and switch everything that says Liberal to Conservative, then re-read it. Do you realize how much like a fanatic you sound? You don’t sound enlightened, you don’t sound educated, you don’t sound reliable. You sound like a crazy parrot, rehashing whatever you hear on conservative talk shows/radio/print.
George • Oct 1, 2009 at 10:50 am
Obama is doing great — he’s made some problems — Republicans should moderate instead of go extreme after losing the election…
Alex Perry • Sep 24, 2009 at 11:07 am
I see complaints about my column containing “wild claims” and “using Glenn Beck as a source of information,” so I figured I would respond.
I guess I will start with disproving the “wild claims” phrase, assuming you are referring to me saying Carol Browner is a socialist and member of socialist international.
“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.”
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/jan/12/obama-climate-czar-has-socialist-ties/”
“Carol Browner, Administrator of the United States Environmental Protection Agency under President Bill Clinton, Member of Socialist International Commission for a Sustainable World Society”
http://www.http://www.socialistinternational.org/viewArticle.cfm?
ArticlePageID=1272
That work? Cool.
Here’s how I’m going to back up my statement that Ezekial Emmanuel wants to put a health care system in place that puts a value on lives based on age and health:
“He explicitly defends discrimination against older patients: “Unlike allocation by sex or race, allocation by age is not invidious discrimination; every person lives through different life stages rather than being a single age. Even if 25-year-olds receive priority over 65-year-olds, everyone who is 65 years now was previously 25 years” (Lancet, Jan. 31).”
Deadly Doctors
Feel free to read any of the links above, get further educated on the subject matter at hand, and then get back to me.
This has nothing to do with Glenn Beck. I never quoted Glenn Beck. Glenn Beck has said these same things that i have said in this column. The reason for this is they are facts. I did not write “according to glenn beck” in my column submission. it was added in by my editor.
I am not a hypocrite for wanting private companies to be in charge of health care. I would be a hypocrite if i, as a conservative, wanted massive government expansion and wanted government to take over healthcare. Government, by all estimates, can’t even handle its current duties. It certainly has given no indication it can now properly solve our nation’s health care problems. Not to mention, as i wrote last week, our country doesn’t have the money to do it even if we wanted to.
Thanks for reading guys and gals.
“Now I’m done.” — Brady Quinn”
Alex Perry • Sep 22, 2009 at 10:20 pm
“Posts containing the phrases “wild claims” and “using Gleen Beck as a source of information” Where do I start?
fox news has nothing to do with this. that said Lolzmuch, your links have nothing to do with my column.
I guess I will start with disproving the “wild claims” phrase, assuming you are referring to me saying Carol Browner is a socialist and member of socialist international.
“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.”
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/jan/12/obama-climate-czar-has-socialist-ties/
“Carol Browner, Administrator of the United States Environmental Protection Agency under President Bill Clinton, Member of Socialist International Commission for a Sustainable World Society”
http://www.socialistinternational.org/viewArticle.cfm?ArticlePageID=1272
That work? Cool.
Lolzmuch • Sep 22, 2009 at 12:52 am
pwned much, eh alex old boy?
of course, we should TOTALLY take EVERYTHING Fox News says for truth, right?
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/
http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/bestoftv/2009/09/18/nr.sanchez.on.fox.news.cnn
portions of this comment were removed by editors
Michael Foley • Sep 21, 2009 at 10:25 pm
Using Glenn Beck as a source of information? Classic. What’s next, references to Rush Limbaugh’s books as authoritative scientific peer-reviewed information on global warming?
We already have people deciding who is worthy of health care and who isn’t – they’re called private insurance companies. If you support one while decrying the other, you are a hypocrite.
Oh, Republicans, never change. You are a constant source of mirth.
Sam • Sep 21, 2009 at 6:10 pm
Not only do I disagree with your wild claims that Obama’s administration is riddled with communists and socialists, but it only makes it hurt worse when your writing skills are sub-par at best.
First off, what is so wrong with being a Communist or a Socialist? Those are Constitutionally protected political parties (That means YOU, J. Edgar Hoover!) and simply by believing in Marxism doesn’t make you a terrorist or “un-American”, as you seem to believe.
In fact, I don’t even think you would know the difference between a true Socialist between one of Fox News’ “black list” liberal politicians, even if he was draped in a red flag and singing the La Marseillaise.
lol