Sunday, September 6, 2009

America's Small Victory


Fox news is reporting that Presidentally appointed "Green jobs" Czar Van Jones has resigned. If you remember, RB6 reported on Jones (who apparently had an R&B album out as well), who is an avowed Communist and hater of all things American, for calling Republicans "assholes".

Now, I know a lot of Republicans. In fact, many of them are assholes.

However this is not caused by the fact that they do not support the overtly Marxist policies of the current resident of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.
I am still at a loss as to what vetting process the Obama White House uses to pick these folks, perhaps drawing names out of a hat?

Jones' background was well known and reported on for years in the media, yet the President thought it would be OK to appoint him to a position that held sway over our fair Republic.

Think again, Comrade! If there is one thing that Conservatives in America can do, it's whine over something! Well, at least the whining didn't go to waste. Keep up the good work America and let's take out the trash in Washington, D.C.!!!

From FoxNews- White House green jobs adviser Van Jones resigned in the middle of the Labor Day weekend following persistent controversy over his past remarks and associations.

Jones, who served as an adviser to the White House Council on Environmental Quality, had generated mounting criticism over the past week. He earlier issued back-to-back apologies -- first, for calling Republicans "assholes" during a videotaped address earlier in the year, and second for signing a petition in 2004 supporting the "9/11 truther" movement, which believes the Bush administration may have been involved in the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks.

The latter development, which came on top of several others, was perhaps the most devastating and led to calls for his resignation.

Jones stepped down late Saturday.

In a sharply worded statement, Jones said the controversy had become an unceasing distraction and assailed his critics.

"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," Jones said.

He said he had been "inundated" with calls from supporters urging him to "stay and fight."

"But I came here to fight for others, not for myself," he said. "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."

Nancy Sutley, chairwoman of the council Jones had been advising, said in a statement that she accepted the resignation, which was effective immediately, and called him a "strong voice for creating 21st century jobs that improve energy efficiency and utilize renewable resources."

The White House had stayed relatively quiet about Jones as the controversy developed, leading to speculation that he was on the way out.

Asked about Jones Friday, White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs said only that he "continues to work in the administration."

Jones is considered a rising star in environmental circles. He wrote the New York Times bestseller "The Green Collar Economy" and has co-founded and worked with several groups dedicated to helping low-income and minority communities -- often through green jobs and better environmental policy. He got his start as a San Francisco-area activist.

But critics raised questions about his fitness for a White House-level office, pointing to his radical activities a decade ago as well as more recent controversial stances.

Jones was an self-described "communist" during the 1990s and previously worked with a group dedicated to Marxist and Leninist philosophies. His comments, even in recent years, were often racially charged. He's blamed "white polluters and white environmentalists" for "steering poison" to minority communities. In 2005, he drew a distinction between white and black youths involved in shooting incidents by referencing the 1999 Columbine High School massacre.

"You've never seen a Columbine done by a black child. Never," Jones said. "They always say, 'We can't believe it happened here. We can't believe it's these suburban white kids.' It's only them!" he said. "Now, a black kid might shoot another black kid. He's not going to shoot up the whole school."

But such statements did not draw widespread attention until after a February video surfaced showing him calling Republicans "assholes" during an address in Berkeley, Calif. Jones apologized, but faced down his past again when it was discovered that he signed a 2004 statement calling on then-New York Attorney General Eliot Spitzer and others to launch an investigation into evidence that suggests "people within the current administration may indeed have deliberately allowed 9/11 to happen, perhaps as a pretext for war."

Jones afterward issued a blanket apology for his past statements and said the petition does not reflect his views. An aide said Jones didn't carefully review the petition at the time.

But that claim was swiftly disputed by 911Truth.org. "He did agree with that statement and he did sign on to it," 911Truth.org spokesman Mike Berger told FOX News in a telephone interview from St. Louis on Friday. Berger said the group's "original board members individually confirmed all signatories that had signed on to the statement."

The calls for resignation mounted.

Rep. Mike Pence, R-Ind., became the first lawmaker to call on Jones to resign, issuing a press release calling for a moratorium on the hiring of additional "czars" until the vetting process in Jones' case could be properly investigated.

Sen. Kit Bond, R-Mo., demanded that the Senate Green Jobs and New Economy Subcommittee conduct hearings to probe Jones' behavior and "reassure the American people that their government is safe from his divisive, incendiary and ultimately counterproductive sentiments."

Thursday, September 3, 2009

First I'm an asshole, now I'm a racist?

So, Charles Rangel, dirty politician from New York has just called me a racist.

If I don't support Federally controlled and mandated Healthcare Reform, it is because I am biased and prejudiced against a black President.

Wow, I had no idea. Thanks, Charlie, for opening my lily white eyes to my personal racism.
Rep. Rangel is of course, dead wrong, about the feelings of Americans. His grasp of the groundswell of opposition to our government chronically overstepping it's bounds is simplistic, dismissive and incorrect. Of course there is racism in America. Of course there are people who hate President Obama because of the color of his skin. But, in truth, America has seen a new color since January.
And that color is RED. Red, as in Communism and Socialism. Red as in Karl Marx and V.I. Lenin. Red as in social engineering and government ownership of private industry. Americans are mad as hell about seeing red. Charles Rangel gets props from me for his service to our country, in the Korean War and in Congress, but RipperBravo6 gives him a big thumbs down for not looking past his own personal biases and understanding that Americans are angry and scared about what socialism as Federal policy is doing to their country.

From FoxNews:

First it was Gov. Paterson. Now the dean of New York's congressional delegation has played the race card -- and just as the governor did, he's using President Obama to do it, the New York Post reported.

Rep. Charles Rangel said Tuesday that "bias" and "prejudice" toward Obama are fueling opposition to health-care reform.

Those incendiary comments came on the heels of Paterson's controversial comments about race that also mentioned the nation's first black president.

"Some Americans have not gotten over the fact that Obama is president of the United States. They go to sleep wondering, 'How did this happen?' " Rangel (D-Manhattan) said Tuesday.

Speaking at a health-care forum in Washington Heights, Rangel said that when critics complain that Obama is "trying to interfere" with their lives by pushing for health-care reform, "then you know there's just a misunderstanding, a bias, a prejudice, an emotional feeling."

"We're going to have to move forward notwithstanding that," said Rangel, the powerful chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee and a chief health-care negotiator.
Rangel then likened the battle over health-care expansion for the uninsured to the fight for civil rights.

"Why do we have to wait for the right to vote? Why can't we get what God has given us? That is the right to live as human beings and not negotiate with white southerners and not count the votes. Just do the right thing," he said.

And I meant what I said about Rangel being dirty. Here is what that bastion of truth, Wikipedia had to say:

On September 24, 2008, the House Ethics Committee announced an investigation into Rangel's alleged failure to report thousands of dollars in rental income or pay taxes on his beachfront villa in the posh resort in Punta Cana, Dominican Republic, allegedly living in multiple rent-subsidized apartments in New York City while claiming his Washington, D.C. home as his primary residence for tax purposes, alleged use of congressional stationery to solicit donors for a public policy institute in his name at City College, and other alleged questionable activities.[2]

Wednesday, September 2, 2009

Jefferson says...


"To compel a man to furnish funds for the propagation of ideas he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical. "

Call me an Asshole one more time...


So, someone else at the White House doesn’t like Americans standing up against the Obama Administration. “Green Czar” Van Jones called the Republican politicians who are attempting to slow or stop the injection of Socialism into our country “assholes”.

From FoxNews: Van Jones, the Obama administration's "green jobs" adviser, told a group of listeners earlier in the year that the reason Republicans are stonewalling the president is because they're "assholes."
Jones' remarks were recorded in a video from February that was posted to YouTube.
He made the remark during an energy lecture in Berkeley, Calif., after a woman in the audience asked him why President Obama and congressional Democrats were having trouble moving legislation -- even though Republicans, with a smaller majority, didn't have as much trouble earlier in the Bush administration.
"Well, the answer to that is, they're assholes," Jones said, to uproarious laughter. "That's a technical, political science term."

Now I am not one to argue with a Yale education, but I doubt if this is a true political science term.

The questioner responded, "I was afraid that that was the answer."

A woman from Berkeley agreed with him? I can almost smell the Patchouli oil, B.O and weed residue from here. It amazes me that there are parts of America so far removed from what our country stands for that they might as well be on another planet.

But Jones said that, even though Obama is "not an asshole," others have to step up the fight.
"Now, I will say this. I can be an asshole, and some of us who are not Barack Hussein Obama are going to have to start getting a little bit uppity," he said.

Is “uppity” code for starting the Peoples Revolution? It must be, because Van Jones is a Communist. What? You didn’t see that on CNN? Well, here is an excerpt from the last bastion of truth in America.

From Wikipedia: Early activism
In 1992, while still a law student at Yale, Jones participated as a volunteer legal monitor for a protest of the Rodney King verdict in San Francisco. He and many other participants in the protest were arrested. The district attorney later dropped the charges against Jones. The arrested protesters, including Jones, won a small legal settlement. Jones later said that "the incident deepened my disaffection with the system and accelerated my political radicalization."[9] His outrage over the verdict radicalized him: Jones said he was "a rowdy nationalist"[10] before the King verdict was announced. By August of that year, he said, "I was a communist."[10] Former employer Eva Paterson counseled him to rethink his tactics and to work for change in wiser ways. "In time, he jettisoned his youthful notions and moved on to seek more effective and attainable solutions," Paterson says.[11] Jones's activism was also spurred on by witnessing racial inequality in New Haven: “I was seeing kids at Yale do drugs and talk about it openly, and have nothing happen to them or, if anything, get sent to rehab...And then I was seeing kids three blocks away, in the housing projects, doing the same drugs, in smaller amounts, go to prison.”[8]
When he graduated law school, Jones gave up plans to take a job in Washington, D.C., and moved to San Francisco instead.[10] He got involved with Standing Together to Organize a Revolutionary Movement (STORM), a group explicitly committed to revolutionary Marxist politics[12] whose points of unity were revolutionary democracy, revolutionary feminism, revolutionary internationalism, the central role of the working class, urban Marxism, and Third World Communism.[13] While with STORM, Jones actively began protesting police brutality.[10]

Thank you American’s Higher Education system. Breeding ground of the Red Menace. McCarthy was wrong to target Hollywood, he should have hit the Ivy League instead.

Well, fellow Americans, is that what we are now reduced to? Because we dissent, because we don’t proscribe to Marxism, because we want moral government, fiscal responsibility and personal freedom, we are assholes?

I for one am proud to be an asshole. I join a long line of assholes including Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Payne, Sam Adams and John Hancock, who King George of England once referred to as “that bunch of Colonial assholes”.
Call me names if you wish, but just remember what that asshole Jefferson said: “The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.”

What an asshole.

Thursday, August 27, 2009

Network Censorship? In America? Unthinkable.


A non-profit group "The League of American Voters" is alleging that corporate giants NBC and ABC are practicing censorship because they refuse to run an anti-healthcare reform ad on the national level. I beg to differ. Both ABC and NBC are privately owned companies (Disney owns ABC and General Electric owns NBC) and have the right to refuse any advertising, on any grounds, as they see fit. This is the wonderful power of privately owned communications companies. Dick Morris, talking head for the LAV gave the following whiny quote;
"It's the ultimate act of chutzpah because ABC is the network that turned itself over completely to Obama for a daylong propaganda fest about health care reform," he said. "For them to be pious and say they will not accept advertising on health care shuts their viewers out from any possible understanding of both sides of this issue."
So, I am confused. The League of American Voters is against health care reform, right? That was the gist of their "censored" ad. How exactly are they helping folks in America understand "both" sides of the issue? I find it a little naieve on the part of Dick Morris, and the LAV, to think that their message would be welcome on such liberal, left wing mouth pieces as ABC and NBC anyway. Sounds like the Right thinks whining is the best way to get their message out. Nice work guys, your great PR machine is part of the reason America is in this predicament anyway. America grows weary of partisan politics.
From FoxNews:
The refusal by ABC and NBC to run a national ad critical of President Obama's health care reform plan is raising questions from the group behind the spot -- particularly in light of ABC's health care special aired in prime time last June and hosted at the White House.
The 33-second ad by the League of American Voters, which features a neurosurgeon who warns that a government-run health care system will lead to the rationing of procedures and medicine, began airing two weeks ago on local affiliates of ABC, NBC, FOX and CBS. On a national level, however, ABC and NBC have refused to run the spot in its present form.
"It's a powerful ad," said Bob Adams, executive director of the League of American Voters, a national nonprofit group with 15,000 members who advocate individual liberty and government accountability. "It tells the truth and it really highlights one of the biggest vulnerabilities and problems with this proposed legislation, which is it rations health care and disproportionately will decimate the quality of health care for seniors."
Adams said the advertisement is running on local network affiliates in states like Louisiana, Arkansas, Maine and Pennsylvania. But although CBS has approved the ad for national distribution and talks are ongoing with FOX, NBC has questioned some of the ad's facts while ABC has labeled it "partisan."
"The ABC Television Network has a long-standing policy that we do not sell time for advertising that presents a partisan position on a controversial public issue," spokeswoman Susan Sewell said in a written statement. "Just to be clear, this is a policy for the entire network, not just ABC News."
NBC, meanwhile, said it has not turned down the ad and will reconsider it with some revisions.
"We have not rejected the ad," spokeswoman Liz Fischer told FOXNews.com. "We have communicated with the media agency about some factual claims that require additional substantiation. As always, we are happy to reconsider the ad once these issues are addressed."
Adams objects to ABC's assertion that his group's position is partisan.
"It's a position that we would argue a vast majority of Americans stand behind," he said. "Obviously, it's a message that ABC and the Obama administration haven't received yet."
Dick Morris, a FOX News political analyst and the League of American Voters' chief strategist, conceptualized the advertisement and said its purpose was to "refocus" the debate on health care reform.
"I feel the whole debate on health care reform needed to be refocused on the issue of Medicare," he told FOXNews.com. "Most of the debate had been on issues of socialized medicine and cost. I felt that the impact of the legislation in cutting the Medicare program and enforcing rationing needed to be addressed."
Morris, a onetime advisor to former President Bill Clinton, said he was particularly troubled by ABC's decision not to air the spot.
"It's the ultimate act of chutzpah because ABC is the network that turned itself over completely to Obama for a daylong propaganda fest about health care reform," he said. "For them to be pious and say they will not accept advertising on health care shuts their viewers out from any possible understanding of both sides of this issue."

Saturday, August 15, 2009

More posts to follow...



Fear not fellow travelers, RipperBravo6 has not forsaken you. He has merely taken a small hiatus to work on other projects. Our country is changing, and not for the better, and RB6 wants to talk about it. Look forward to more posts in the upcoming weeks.

And remember the lesson the Sam Adams, Thomas Paine and Thomas Jefferson taught us:

THERE IS NOTHING MORE AMERICAN THAN DISSENT!!!!!!!

Sunday, July 5, 2009

You guys are going to let Joe Biden talk about Foreign Policy?



Perfect. Just freakin’ perfect. Once again, great news from our nation’s capitol, delivered by the “brains” of the Obama administration, VP Joe Biden.
For years, the US has meddled in the foreign affairs of other countries. Normally I abhor this “nation building” approach, as it normally means usurping the natural growth of a countries form of government. That, and it makes us look more like the ass-holish puppet masters that the world wants to believe we are.

However, there is one area that I can almost agreed with our meddling, and that is in the restraint we force upon the state of Israel. Don’t get me wrong, I totally support Israels right to defend herself. I get a little misty-eyed thinking about her brave soldiers, sailors and airmen fighting off despotic Arab invaders in 1948, 1967 and 1973. The Arab nations that have attacked Israel have gotten what they deserved.
But things have changed in the world. The spectre of International Terrorism has made the possibility of a strike anywhere in the world become a stark reality. I don’t want to see Iran become a nuclear power and I agree that Israel has the most to risk if it does. But in the world today, the only difference between the USA and Israel to an Arab OR a Muslim is that the US is over here, and the Israelis live next door. To strike at either is the dream of every two-bit psychopathic Islamo-Fascist.

Now, the current administration is saying “Go ahead, do what you want, we could care less”. We have too much to risk to allow Israel to attack Iran unprovoked. Iran would surely use their limited nuclear arsenal to first destroy Israel, then try and find a way to export that nuclear material to a group who would be willing and able to strike inside the US.
Normally I am a proponent of destroying tyrannical dictatorships that hate America, but I just think we should encourage the Israelis to consider all the options before a preemptive strike. This is the same isolationist spirit, which comes from facing a huge problem at home (the economy) that served to blind us during the Great Dperession. Our disengagement with both friends and enemies (Israel and North Korea for example) allows things to occur in the world that can come back to bite us in a most horrible way. Just my 2 cents worth.
From FoxNews-
WASHINGTON -- Vice President Joe Biden seemed to give Israel a green light for military action to eliminate Iran's nuclear threat, saying the U.S. "cannot dictate to another sovereign nation what they can and cannot do."
Israel considers Iran its most dangerous adversary and is wary of hard-line Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who just won a disputed re-election. He repeatedly has called for Israel to be wiped off the map and contends the Holocaust is a "myth."
Israel and the U.S. accuse Iran of seeking to develop weapons under the cover of a nuclear power program. Iran denies that.
"Israel can determine for itself -- it's a sovereign nation -- what's in their interest and what they decide to do relative to Iran and anyone else," Biden told ABC's "This Week" in an interview broadcast Sunday.
"Whether we agree or not. They're entitled to do that. Any sovereign nation is entitled to do that. But there is no pressure from any nation that's going to alter our behavior as to how to proceed," Biden said.
The government of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu says it prefers to see Iran's nuclear program stopped through diplomacy but has not ruled out a military strike.
"If the Netanyahu government decides to take a course of action different than the one being pursued now, that is their sovereign right to do that. That is not our choice," Biden said.
Asked about Biden's comments, Adm. Mike Mullen, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said Sunday the U.S. position on Iran and a military strike involves a "political decision."
"I have been, for some time, concerned about any strike on Iran. I worry about it being very destabilizing, not just in and of itself but unintended consequences of a strike like that," Mullen said on CBS' "Face the Nation."
"At the same time, I'm one that thinks Iran should not have nuclear weapons. I think that is very destabilizing," he said.
While most experts are in agreement that there's a good chance Iran could have a usable nuclear bomb sometime during his presidency, President Barack Obama told The Associated Press in an interview Thursday, "I'm not reconciled with that."
A nuclear-armed Iran, Obama said, probably would lead to an arms race in the volatile Mideast and that would be "a recipe for potential disaster." He said opposing a nuclear weapons capacity for Iran was more than just "a U.S. position" and that "the biggest concern is not simply that Iran can threaten us or our allies, like Israel or its neighbors."
Israel is also concerned about Iran's close support for two of its most committed enemies, Hezbollah guerrillas in Lebanon and Hamas militants in the Gaza Strip.
Obama said in May, after his first meeting with Netanyahu at the White House, that the Iranians had until year's end to get serious about international talks on curbing their nuclear ambitions. "We're not going to have talks forever," he said.
But Obama sees movement on Israeli-Palestinian peace as key to building a moderate Arab coalition against Iran, while Netanyahu says dealing with the Iranian threat must take precedence over peacemaking with the Palestinians.
Most experts believe that wiping out the Iranian nuclear program is beyond the ability of Israel's military. In 1982 the Israeli air force destroyed Iraq's nuclear reactor in a lightning strike. But Iran's facilities are scattered around the country, some of them underground.
Biden was asked in the interview that if the Israelis decide they need to try to take out Iran's nuclear program, would the U.S. stand in the way militarily?
"We cannot dictate to another sovereign nation what they can and cannot do," the vice president replied. "Israel has a right to determine what's in its interests, and we have a right and we will determine what's in our interests."