Anita Dunn...

[uptownlivin90]

Exactly. We shouldn't apply such standards to people working in the WH. Only those who want to be part owner in the NFL.

Where'd I say that Rush Limbaugh shouldn't have been an owner of the NFL or that I cared whether or not he would be one? Nice dodge.

What am I dodging?? I'm just pointing out the double standard.

The double standard in what? Because I never said anything about Rush Limbaugh. I'm a pretty big 1st and 2nd amendment person... but I haven't followed the Limbaugh story much. Of course it's his right to be a partial-owner in the NFL, as long as he's qualified.

 

[Sherry]

Where'd I say that Rush Limbaugh shouldn't have been an owner of the NFL or that I cared whether or not he would be one? Nice dodge.

What am I dodging?? I'm just pointing out the double standard.

The double standard in what? Because I never said anything about Rush Limbaugh. I'm a pretty big 1st and 2nd amendment person... but I haven't followed the Limbaugh story much. Of course it's his right to be a partial-owner in the NFL, as long as he's qualified.

Calm down, Francis. I didn't say YOUR double standard.

 

[Ame®icano]

So far every thing I have seen against Jennings is a lie. Hannity lies. You are correct, pick your battles carefully.

I rarely watch Hannity, so it would help me if you precise what exactly he lied about?

This one is my favorite...
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sc4l4pBTDm8]YouTube - Sean Hannity Lies and Distorts Obama's Comment Regarding Insurance Execs[/ame]

I mean how do you lie about something someone says when its on a video you play on your own show three seconds later?

The funnier version of this would be:
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IalNDTTtk2U&feature=related"]Sean Hannity-Busted![/ame]

"It makes it easier for insurance companies to treat their customers badly."

"The truth, executives don't do that because they're bad people...."

Not defending Hannity, but Obama said it bot ways.

 

[uptownlivin90]

I rarely watch Hannity, so it would help me if you precise what exactly he lied about?

This one is my favorite...
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sc4l4pBTDm8]YouTube - Sean Hannity Lies and Distorts Obama's Comment Regarding Insurance Execs[/ame]

I mean how do you lie about something someone says when its on a video you play on your own show three seconds later?

The funnier version of this would be:
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IalNDTTtk2U&feature=related"]Sean Hannity-Busted![/ame]

"It makes it easier for insurance companies to treat their customers badly."

"The truth, executives don't do that because they're bad people...."

Not defending Hannity, but Obama said it bot ways.

Not neccesarily. You can treat somebody badly without having bad intentions or being a bad person or even knowing that your treating them badly. What Obama was saying is that these people aren't giving their customers the fair end of the deal which is treating them badly, but I guess not realizing the extent to which they harm their customers. I don't buy that at all, but I guess if Obama thinks that their not bad people he's entitled to his opinion.

 

[Wicked Jester]

Here's two prime examples of Mao loving Anita Dunne:
Click on the top example first, as soon as beck points to the baord, click on the bottom example.
You'll see what I mean!
[ame]www.youtube.com/watch?v=CXJjoruQs0Y[/ame]
[ame]www.youtube.com/watch?v=Knq3vvH4dTo[/ame]

 

[Fatality]

Who is Jennings?

hes the one who has sex wiht children

The perfect example of a Fox viewer. Nicely done sir.

standing up for your pedophile love interest

 

[Ame®icano]

This one is my favorite...
YouTube - Sean Hannity Lies and Distorts Obama's Comment Regarding Insurance Execs

I mean how do you lie about something someone says when its on a video you play on your own show three seconds later?

The funnier version of this would be:
Sean Hannity-Busted!

"It makes it easier for insurance companies to treat their customers badly."

"The truth, executives don't do that because they're bad people...."

Not defending Hannity, but Obama said it bot ways.

Not neccesarily. You can treat somebody badly without having bad intentions or being a bad person or even knowing that your treating them badly. What Obama was saying is that these people aren't giving their customers the fair end of the deal which is treating them badly, but I guess not realizing the extent to which they harm their customers. I don't buy that at all, but I guess if Obama thinks that their not bad people he's entitled to his opinion.

If one treat another badly, he's bad person.

You say - not neccesarily.

I say - most likely.

See the difference?

 

[Ame®icano]

Sure I'd agree. If she likes Mao she should tell us and go about doing her job. Sounds absolutely fair. My point is nobody should be put in a position to have to disclose or defend their personal beliefs in order to keep their 9 to 5. This is America, or atleast... it was.

Do you think she would still have a job if she said Hitler instead of Mao?

My point here is, why would anyone be able to lionize Mao, noted leading murderer in the 20th Century, when a similar statement regarding Hitler is a certain career killer?

It suggests in unarguable language that admiration for commie mass murderers is just fine with this administration, and while not explicitly stated, might be a requirement. With all those names surrounding Obama in the WH, I wouldn't be surprised if it was. No previous administration so easily accepts the communist ideology as Obama and his cadre.

 

[mudwhistle]

Jake Tapper tweeted about the video and now Dunn is claiming that she was "joking".

It is remarkable the defense of this woman - she gives a pro Mao speech at a high school commencement ceremony.

And she is a top official/advisor in the White House - and a top advisor during his campaign. She ranks right below the architect David Axelrod. Anyone attempting to state she has no direct influence on Obama is outright lying.

ONCE AGAIN, we must ask why Obama surrounds himself with such people.

How many others are supportive of figures such as Mao - complete statists who controlled all facets of government and the daily lives of their people?

What is going on with this White House?

It's pretty much a a takeover of our government in the middle of two wars by enemies of the state.

Makes me wonder why we allow people like this to run for POTUS without having to pass a patriotism test and a background check. If you can't get a security clearance you shouldn't be allowed to run for POTUS.

 

[Barb]

Yeup let's do a purge of people based on political ideology. How American is that. You like mao, can't be a PR guy for the white house. What's next? Who's next? Like Hitler can't work here. Neo-Nazis need not apply. No. This is rediculous. If their qualified for the job, give them the damn job. If they've proven they can work in an office environment without being disruptive I don't care if they worship Stalin's left foot... you give them the job. Damn fake-me-out conservatives these days. You people do not love America or stand for freedom. You stand for a nation built on political partisanship and discrimination. Glenn Beck is everything America is AGAINST.

Honestly, she should have known better. For one, the political climate is not one in which subtlety is understood, much less appreciated. For another, Mao really was batshit crazy, so the blinkered criticism has some limited credibility. Limited cred is all it ever took, today it is almost superfluous. If she is on her way out, it is probably just as well.

Nope. Doesn't hold water bruh. Let's look at the precedent here. Let's say Anita get's straight up fired for being a Maoist (number one her husband's a lawyer and if I were her I'd sue Obama's ass off) which this video does not even prove that she is AT ALL, that sets this nation up for something. Let's say your a neo-nazi with four children, you've got a nice office job, follow all the rules, work with whoever you need to and don't AT ALL interject your personal beliefs regarding white supremecy (that's a stretch for most but let's assume). Your caught on video at a neo-nazi rally. Should you be terminated from your job because you have a wack-job ideology? Do we believe in the first amendment in this nation or only when it protects our own political ideologies?

Your pre reqs for the Nazi don't match up with the title Ms. Dunn made her public statements under. It is a political position, and the problems related to this are political in nature. Her job is to promote the policies of the president, not to give the administration a black eye. And much like any political position, I don't think she'd get fired outright, she'd be eased out, found another job, given the opportunity to try new things in the public sector, or spend more time with her family.

The thing is, it wouldn't have been so bad if she said Marx was one of the political philosophers she "turns to most,” as most on the left understand the vast difference between Marx' philosophy and what Mao made of it. It isn't that we're still (at least half of us aren') looking for the red under the bed. Hell, I'd go for some mix between capitalism and socialism myself. It's that it was a stupid, stupid, stupid statement to make given the political climate her boss and his administration has to work under, and what Mao was actually about and responsible for.

 

[uptownlivin90]

Do you think she would still have a job if she said Hitler instead of Mao?

No. Quite frankly I don't. That doesn't have anything to do with the principle itself it's just that though Hitler (as fucked up as this is going to sound) only killed 12 to 14 million people in the highest estimates I've seen. This is because Hitler is sort of the known center piece for genocide awareness worldwide, AND the massive Jewish influence on the American media plays a part in this as well. Mao is not as well known as hitler in the US except for amongst the more educated individuals, those who have gone to college and studied different philosophies and lines of thought and therefore the statement holds alot less baggage.

That brings up another point that those who are college educated especially those educated in higher level schools have a much larger tolerance level for statements about Mao, Lenin, Trotsky, etc because these individuals and others are studied indepth in the curriculum. Which is why I don't think she's a Maoist, but she simply studied Mao and finds him interesting. IDK if I'm overanalyzing but I can't help to wonder why a Maoist would openly support Maoism at a graduation at a Roman Catholic High School. I could SEE if this was a venue like a California Green Party local convention, but it's not. From what I saw it looks to me like dry college-educated irony. I think it would be dumb to say if you are planning on a career in politics, but as a political strategist (or a media political hype man) not so much. She was trying to create a rhetorical a parallel between Mao and Mother Teresa. The students seemed to be educated enough literary strategy to get it, and we have to remember she's a communications director, this woman is skilled in the art of literature, english, writing. She may have used a parallel that in the context made sense but if viewed in light of her being an important person in white house staff may raise eyebrows.

It suggests in unarguable language that admiration for commie mass murderers is just fine with this administration, and while not explicitly stated, might be a requirement.

Clearly not so. Barack Obama is not a radical communist or black nationalist. But I've said this before and I'll say it again I did not believe in 2008 that this nation was mature enough to handle Barack Obama as President of the United States. I'm being proven right time and time again. Van Jones is an example of this, and I'm going to say this in the most respectful and least condescending way possible. The election of the first black president brings with it a serious hallmark, the entrance of African Americans into the mainstream political arena of the United States.

Now within the African American community moreso then within any other minority community there have been drastic changes over the past few years. Integration has begun after 40 years of stalling to take full hold, African Americans are more and more leaving the inner cities and moving into the suburbs. You have large suburbian communities such as Prince George's County outside of DC, baldwin Hills outside of LA, Lithonia outside of ATL that are predominetly African American. African Americans have historically been influence in only two classes in America the lower and the upper, now we've entered the middle. 1/4 of the black workforce is in some form middle management.

Now the President brings with him a new discussion and new reality, because there is a small element of African American society, like within all minorities of radical black nationalists that still exist. They are like most radical movements (including white supremecists) amongst the poor and the poverty rate amongst African Americans is 36.7% so, that's a small minority of a small minority. There was a larger element of radicalism during three crucial periods in our nation's history, the 1920s (when Marcus Garvey led the back to Africa movement), the 1960s (black panther party, Black Liberation Army), and the early 1990s. There are alot of people that lived during these times there were radicalized. During the 60s this was especially so, this was during the time when segregation was ending in the south and horrible autrocities were being commited by police against African Americans and other civil rights leaders. Not a great time in US history.

This is the era President Obama was in college during. Alot of these individuals who were radicalized decided rather then to use violence they were going to get educated and be social activists and lawyers so on and so forth. These individuals and others abandoned their more radical ideas which they followed in their youths to make positive change are a crucial part of the African American community. These are the black community's intellectual class, many of them educated in Ivy League schools. President Obama is not a black communist however he has like any other person works within the inner city that includes mayors, council workers, even governors of states like New York and Illinois have had to work with people who at one point in their lives were radicals.

This is the main problem that occurs during the process of full integration distrust. Van jones at one point was a communist. Does this mean that the Communist Party USA is using him to form some sort of mass conspiracy? No. It means that he was appointed to a position to do a specific job in the white house because the white house feel's he's the best guy to do it, becuase of his expertise on greens jobs and his advocacy for it. Glenn Beck's theory is supported by a chalk board on which he puts people's faces next to each other and says there see they're all connected... and therefore all communists. The same way they tried to tie Governor Rendell to Farrakhan. There is no documentation there are no statements made, no witnesses just Glenn Beck and his chalk board. My question is what evidence is there that the Obama Adminsitration has been collaberating with the Communist Party in any way shape or form in order to form policy based on the Communist Party USA's platform. When I see that I'll believe it. Until then it's hyperbole and it completely misses the point.

The Communist Party has zero direct influence over public policy. The Green Party probably has more leverage and that's pretty damn sad. Like I said just because there might be a communist or two working in the SEIU or the ACLU for that matter does not mean that the organizations are working for the communist party. Just like just because someone in the NRA may be from one of those extremist state separatist militias doesn't mean that the NRA works for them. This nation has to come to place of maturity where this Glenn Beck stuff isn't just listen to and don't just sit back and make up conspiracy theories because we see people's faces next to each other on chalk boards. My biggest fear is that this new level of integration has caused a back lash of misinformation thanks to the Beckites of this world, even Alex Jones has expressed serious concern about Beck. He is unneccesarily divisive.

 

[uptownlivin90]

Jake Tapper tweeted about the video and now Dunn is claiming that she was "joking".

It is remarkable the defense of this woman - she gives a pro Mao speech at a high school commencement ceremony.

And she is a top official/advisor in the White House - and a top advisor during his campaign. She ranks right below the architect David Axelrod. Anyone attempting to state she has no direct influence on Obama is outright lying.

ONCE AGAIN, we must ask why Obama surrounds himself with such people.

How many others are supportive of figures such as Mao - complete statists who controlled all facets of government and the daily lives of their people?

What is going on with this White House?

It's pretty much a a takeover of our government in the middle of two wars by enemies of the state.

Makes me wonder why we allow people like this to run for POTUS without having to pass a patriotism test and a background check. If you can't get a security clearance you shouldn't be allowed to run for POTUS.

On another social networking website, a guy said something to me that struck me as frightening, and I tend concur with his conclusion. The American view of "patriotism" is a highly germanized view which maintains that you cannot critize the policies or actions of your nation's government, and he says that this is something that originated out of Nazi Germany and was the force behind German fascism. Fascism by definition is:

A system of government that promotes extreme nationalism, repression, anticommunism, and is ruled by a dictator.
regentsprep.org/Regents/global/vocab/topic_alpha.cfm

It's largest component is not neccesarily to comply completely with the leadership and does not neccesarily require a cult of personality it can thirve with a serious sense of nationalism, an "us against you" mentality. Where people are not allowed to say things or criticize the state. You are either "anti-us" or "pro-us". People who criticize the state are against it. Those who do not are for it. It scares me to here Congresspeople like Michelle Bachman who on live television demanded a probe of "anti-American" politicians. It seems to be the center-right that pushes this the most. Libertarians, especially northern ones, tend not do so because they stick to the constitution (1st Amendment rights). It's an interesting theory...

 

[chanel]

What poitive changes have the black radical intellectuals made in their communities? Be specific please.

 

[uptownlivin90]

What poitive changes have the black radical intellectuals made in their communities? Be specific please.

Depends on who exactly your talking about. Those who left the black radical movement to persue meaningful endeavors and became lawyers, mayors, professors have become positive leaders within the community. Robert Trivers for instance is a known famous socio-biologist one of the most influencial in the World. Chaka Khan famous music artist who's sung at both Democratic and Republic conventions is a former Black Panther member she has helped countless organizations raise money for various charitable causes and is VERY influence in mainstream music and media, multi-grammy award winner. Cornel West (author, writer), Michael Baisden (journalist), Tavis Smiley (journalist), Melissa Harris-Lacewell (social psycologist), Kenneth Irvine Chenault (CEO business consultant)... the list goes on and on.

 

[uptownlivin90]

Say all that to say this, there are and have been people of all races who have been radicalized or apart of these radical groups especially young intellectuals on college campuses who have left them and become not only positive forces within society but very prominent ones.

 

[Barb]

Do you think she would still have a job if she said Hitler instead of Mao?

No. Quite frankly I don't. That doesn't have anything to do with the principle itself it's just that though Hitler (as fucked up as this is going to sound) only killed 12 to 14 million people in the highest estimates I've seen. This is because Hitler is sort of the known center piece for genocide awareness worldwide, AND the massive Jewish influence on the American media plays a part in this as well. Mao is not as well known as hitler in the US except for amongst the more educated individuals, those who have gone to college and studied different philosophies and lines of thought and therefore the statement holds alot less baggage.

That brings up another point that those who are college educated especially those educated in higher level schools have a much larger tolerance level for statements about Mao, Lenin, Trotsky, etc because these individuals and others are studied indepth in the curriculum. Which is why I don't think she's a Maoist, but she simply studied Mao and finds him interesting. IDK if I'm overanalyzing but I can't help to wonder why a Maoist would openly support Maoism at a graduation at a Roman Catholic High School. I could SEE if this was a venue like a California Green Party local convention, but it's not. From what I saw it looks to me like dry college-educated irony. I think it would be dumb to say if you are planning on a career in politics, but as a political strategist (or a media political hype man) not so much. She was trying to create a rhetorical a parallel between Mao and Mother Teresa. The students seemed to be educated enough literary strategy to get it, and we have to remember she's a communications director, this woman is skilled in the art of literature, english, writing. She may have used a parallel that in the context made sense but if viewed in light of her being an important person in white house staff may raise eyebrows.

It suggests in unarguable language that admiration for commie mass murderers is just fine with this administration, and while not explicitly stated, might be a requirement.

Clearly not so. Barack Obama is not a radical communist or black nationalist. But I've said this before and I'll say it again I did not believe in 2008 that this nation was mature enough to handle Barack Obama as President of the United States. I'm being proven right time and time again. Van Jones is an example of this, and I'm going to say this in the most respectful and least condescending way possible. The election of the first black president brings with it a serious hallmark, the entrance of African Americans into the mainstream political arena of the United States.

Now within the African American community moreso then within any other minority community there have been drastic changes over the past few years. Integration has begun after 40 years of stalling to take full hold, African Americans are more and more leaving the inner cities and moving into the suburbs. You have large suburbian communities such as Prince George's County outside of DC, baldwin Hills outside of LA, Lithonia outside of ATL that are predominetly African American. African Americans have historically been influence in only two classes in America the lower and the upper, now we've entered the middle. 1/4 of the black workforce is in some form middle management.

Now the President brings with him a new discussion and new reality, because there is a small element of African American society, like within all minorities of radical black nationalists that still exist. They are like most radical movements (including white supremecists) amongst the poor and the poverty rate amongst African Americans is 36.7% so, that's a small minority of a small minority. There was a larger element of radicalism during three crucial periods in our nation's history, the 1920s (when Marcus Garvey led the back to Africa movement), the 1960s (black panther party, Black Liberation Army), and the early 1990s. There are alot of people that lived during these times there were radicalized. During the 60s this was especially so, this was during the time when segregation was ending in the south and horrible autrocities were being commited by police against African Americans and other civil rights leaders. Not a great time in US history.

This is the era President Obama was in college during. Alot of these individuals who were radicalized decided rather then to use violence they were going to get educated and be social activists and lawyers so on and so forth. These individuals and others abandoned their more radical ideas which they followed in their youths to make positive change are a crucial part of the African American community. These are the black community's intellectual class, many of them educated in Ivy League schools. President Obama is not a black communist however he has like any other person works within the inner city that includes mayors, council workers, even governors of states like New York and Illinois have had to work with people who at one point in their lives were radicals.

This is the main problem that occurs during the process of full integration distrust. Van jones at one point was a communist. Does this mean that the Communist Party USA is using him to form some sort of mass conspiracy? No. It means that he was appointed to a position to do a specific job in the white house because the white house feel's he's the best guy to do it, becuase of his expertise on greens jobs and his advocacy for it. Glenn Beck's theory is supported by a chalk board on which he puts people's faces next to each other and says there see they're all connected... and therefore all communists. The same way they tried to tie Governor Rendell to Farrakhan. There is no documentation there are no statements made, no witnesses just Glenn Beck and his chalk board. My question is what evidence is there that the Obama Adminsitration has been collaberating with the Communist Party in any way shape or form in order to form policy based on the Communist Party USA's platform. When I see that I'll believe it. Until then it's hyperbole and it completely misses the point.

The Communist Party has zero direct influence over public policy. The Green Party probably has more leverage and that's pretty damn sad. Like I said just because there might be a communist or two working in the SEIU or the ACLU for that matter does not mean that the organizations are working for the communist party. Just like just because someone in the NRA may be from one of those extremist state separatist militias doesn't mean that the NRA works for them. This nation has to come to place of maturity where this Glenn Beck stuff isn't just listen to and don't just sit back and make up conspiracy theories because we see people's faces next to each other on chalk boards. My biggest fear is that this new level of integration has caused a back lash of misinformation thanks to the Beckites of this world, even Alex Jones has expressed serious concern about Beck. He is unneccesarily divisive.

"Which is why I don't think she's a Maoist, but she simply studied Mao and finds him interesting."

Honestly, she couldn't have "studied" him. It was an unfortunate comment she pulled out of the air (and a reference to a Mao quote first cited by a republican) in preparation for a speech she probably had no idea would ever see the light of day beyond those she delivered it to. Far from being smart, Mao was merely clever and manipulative. Mao was self-educated (a higher education home schooling) because he was not accepted in China's universities. Mao loathed the intellectuals to the point he allowed his paranoia about them being against him to purge China of the best and brightest minds (they ended up in the countryside, at hard labor, and starving with the farmers), deregulated education standards, and drained China of the minds able to make well planned policy.

And how Dunn used him was asinine as well. To use this person, with all of history to choose from, to make the point that the kids didn't have to listen to others in defining themselves or their dreams, just doesn't make a lick of sense. Mao was all about control, hardly a liberal trait. His Hundred Flowers Movement was followed up with a purge of most of those students who made suggestions for China's future, no matter how circumspect they tried to be. Many of Mao's "revolutions" contradicted the last; one group may be purged in one, and the one he encouraged to rise up against it would be purged the next.

Beck used this clip (from June) in retribution for Dunn coming out with the information (in case anyone missed it) that FOX was not a legitimate news station, but a public broadcasting arm of the republican party. She was quite correct about that, and Beck is a worthless hack. But it does no good for liberals to refuse to disagree with the dumb-assed shit that came out of her mouth, as it gives political cover for the very (and I agree its grossly reaching and misrepresentative) speculation you've been dealing with on this thread.
.

 

[uptownlivin90]

Do you think she would still have a job if she said Hitler instead of Mao?

No. Quite frankly I don't. That doesn't have anything to do with the principle itself it's just that though Hitler (as fucked up as this is going to sound) only killed 12 to 14 million people in the highest estimates I've seen. This is because Hitler is sort of the known center piece for genocide awareness worldwide, AND the massive Jewish influence on the American media plays a part in this as well. Mao is not as well known as hitler in the US except for amongst the more educated individuals, those who have gone to college and studied different philosophies and lines of thought and therefore the statement holds alot less baggage.

That brings up another point that those who are college educated especially those educated in higher level schools have a much larger tolerance level for statements about Mao, Lenin, Trotsky, etc because these individuals and others are studied indepth in the curriculum. Which is why I don't think she's a Maoist, but she simply studied Mao and finds him interesting. IDK if I'm overanalyzing but I can't help to wonder why a Maoist would openly support Maoism at a graduation at a Roman Catholic High School. I could SEE if this was a venue like a California Green Party local convention, but it's not. From what I saw it looks to me like dry college-educated irony. I think it would be dumb to say if you are planning on a career in politics, but as a political strategist (or a media political hype man) not so much. She was trying to create a rhetorical a parallel between Mao and Mother Teresa. The students seemed to be educated enough literary strategy to get it, and we have to remember she's a communications director, this woman is skilled in the art of literature, english, writing. She may have used a parallel that in the context made sense but if viewed in light of her being an important person in white house staff may raise eyebrows.

It suggests in unarguable language that admiration for commie mass murderers is just fine with this administration, and while not explicitly stated, might be a requirement.

Clearly not so. Barack Obama is not a radical communist or black nationalist. But I've said this before and I'll say it again I did not believe in 2008 that this nation was mature enough to handle Barack Obama as President of the United States. I'm being proven right time and time again. Van Jones is an example of this, and I'm going to say this in the most respectful and least condescending way possible. The election of the first black president brings with it a serious hallmark, the entrance of African Americans into the mainstream political arena of the United States.

Now within the African American community moreso then within any other minority community there have been drastic changes over the past few years. Integration has begun after 40 years of stalling to take full hold, African Americans are more and more leaving the inner cities and moving into the suburbs. You have large suburbian communities such as Prince George's County outside of DC, baldwin Hills outside of LA, Lithonia outside of ATL that are predominetly African American. African Americans have historically been influence in only two classes in America the lower and the upper, now we've entered the middle. 1/4 of the black workforce is in some form middle management.

Now the President brings with him a new discussion and new reality, because there is a small element of African American society, like within all minorities of radical black nationalists that still exist. They are like most radical movements (including white supremecists) amongst the poor and the poverty rate amongst African Americans is 36.7% so, that's a small minority of a small minority. There was a larger element of radicalism during three crucial periods in our nation's history, the 1920s (when Marcus Garvey led the back to Africa movement), the 1960s (black panther party, Black Liberation Army), and the early 1990s. There are alot of people that lived during these times there were radicalized. During the 60s this was especially so, this was during the time when segregation was ending in the south and horrible autrocities were being commited by police against African Americans and other civil rights leaders. Not a great time in US history.

This is the era President Obama was in college during. Alot of these individuals who were radicalized decided rather then to use violence they were going to get educated and be social activists and lawyers so on and so forth. These individuals and others abandoned their more radical ideas which they followed in their youths to make positive change are a crucial part of the African American community. These are the black community's intellectual class, many of them educated in Ivy League schools. President Obama is not a black communist however he has like any other person works within the inner city that includes mayors, council workers, even governors of states like New York and Illinois have had to work with people who at one point in their lives were radicals.

This is the main problem that occurs during the process of full integration distrust. Van jones at one point was a communist. Does this mean that the Communist Party USA is using him to form some sort of mass conspiracy? No. It means that he was appointed to a position to do a specific job in the white house because the white house feel's he's the best guy to do it, becuase of his expertise on greens jobs and his advocacy for it. Glenn Beck's theory is supported by a chalk board on which he puts people's faces next to each other and says there see they're all connected... and therefore all communists. The same way they tried to tie Governor Rendell to Farrakhan. There is no documentation there are no statements made, no witnesses just Glenn Beck and his chalk board. My question is what evidence is there that the Obama Adminsitration has been collaberating with the Communist Party in any way shape or form in order to form policy based on the Communist Party USA's platform. When I see that I'll believe it. Until then it's hyperbole and it completely misses the point.

The Communist Party has zero direct influence over public policy. The Green Party probably has more leverage and that's pretty damn sad. Like I said just because there might be a communist or two working in the SEIU or the ACLU for that matter does not mean that the organizations are working for the communist party. Just like just because someone in the NRA may be from one of those extremist state separatist militias doesn't mean that the NRA works for them. This nation has to come to place of maturity where this Glenn Beck stuff isn't just listen to and don't just sit back and make up conspiracy theories because we see people's faces next to each other on chalk boards. My biggest fear is that this new level of integration has caused a back lash of misinformation thanks to the Beckites of this world, even Alex Jones has expressed serious concern about Beck. He is unneccesarily divisive.

"Which is why I don't think she's a Maoist, but she simply studied Mao and finds him interesting."

Honestly, she couldn't have "studied" him. It was an unfortunate comment she pulled out of the air (and a reference to a Mao quote first cited by a republican) in preparation for a speech she probably had no idea would ever see the light of day beyond those she delivered it to. Far from being smart, Mao was merely clever and manipulative. Mao was self-educated (a higher education home schooling) because he was not accepted in China's universities. Mao loathed the intellectuals to the point he allowed his paranoia about them being against him to purge China of the best and brightest minds (they ended up in the countryside, at hard labor, and starving with the farmers), deregulated education standards, and drained China of the minds able to make well planned policy.

And how Dunn used him was asinine as well. To use this person, with all of history to choose from, to make the point that the kids didn't have to listen to others in defining themselves or their dreams, just doesn't make a lick of sense. Mao was all about control, hardly a liberal trait. His Hundred Flowers Movement was followed up with a purge of most of those students who made suggestions for China's future, no matter how circumspect they tried to be. Many of Mao's "revolutions" contradicted the last; one group may be purged in one, and the one he encouraged to rise up against it would be purged the next.

Beck used this clip (from June) in retribution for Dunn coming out with the information (in case anyone missed it) that FOX was not a legitimate news station, but a public broadcasting arm of the republican party. She was quite correct about that, and Beck is a worthless hack. But it does no good for liberals to refuse to disagree with the dumb-assed shit that came out of her mouth, as it gives political cover for the very (and I agree its grossly reaching and misrepresentative) speculation you've been dealing with on this thread.
.

Granted. Agree to disagree. It wasn't the best comment for her to make, and her retractions have been a disaster, I'm starting to question how great of a PR lady she actually is. Might be a good test to see if she's qualified... hey let's see if she can dig her way outta this shit.

 

[007]

YouTube - Obama Cabinet Member Anita Dunn: Mao Tse Tung "Favorite Philosopher"; Truth is subjective

I can’t believe this. This is Obama’s Director of Communications, a top advisor, the wife Obama’s personal lawyer, and she does in fact support the architect of Chinese Communism whose regime saw millions of their own people die by starvation when the government takes over and controls all means of production – including food production. She has also declared all out war on Fox News.

You or I or anyone else can expose every single one of these commie loving, radical, zealot pieces of shit like this skank or van jones surrounding obama whom he appointed, and it won't make one wit of a difference to the brain dead, kook aide drinking, indoctrinated, dough head liberals, Sinatra. But don't worry. They're the minority. Most thinking people that will listen and make rational decisions aren't liberals.

 

[Barb]

Sure I'd agree. If she likes Mao she should tell us and go about doing her job. Sounds absolutely fair. My point is nobody should be put in a position to have to disclose or defend their personal beliefs in order to keep their 9 to 5. This is America, or atleast... it was.

Do you think she would still have a job if she said Hitler instead of Mao?

My point here is, why would anyone be able to lionize Mao, noted leading murderer in the 20th Century, when a similar statement regarding Hitler is a certain career killer?

It suggests in unarguable language that admiration for commie mass murderers is just fine with this administration, and while not explicitly stated, might be a requirement. With all those names surrounding Obama in the WH, I wouldn't be surprised if it was. No previous administration so easily accepts the communist ideology as Obama and his cadre.

Communism is an economic construct, just a capitalism is. Neither one, taken to their logical extremes, is good for the populace. Did you know that the scientist that gave us E = mc^2 and urged Roosevelt to build the Atomic Bomb (because Germany was going in that direction and which he later regretted) was a socialist? This Nobel prize winner and the Times man of the 20th century had his own FBI file, started on the charges of one Harriet Frothingham, that he should not be granted citizenship because of his political beliefs. How fucked up is that? The greatest and most peaceable mind of the 20th century almost couldn't live in or contribute to the US because of anticommunist hysteria. And you want to bring all that back?

Why Socialism? Albert Einstein - Monthly Review

Federal Bureau of Investigation - Freedom of Information Privacy Act

 

[Zona]

hes the one who has sex wiht children

The perfect example of a Fox viewer. Nicely done sir.

standing up for your pedophile love interest

Can you link us to Jennings having sex with children? If not, then shut the fuck up. Oh and god bless.