Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: koan who wrote (510794)	9/6/2009 4:31:03 PM
From: longnshort	Respond to of 1579842

So you don't agree with Thomas Sowell ? That's racist

To: koan who wrote (510794)	9/6/2009 4:41:43 PM
From: longnshort	Respond to of 1579842

Van Jones & Obama's "Centrism" [Jonah Goldberg] I just watched David Axelrod, the top ranking political advisor in the White House, and Robert Gibbs, the President's spokesman on "Meet the Press" and "This Week" respectively. Neither of them was willing, even after repeated questioning, to offer a single negative word about Van Jones. Not one word. A 9/11 Truther and defender of Mumia-Abu Jamal is not radical enough for this White House to distance itself from the man in any way. Again and again, this White House has been offered chances to condemn the man's views and they have willfully and quite deliberately refused. Compare this to the controversy over Lani Guinier, President Clinton's nominee to run the civil rights division at the Justice Department. When her views came to light, president Clinton disavowed her. "This has nothing to do with the political center," Clinton insisted, "This is about my center." Who would have guessed that there's a case for saying Bill Clinton's center had more intellectual integrity than Barack Obama's? Now, there's reason to believe that Clinton was lying when he said he was unaware of her views when he picked her, but at least Clinton understood that he couldn't claim to be a centrist and associate himself with her views if they became widely known. Van Jones' views are now widely known. And as far as anyone can tell reading the newspapers this morning or watching the Sunday shows, this White House and this President have nothing but praise for Jones and think he's a fine, self-sacrificing, public servant who simply took one for the team. I can't think of a more succinct, discrete, example illuminating why Obama's claims to centrism are a fraud. Update: Oh and the conversation between Tom Brokaw and Tom Friedman about the lessons of Van Jones was a complete scandal. One of Friedman's key take-aways from this whole affair is that too many people will self-censor themselves so they can get government jobs. What a tragedy that fewer people will support cop-killers and anti-American conspiracy groups because of poor Van Jones chilling effect on the culture. Oh, and listening to Friedman and Brokaw disparage the internet as a useless news medium, makes them sound like cranky old monks lamenting that flash-in-the-pan printing press. The New York Times [Mark Hemingway] A couple of takeaways from Van Jones resignation: 1) Remember Chas Freeman? This is actually the second time an Obama appointee has been sunk due to a protracted controversy over past statements and the NYT didn't write a single word about the controversy until after the fact. (Of course, Freeman had merely been nominated when he took himself out of the running for Director of National Intelligence — he wasn't actually in the administration, unlike Van Jones.) 2) While Glenn Beck and others in the conservative commentariat had been shining a light on Jones' radical past for a while, the revelations that finally sunk Jones were broken by Gateway Pundit and other bloggers. Not that long ago, the idea that a guy Googling in the basement would be capable of bringing down a White House staffer would have been a story in and of itself. I suppose some might think this sort of thing is old hat five years after Rathergate, but I also suspect that this aspect of the story will be largely ignored because it makes the MSM look very, very bad. Van Jones is an admitted former communist in an administration that thinks 'vetting' has something to do with universal health care for pets, and no one in the traditional media thought, "Hey, I wonder what we can learn if we just look this guy up on the internet?" The Corner on National Review Online (6 September 2009) corner.nationalreview.com

To: koan who wrote (510794)	9/6/2009 4:42:55 PM
From: longnshort	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1579842

Here's the lefts barbarity. Olbermann to Daily Kos Audience: 'Send Me Everything You Can Find About Glenn Beck' By Jeff Poor on MSNBC Guess who's not pleased about Van Jones middle-of-the-night-on-a-holiday-weekend resignation? Perhaps you never would have seen this one coming, but no other MSNBC "Countdown" host and provocateur Keith Olbermann himself. Bitter and seeing red? Perhaps. In a post on the Daily Kos dated Sept. 6, Olbermann urged the half-crazed liberal Kos readers to go digging for dirt on Fox News host Glenn Beck, Beck's radio producer Stu Burguiere and Fox News president Roger Ailes. (h/t Morgen of Verum Serum) "I don't know why I've got this phrasing in my head, but: Find everything you can about Glenn Beck, Stu Burguiere, and Roger Ailes," Olbermann wrote. "No, even now, I refuse to go all caps. No, sending me links to the last two Countdowns with my own de-constructions of his biblical vision quality Communist/Fascist/Socialist/Zimbalist art at Rockefeller Center (where, curiously, he works, Comrade) doesn't count. Nor does sending me links to specious inappropriate point-underscoring prove-you're-innocent made-up rumors." Olbermann said he plans to put forth his formal plans to go after Beck on his Sept. 8 show. "Tuesday we will expand this to the television audience and have a dedicated email address to accept leads, tips, contacts, on Beck, his radio producer Burguiere, and the chief of his tv enablers, Ailes (even though Ailes' power was desperately undercut when he failed to pull off his phony 'truce' push)," Olbermann wrote. It's not clear what Olbermann's goal is here, but it does appear he's some how trying to employ the thirteenth rule from the tactics chapter from Saul Alinsky's "Rules for Radicals" - "Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it." Olbermann dedicated segments last week during two shows going after Beck's analysis of the art in NBC headquarters Rockefeller Center, in New York City.