On Obama's FCC "Diversity" Czar

[Smurf-Herder]

Don't call this 'diversity'
Does FCC official want government thumb on political discourse?

Augusta Chronicle Editorial Staff
Thursday, September 03, 2009

It sounds crazy. And only conservative outlets are reporting it -- so it's easy for the rest to think it's just paranoia.

But some believe the Federal Communications Commission -- and in particular its new "chief diversity officer," Mark Lloyd -- may embark on a campaign to have the government monitor political content on radio stations and use fines and fees and other regulations to level the ideological playing field.

Currently, most of talk radio's most successful and popular programs are conservative. That has long rankled liberals, who tried starting up the "Air America" network to compete, largely in vain.

Now, however, the FCC may be used to level the field using the long arm of government. And Lloyd has said he wants the FCC beefed up throughout the country -- with money confiscated from private radio stations.

The fear is that Lloyd wants to institute draconian fines on stations that fail to meet the government's standards on diversity of opinion and other things -- and that those fines would be turned over to public broadcasting, which Lloyd is said to favor.

True? We have no idea. But we have seen video of Lloyd extolling the beauty of how Venezuelan strongman Hugo Chavez has essentially whisked control of media there out of the hands of the owners on behalf of the state.

Lloyd called Chavez's takeover of Venezuela an "incredible" and "democratic" revolution.

You get the impression he'd like to do the same thing here -- that he believes this country's media should never have been out of the government's hands. Indeed, he has lamented that today's supposed injustices in American media date back to the "refusal to allow the Post Office to continue to operate the telegraph service."

We hope and believe Chavez's tactics would backfire in the United States, where the First Amendment is deeply rooted. But if there's even a scintilla of evidence that the government is going to try anything close to what is feared, and what Lloyd has hinted at, then we need to know and be prepared.

In addition, considering the radicals that Barack Obama has been surrounded by his entire life -- from communist Frank Marshall Davis to the Weather Underground founders to Jeremiah Wright and "Green Jobs" czar Van Jones -- it's not a stretch to believe something's afoot.

It may seem even less farfetched when you consider that famous socialist Saul Alinksy -- author of the book Rules for Radicals -- has fans in such people as Lloyd, Hillary Clinton -- who wrote her college thesis about him -- and Barack Obama.

From the Thursday, September 03, 2009 edition of the Augusta Chronicle

http://chronicle.augusta.com/stories/2009/09/03/edi_546766.shtml

[MintJulep]

Regardless of what they "want", I think it is totally out of their reach now.

With Fox News and the Internetz, the LMSM will never again have the monopoly they once had on the media. And to try and impose such would result in a backlash which would make the townhall meetings look like civil discourse. :D

[Smurf-Herder]

From everything I've heard, this position never existed before Obama created it. So the whole thing is pointless, unless they expect something to come of it. An end run around the failed Fairness Doctrine - going through the executive branch, instead of standard legislation.

[CosmicRocker]

From everything I've heard, this position never existed before Obama created it. So the whole thing is pointless, unless they expect something to come of it. An end run around the failed Fairness Doctrine - going through the executive branch, instead of standard legislation.

So the whole thing is pointless Ya Think?

Look at the title:
chief diversity officer

only a bureaucrat could come up with that name.

[bairdi]

"It sounds crazy. And no news outlets are reporting it -- so it's easy for the rest to think it's just paranoia."

Yeah....and if an asteroid were heading for earth and were to slam into this planet, we would all be dead.

That article does nothing but rants and tries to incite fear for something that is currently non existent.

[Citizen]

"It sounds crazy. And no news outlets are reporting it -- so it's easy for the rest to think it's just paranoia."

Yeah....and if an asteroid were heading for earth and were to slam into this planet, we would all be dead.

That article does nothing but rants and tries to incite fear for something that is currently non existent.

What a stupid response.

[bairdi]

What a stupid response.
"Stupid is as stupid does"

"Paranoia strikes deep
Into your life it will creep
It starts when you're always afraid
You step out of line, the man come and take you away"

I just calls em as I sees em.

But some believe.....
Now, however, the FCC may be used to......
The fear is that Lloyd wants to institute.....
True? We have no idea.....
You get the impression....

[Citizen]

You could have chosen a more original angle instead of the hot topic claims of fear mongering. One track minds!

[Bill Cosby]

Regardless of what they "want", I think it is totally out of their reach now.

With Fox News and the Internetz, the LMSM will never again have the monopoly they once had on the media. And to try and impose such would result in a backlash which would make the townhall meetings look like civil discourse. :D
:thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup:

I would love to see more, not less voices out there....... thousands of more... SMall & medium voices, low band & internet/podcasts...

[Smurf-Herder]

"It sounds crazy. And no news outlets are reporting it -- so it's easy for the rest to think it's just paranoia."

Yeah....and if an asteroid were heading for earth and were to slam into this planet, we would all be dead.

That article does nothing but rants and tries to incite fear for something that is currently non existent.

Everything this guy's talked about can be found all over the web.

[SeniorChief]

I don't think any of Obama's whacked out Socialist/Commie czars could pass a background investigation to achieve an appointment -

That's why the Onointed One simple hires them on as "Special Czars."

Thank God people like Glen Beck are exposing these filthy people for whom they really are.

[bairdi]

You could have chosen a more original angle instead of the hot topic claims of fear mongering. One track minds!
But it is fear mongering whether that is the "hot topic" or not. The guy is creating a scenario that does not exist and is twisting statements and facts to create a desired outcome in order to induce fear in conservatives. This is manipulation at its finest and is exactly what Glen Beck does too. Even if the Obama administration were to reinstitute the fairness doctrine, and I don't think they will, it would not be an evil act.

[SeniorChief]

This is manipulation at its finest and is exactly what Glen Beck does too.

What has Glen Beck reported regarding this individual that is "manipulated?"
Everything I have seen is backed with fact, evidence, words out of the commies mouth.
What's he manipulating?
Cite a couple of examples....

[SeniorChief]

Everything this guy's talked about can be found all over the web.

I love this one - In 2005 (Van) Jones told the East Bay Express that the acquittal of Rodney King's assailants in 1992 in that infamous police brutality case changed him significantly. "I was a rowdy nationalist on April 28th, and then the verdicts came down on April 29th," he said. "By August, I was a communist."

[bairdi]

What has Glen Beck reported regarding this individual that is "manipulated?"
Everything I have seen is backed with fact, evidence, words out of the commies mouth.
What's he manipulating?
Cite a couple of examples....
Glenn Beck manipulates his viewers. When one takes "facts, evidence and words out of the commies mouth" and also out of context and uses them to come to a specific conclusion to influence someone to his view, then that is manipulation. The fact that you do not realize the extent to which your thinking has been influenced by this man is no surprise.

[SeniorChief]

Glenn Beck manipulates his viewers. When one takes "facts, evidence and words out of the commies mouth" and also out of context and uses them to come to a specific conclusion to influence someone to his view, then that is manipulation.

Here's something not out of context regarding the gentleman who you are defending in this thread -

FACT -

Jones and other young activists in 1994 formed a group called Standing Together to Organize a Revolutionary Movement, or STORM, rooted in Marxism and Leninsm. Two years later, Jones launched the Ella Baker Center, an Oakland, Calif., based "strategy and action center" which states that it tries to "promote positive alternatives to violence and incarceration."

What sort of "CONCLUSION" would you prefer Glen Beck guide people to come to following the presentation of this fact?

[bairdi]

Here's something not out of context regarding the gentleman who you are defending in this thread -

FACT -

Jones and other young activists in 1994 formed a group called Standing Together to Organize a Revolutionary Movement, or STORM, rooted in Marxism and Leninsm. Two years later, Jones launched the Ella Baker Center, an Oakland, Calif., based "strategy and action center" which states that it tries to "promote positive alternatives to violence and incarceration."

What sort of "CONCLUSION" would you prefer Glen Beck guide people to come to following the presentation of this fact?
It's really simple chief. Beck could either present all sides of the facts and entertain explanation from different perspectives and let the viewer decide the truth or he himself could decide what is true and attempt to persuade the viewer using snippets of facts, quotes, observation and innuendo. Beck chooses the latter in order to lead his viewers to the same conclusions he perceives regardless of the truth of those conclusions. In other words, he has an agenda to sell and you and smurfy and the rest are buying.

[SeniorChief]

It's really simple chief. Beck could either present all sides of the facts and entertain explanation from different perspectives and let the viewer decide the truth...

I've posted two FACTS about this guy in the thread.
What's the opposing viewpoint?
He's NOT a Marxist, Racist, Communist?

I don't even see even the "Czar" himself offering that point of view.

[Citizen]

But it is fear mongering whether that is the "hot topic" or not. The guy is creating a scenario that does not exist and is twisting statements and facts to create a desired outcome in order to induce fear in conservatives. This is manipulation at its finest and is exactly what Glen Beck does too. Even if the Obama administration were to reinstitute the fairness doctrine, and I don't think they will, it would not be an evil act.

Obama's administration doesn't use fear as well? They don't twist and destort facts? A simple yes or no will suffice.

[MintJulep]

Here's something not out of context regarding the gentleman who you are defending in this thread -

FACT -

Jones and other young activists in 1994 formed a group called Standing Together to Organize a Revolutionary Movement, or STORM, rooted in Marxism and Leninsm. Two years later, Jones launched the Ella Baker Center, an Oakland, Calif., based "strategy and action center" which states that it tries to "promote positive alternatives to violence and incarceration."

What sort of "CONCLUSION" would you prefer Glen Beck guide people to come to following the presentation of this fact?
Ding, ding ding..............we have a winner!

[disrupter]

The government spends hundreds of millions on propaganda to sell bullshit to the American people.

Now you are 'discovering' it might be a bad thing Smurfy?

Looks that 'quantum' vacuum has gotten to your head.

There are actually stipulations using the public airwaves, in that it serve the public good.

Infomercials do not do this.
Inaccurate corporate spin propaganda, masquerading as 'news' does not do this.

If liberal voices speak you might actually hear something factual & true for a change.

We wouldn't want to taint the current condensed sewage of our public airwaves dialogue with some crystal, clear pure water, would we?

[Smurf-Herder]

It's really simple chief. Beck could either present all sides of the facts and entertain explanation from different perspectives and let the viewer decide the truth or he himself could decide what is true and attempt to persuade the viewer using snippets of facts, quotes, observation and innuendo. Beck chooses the latter in order to lead his viewers to the same conclusions he perceives regardless of the truth of those conclusions. In other words, he has an agenda to sell and you and smurfy and the rest are buying.

I don't see people of your opinion defending the accusations in any way. All I see is attacks on the people bringing this to light.

Van Jones is a radical revolutionary (STORM founder) - as if Jeff Jones (co-founder of The Weather Underground, with Bill Ayers), the NY State director of the Apollo Alliance (co-founded by Van Jones); which Pelosi praised for helping in the writing of the Stimulus Bill, according to their own website.

These are all facts that can be shown independently.

[bairdi]

I don't see people of your opinion defending the accusations in any way. All I see is attacks on the people bringing this to light.

Van Jones is a radical revolutionary (STORM founder) - as if Jeff Jones (co-founder of The Weather Underground, with Bill Ayers), the NY State director of the Apollo Alliance (co-founded by Van Jones); which Pelosi praised for helping in the writing of the Stimulus Bill, according to their own website.

These are all facts that can be shown independently.
I know very little about Van Jones so I would not attempt to defend or promote the man. I do know manipulation when I see it though. Here is a suggestion for you Smurf. Turn off the Beck, in fact turn off Fox for a while. Do an independent search about Van Jones and read everything you can about the guy both good and bad and then form your own opinion as to whether he is trying to do what is or is not in the best interest of the citizens of this nation. Then come back here and have a discussion instead of regurgitating Beck's talking points.

[Smurf-Herder]

I know very little about Van Jones so I would not attempt to defend or promote the man. I do know manipulation when I see it though. Here is a suggestion for you Smurf. Turn off the Beck, in fact turn off Fox for a while. Do an independent search about Van Jones and read everything you can about the guy both good and bad and then form your own opinion as to whether he is trying to do what is or is not in the best interest of the citizens of this nation. Then come back here and have a discussion instead of regurgitating Beck's talking points.


That's my point - I already did that before I started posting on him. I check out everything Beck or others say, before I stick my neck out. Because I know both left and right have their spin.

From everything I've seen, Van Jones is another Rev. Wright ideologically, but a political organizer version.

[bairdi]

That's my point - I already did that before I started posting on him. I check out everything Beck or others say, before I stick my neck out. Because I know both left and right have their spin.

From everything I've seen, Van Jones is another Rev. Wright ideologically, but a political organizer version.
And what has he done to the detriment of this country? Chief wrote "Jones launched the Ella Baker Center, an Oakland, Calif., based "strategy and action center" which states that it tries to 'promote positive alternatives to violence and incarceration'" which sounds like a pretty noble endeavor to me. I also read that he recently wrote a book that advocates creating millions of jobs in the private sector by investing in green industries and argues that it would save the US economy from stagflation. What is so evil about that?

[Moby]

I don't see people of your opinion defending the accusations in any way. All I see is attacks on the people bringing this to light.
Some of us are smart enough to know that if the same look was taken into post political appointees that you'd find similar issues. We've actually looked for our selves instead of sitting in front of the TV drinking and smoking and waiting for someone to program us.

It's partisan as hell to only look at one side.

It's plain stupid to only pay attention to what one politically active billionaire poses to you.

It's a none issue.

[Smurf-Herder]

Some of us are smart enough to know that if the same look was taken into post political appointees that you'd find similar issues. We've actually looked for our selves instead of sitting in front of the TV drinking and smoking and waiting for someone to program us.

It's partisan as hell to only look at one side.

It's plain stupid to only pay attention to what one politically active billionaire poses to you.

It's a none issue.

I see no evidence of that. Only attacks on sources your opponents use.

[Moby]

I see no evidence of that. Only attacks on sources your opponents use.
That's because you never bothered to do your own research on politics in the past. Come on Smurf, you use the same lines almost word for word if not identical to those created by Murdoch's employees.

Did you research any of of Bush's appointees and if so, than what did you find?

[doctordog]

That's because you never bothered to do your own research on politics in the past. Come on Smurf, you use the same lines almost word for word if not identical to those created by Murdoch's employees.

Did you research any of of Bush's appointees and if so, than what did you find?

Newsflash- Bush isn't President anymore, didn't Jon Stewart tell you that?:lmao2:

[Moby]

Newsflash- Bush isn't President anymore, didn't Jon Stewart tell you that?:lmao2:
There you go again Wayers. While massive media networks have been geared towards creating these talking points for you, you need to understand when to use them otherwise you may appear to be no smarter than a 5th grader.

1. I was chatting with Smurf and if you think that he needs you to defend him than you are sadly mistaken. He's an adult and quite capable of discussing issues even though he often gets confused. I also think he's far smarter than you and obviously more honest.

2. Maybe you just didn't understand the subject at hand and your programming took over and if that's the case than you should just move on.

3. Maybe you're just being a childish and immature troll. If that's the case you should just move along little man and let the adults have a chat. OK?

[Smurf-Herder]

That's because you never bothered to do your own research on politics in the past. Come on Smurf, you use the same lines almost word for word if not identical to those created by Murdoch's employees.

Did you research any of of Bush's appointees and if so, than what did you find?

I agreed with enough of Bush's policies that I didn't bother.

But I never thought the Sneak & Peak provision of the Patriot Act was a good idea. And I saw executive letters being abused in non-terrorism related cases - which I spoke out against when I was a member of another board. I also wanted Rumsfeld's resignation nearly a year before he left - for his mishandling of the invasion of Iraq and the aftermath.

But Wayers is right. This is about the present, not the past.

[Moby]

But Wayers is right. This is about the present, not the past.
I think it depends on what you want to achieve. If you only want to bitch about the current situation and play partisan politics than its very important to ignore the past.

On the other hand, if you want educate yourself on the country that you claim to love than it's important to understand the past and understand how things work so you have some idea of how we got to where we are today.

If you don't know how DC politics works than this seems outrageous to you and you'll only complain about one party doing it because you're told to do so. On the other hand, if you really want to make this country a better place than you need to learn about politics and that means paying attention to how things work today and in the past.

Wayers is right if partisan politics is all you care about. He's totally wrong if you want to learn about this country.

[doctordog]

There you go again Wayers. While massive media networks have been geared towards creating these talking points for you, you need to understand when to use them otherwise you may appear to be no smarter than a 5th grader.

1. I was chatting with Smurf and if you think that he needs you to defend him than you are sadly mistaken. He's an adult and quite capable of discussing issues even though he often gets confused. I also think he's far smarter than you and obviously more honest.

2. Maybe you just didn't understand the subject at hand and your programming took over and if that's the case than you should just move on.

3. Maybe you're just being a childish and immature troll. If that's the case you should just move along little man and let the adults have a chat. OK?

All good points Moby, maybe you should print this out and tack it up somewhere around your computer next time you butt in on someone else and myself on this board:thumbsup:

[Smurf-Herder]

I think it depends on what you want to achieve. If you only want to bitch about the current situation and play partisan politics than its very important to ignore the past.

On the other hand, if you want educate yourself on the country that you claim to love than it's important to understand the past and understand how things work so you have some idea of how we got to where we are today.

If you don't know how DC politics works than this seems outrageous to you and you'll only complain about one party doing it because you're told to do so. On the other hand, if you really want to make this country a better place than you need to learn about politics and that means paying attention to how things work today and in the past.

Wayers is right if partisan politics is all you care about. He's totally wrong if you want to learn about this country.

I'm not looking at this in terms of taking some kind of college course. I'm looking at this in terms of people being enlightened on how much worse the present situation is than it ever has been in the past.

This isn't about partisan politics anymore. The country is going down the tubes and people are either scared to ask questions, or want to silence those who do.

Sorry if you can only see this as partisan. But you can't separate the fact that somebody has to be responsible for what they do in the here and now. Dwelling on the past doesn't stop people making serious errors in the present. Only acting in the present does.

[Mason66]

This thread was about the diversity czar which is Mark Lloyd so I am not sure how it ended up on Van Jones.

Hey Moby, can you name any Bush appointee that had such a radical background as these appointees of Obama?

Did Bush appoint an avowed communist? Do you know of any radicals that Bush appointed?

These czars remind me of the possee of every rapper. They get some power and have to bring along half their neighborhood with them. Just crazy.

[bairdi]

Under Bush, this country was controlled by a cabal of neo conservative ideologists who espoused ideas of world wide domination as expressed by their organization Project for the New American Century. These people have a militaristic, neo nazi philosophy that is far more dangerous than that of any appointee that Obama has made. Did Bush appoint any radicals? How about Rummny, Wolfie, Rove, Bolton etc. etc.

[Smurf-Herder]

Under Bush, this country was controlled by a cabal of neo conservative ideologists who espoused ideas of world wide domination as expressed by their organization Project for the New American Century. These people have a militaristic, neo nazi philosophy that is far more dangerous than that of any appointee that Obama has made. Did Bush appoint any radicals? How about Rummny, Wolfie, Rove, Bolton etc. etc.

Well, what we're saying is:

Under Obama, this country is being controlled by a cabal of radical ideologues who espouse ideas of a new world order of transnationalism as expressed by a network of intertwined labor, media, environmental and political left-wing organizations, funded by billionaire liberals and philanthropes ( http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/ ). These people have a socialist, marxist philosophy that is far more dangerous than that of any appointee that Bush has made.

BTW, the PNAC disbanded a while back. But all these groups at the link above are still very active and members of these groups have an active interaction with the administration, receiving federal funds directly or indirectly to promote their shared agendas.

[Bill Cosby]

It's partisan as hell to only look at one side.

It's plain stupid to only pay attention to what one politically active billionaire poses to you.

It's a none issue.

Yep it getZ annoying sometimes... :thumbsup:

It is ok that bush was in office during the ecO-collapse... Obama is the bad guy for not fixing it in 6 months...

One act & two sets of measure, one for my enemy & another for my friend..

One I defend & the other I condemn..

One can do no right & the other no wrong..


Bill Cosby 09/09

[bairdi]

Well, what we're saying is:

Under Obama, this country is being controlled by a cabal of radical ideologues who espouse ideas of a new world order of transnationalism as expressed by a network of intertwined labor, media, environmental and political left-wing organizations, funded by billionaire liberals and philanthropes ( http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/ ). These people have a socialist, marxist philosophy that is far more dangerous than that of any appointee that Bush has made.

BTW, the PNAC disbanded a while back. But all these groups at the link above are still very active and members of these groups have an active interaction with the administration, receiving federal funds directly or indirectly to promote their shared agendas.
Screw Horowitz. Show me a website similar to the PNAC website where the people you speak of have written a statement of principles, crafted their ideology into a treatise similar to Rebuilding America's Defenses and have authored hundreds of position papers. Do that and I might buy what you are saying. PNAC has not disbanded. Quite a few of them are working for Fox News and they are mounting a strong propaganda campaign led by their Propaganda Minister and Chairman William Kristol.

[Smurf-Herder]

Screw Horowitz. Show me a website similar to the PNAC website where the people you speak of have written a statement of principles, crafted their ideology into a treatise similar to Rebuilding America's Defenses and have authored hundreds of position papers. Do that and I might buy what you are saying. PNAC has not disbanded. Quite a few of them are working for Fox News and they are mounting a strong propaganda campaign led by their Propaganda Minister and Chairman William Kristol.


By the end of 2006, PNAC was "reduced to a voice-mail box and a ghostly website", with "a single employee" "left to wrap things up", according to the BBC News.[24] According to Tom Barry, "The glory days of the Project for the New American Century (PNAC) quickly passed."[25] In 2006, Gary Schmitt, former executive director of the PNAC, a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute and director of its program in Advanced Strategic Studies, stated that PNAC had come to a natural end:

When the project started, it was not intended to go forever. That is why we are shutting it down. We would have had to spend too much time raising money for it and it has already done its job. We felt at the time that there were flaws in American foreign policy, that it was neo-isolationist. We tried to resurrect a Reaganite policy. Our view has been adopted. Even during the Clinton administration we had an effect, with Madeleine Albright [then secretary of state] saying that the United States was 'the indispensable nation'. But our ideas have not necessarily dominated. We did not have anyone sitting on Bush's shoulder. So the work now is to see how they are implemented.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_for_the_New_American_Century

The Apollo Alliance seems to be the umbrella organization - considering the influence they have in writing the bills everybody's arguing over.

A project of the Tides Center, the Apollo Alliance (AA) claims to have been “launched in the aftermath of the 9/11 tragedy to catalyze a clean energy revolution in America.” AA says that in late 2007 it “spun off from its founding organizations, Campaign for America’s Future and Center for Wisconsin Strategy, formed its own Board of Directors, and expanded its staff and program to better meet the critical challenge of promoting clean energy and good jobs.”

The watchdog website UndueInfluence.com describes AA as a coalition composed of “[t]rue believers with an absolute belief that government is the solution to all social and economic problems, allied with labor unions, subsidy-seeking companies and global warming / weather control advocates.”

Van Jones, a self-procaimed "communist" and "revolutionary," served on the AA board of directors for several years along with such luminaries as: Gerald Hudson, International Executive Vice President of the Service Employees International Union (SEIU); environmentalist Carl Pope; Joel Rogers, a founder of the Marxist political coalition known as the New Party; John Podesta, President and CEO of the Center for American Progress; Robert Borosage, co-founder of both the Institute for America’s Future and Campaign for America's Future; actor and environmentalist Robert Redford; former Bill Clinton administration officials Kathleen McGinty and Dan Reicher; and key figures from the Natural Resources Defense Council, the United Steelworkers Union, and the Laborers’ International Union of North America.

AA describes itself as “a coalition of labor, business, environmental, and community leaders working to catalyze a clean energy revolution that will put millions of Americans to work in a new generation of high-quality, green-collar jobs.” “Inspired by the Apollo space program,” adds AA, “we promote investments in energy efficiency, clean power, mass transit, next-generation vehicles, and emerging technology, as well as in education and training. Working together, we will reduce carbon emissions and oil imports, spur domestic job growth, and position America to thrive in the 21st century economy.”

Van Jones describes Apollo Alliance’s mission as “sort of a grand unified field theory for progressive left causes.”

A director of New York State’s chapter of Apollo Alliance is Jeff Jones (no relation to Van Jones). AA’s website describes Jeff Jones as someone devoted to “clean[ing] up toxic pollution in inner-city and rural neighborhoods and revers[ing] global warming.” The website does not mention that in the 1970s Jones was one of the four key leaders of the Weather Underground terrorist organization, along with Mark Rudd, Bill Ayers, and Bernardine Dohrn.

The Apollo Alliance has a long list of endorsers, among which are: ACORN; Change to Win (an ACORN entity); the SEIU; the Van Jones-founded Ella Baker Center for Human Rights, which claims that the American criminal-justice system is infested with racism; Green For All (another organization founded by Van Jones); the Working Families Party; Greenpeace USA; the League of Conservation Voters; the Natural Resources Defense Council; the Rainforest Action Network; the Sierra Club; the Union of Concerned Scientists; Working Assets; EarthJustice; the National Wildlife Federation; the Progressive States Network; and a host of big labor unions (including the AFL-CIO, AFSCME, Teamsters, Machinists and Aerospace Workers, Electrical Workers, SEIU, Sheet Metal Workers, Transportation Workers, United Auto Workers, Food and Commercial Workers, Mine Workers, and Steel Workers).

Apollo Alliance exerts a powerful influence on the views and policies of the Obama administration. AA helped craft portions of the $787 billion “stimulus” legislation (officially called the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act) that President Obama signed into law in early 2009. Specifically, AA had a hand in writing the “clean energy and green-collar jobs provisions” of the bill, for which $86 billion was earmarked. This included funds “to build new transit and high speed rail lines, weatherize homes, develop next generation batteries for clean vehicles, scale up wind and solar power, build a modern electric grid, and train a new generation of green-collar workers.” AA recommended that the stimulus bill allocate $11 billion for the development of a so-called "Smart Grid," which would use digital technology to deliver electricity from suppliers to consumers; ultimately the bill allocated precisely that amount to Smart Grid-related projects, including a $100 million provision for job training related to Smart Grid technology.

Confirming the magnitude of AA's role in shaping the stimulus bill, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said in mid-2009: “The Apollo Alliance has been an important factor in helping us [the U.S. Senate] develop and execute a strategy that makes great progress on these goals and in motivating the public to support them.”

In July 2009, Senator Reid and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi appointed AA Board Chair Phil Angelides, the former Treasurer of the State of California, to serve as chairman of the newly created Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission.

Apollo Alliance has received funding directly from the Stephen M. Silberstein Foundation and the Robert & Patricia Switzer Foundation. In addition, AA has been the beneficiary of grants made to the Institute for America's Future that were earmarked specifically for AA; among these were grants from the Nathan Cummings Foundation, the Town Creek Foundation, the Overbrook Foundation, the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation, the Max and Anna Levinson Foundation, and the Energy Foundation.

http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/groupProfile.asp?grpid=7490

Apollo Alliance website - http://apolloalliance.org/

[Moby]

Hey Moby, can you name any Bush appointee that had such a radical background as these appointees of Obama?
"As radical" is a matter of perception but the most famous controversial person was probably Donald Rumsfeld. Rummy worked for a political organization that bypassed The Constitution and broke a huge amount of laws in an attempt to destroy democracy and our way of life. I'm sure you've heard about it.

If you want to talk about cronyism than FEMA was a pretty popular example there.

[Moby]

All good points Moby, maybe you should print this out and tack it up somewhere around your computer next time you butt in on someone else and myself on this board:thumbsup:
You see, I'll try to make a valid point to the conversation at hand instead of just spewing a knee jerk preprogrammed response that doesn't reflect the conversation. There's a difference between thought and your programmed response. If you could think about it, you'd understand that.

[Moby]

I'm not looking at this in terms of taking some kind of college course. I'm looking at this in terms of people being enlightened on how much worse the present situation is than it ever has been in the past.
Who's talking about a college course? I'm just talking about enough information to form YOUR OWN thoughts on this situation.

Hog tried the same thing before but, "If you don't know how things worked in the past, how can you possibly know that things are better or worse now?" There is no way that you can.

You can just follow like sheep and believe whatever Beck tells you to believe :(