01 September 2009

More Hypocrisy From Leftists In Academia

Many CW bloggers and historians claim to be of the opinion that all who supported the CSA, including men like Lee and Jackson, were "traitors." (Even though both of these men originally opposed secession). Many of these same "historians" were very vocal and public about their support for President Obama. Now comes this news:

"President Obama's environmental adviser, Van Jones, was the main speaker at an anti-war rally that urged "resistance" against the U.S. government, WND has learned. The rally was sponsored by an organization associated with the Revolutionary Communist Party, which calls for the overthrow of the U.S. government and its replacement with a communist dictatorship."

I can assure you, however, that you will not hear any suggestions coming from these same "historians" and bloggers that Obama or Jones are "traitors". The silence from these leftists who use their positions in academia to promote their agenda is deafening.
Hmmm . . . I wonder why?

Story here.

*I'm vacationing in Maine, thus the lack of posts and posting of comments. I hope to post some pending comments soon. I'm using dial-up . . . veeerrryyy ssslllooowww.


chaps said...

George Washington, et al, really were traitors to Great Britain. They made war upon the British while still British subjects before Independence was declared. Jefferson Davis, Lee, et al, were not traitors. Their war with the US was fought as citizens of another, independent, country. If you think not, explain why States had to be "readmitted" to the Union and why Confederates had to apply to have citizenship restored.

kindredblood said...

WND? Is that the most reliable source out there?

I suppose there is a slight difference between calling for it and actually attempting it...in the case of Lee and Jackson. I see them much as the North at the time saw them...as tratiors...plain and simple.

Billy Yank

Richard G. Williams, Jr. said...


Is your main defense to attack the messenger? Weak. You can verify the facts through other sources.

So you have no problem with an avowed communist in the administration and no problem with his appearance at this event?

Moreover, you misstated the facts. The Southern states simply wanted to leave peacefully. This organization actually calls for overthrowing the US government and you can't bring yourself to condemn that?

You make my point quite well Billy.

Richard G. Williams, Jr. said...


“Rebellion against tyrants is obedience to God.” ~ Benjamin Franklin

Anonymous said...

"An avowed communist"? Because he spoke at a rally that was hosted by a group associated with the Revolutionary Communist Party? By this criteria all "pro-lifers" are terrorist murderers as they are associated with the "Army of God"

Brboyd said...

The time to act is now. If you are conservative and do not want to see this country become totalitarian, then you better stand up. Be heard. Be seen. Dont be a trouble maker. Be a trouble fixer.

I dont want to sit with my grand children one day and have to say "I remember when our country was open and free".

Richard G. Williams, Jr. said...


Your comment reveals 2 things:

1: You didn't read the article and know nothing about STORM.
2: You can't even bring yourself to criticize "The One" over bringing this radical into his administration.

You, like Billy Yank, prove my original point.

jacksonianlawyer said...

That Van Jones is a communist and sympathetic to the communist cause is a moot issue; the fact that some are debating it herein is a testament to their ignorance.

Spend 2 minutes searching the web and one can find a wealth of information confirming Van Jones's radicalism - something that is not in his "past" but is very much in his "present" (Fox News just ran an article with a video clip of Van Jones's take on "Republicans"):


Likewise, Matthew Vadum of Capital Research Center ran an article a few weeks ago outlining just who Van Jones is, along with his STORM and Color For Change, Center For American Progress, connections:

(Can also be found in 8/12 entry on Capital Research Center's website)

Also, see here:


And here's an interesting analysis from Darren Pope over at the Columbia Independent Examiner today:


There's more out there - much more - for anyone who has any doubts as to just what Van Jones is all about.

RW - hope you enjoy your vacation my friend. Thanks for sharing this amidst trying to get in some R&R.

Brboyd said...

Why do you censor what I say but let these socialist progressives speak? Im disappointed

Richard G. Williams, Jr. said...


Willful ignorance. Thanks for the info. I KNOW many of these Obama supporters are having buyer's remorse. It's very hard for them to admit.


Sorry I overlooked your last comment. It's up now. I screen a lot of comments, not just yours. Nothing personal. I think we agree on most things discussed here.

kindredblood said...


Until reading your post, I had not heard of this issue. I was not attacking the messenger...just questioning whether or not this was the best source to obtain info on. Obviously there is something to the story not that I have looked elsewhere.

And No, I do not agree with a communist or any other anti-American in the Administration or the Government.

But if you think the south "wanted to leave peacefully" you, I believe are sadly mistaken. The south knew all too well that secession would bring war, that is why they seized as much military equipment as possible. Many states seized Government property prior to their secession.

Billy Yank

Brboyd said...

Thanks Richard. My apologies for not giving you the benefit of the doubt.

Richard G. Williams, Jr. said...


Appointing someone with Jones's background should be the subject of a Congressional investigation. The stuff going on within the Obama administration is no longer about "right" vs. "left" or "Republican" vs. "Democrat." This is serious and anti-American and many on the left are turning a blind eye.

We will agree to disagree re: The South and secession. That issue has been debated here recently and I have no intention of going back down that road right now. Suffice it to say that New England states had threatened secession decades before the South attempted it. Many on both sides of the Mason-Dixon believed it was constitutional.

The peaceful attempt would have been successful were it not for Lincoln's administration. We can debate the wisdom of the various parties and their decisions, but I think the veracity of my contention is obvious to the objective eye.


No problem!

Johann Van De Leeuw said...

Mr. Williams - on your response to Mr. Yank's I say: hear hear! The reason the South seized those stores, was because they suspected Lincoln would force war on them: which is exactly what he did. Sending a fleet to reinforce Ft. Sumter, (which dominates Charleston), is quite an act of aggression.

Richard G. Williams, Jr. said...

Billy Yank:

Regarding your suggestion that WND is not a credibile source:

They were the first to break the Van Jones story;


While the state-controlled media ignored it:


Van Jones has resigned. 'Nuff said?

kindredblood said...

Nuff said...you should not have anything to complain about now.

BTW...calling the media, State Controlled, makes you sound so much like Rush!

Richard G. Williams, Jr. said...

Hello Billy! Trust me sir, I have LOTS more to complain about with this administration. So you're a Rush fan too?

BTW, I was in Yankeeland all last week - Northern Maine - BEAUTIFUL!