Loading
Patriot Watch Independent
Chicago, Illinois US
734 news,
250 videos,
3 blog posts,
4256 comments,
34 forum posts
Related Videos
-
2:240 stars
Bill Maher, I'm Not: Going Rogue
Submitted 22 hours ago
by Britethorn0 comments | 21 views
-
3:550 stars
Judge Napolitano Hands O'Reilly His Arse
Submitted 2 days ago
by ironhead0 comments | 81 views
-
0:334.5 stars
NY Governor declares Obama’s terrorist trial ...
Submitted 4 days ago
by NewWarriorMan1 comment | 45 views
-
2:450 stars
Obama(Election Anniversary)
Submitted 5 days ago
by passingthetorch0 comments | 119 views
-
0:404.5 stars
Hasan FREE with insanity plea as Reid Baer co...
Submitted 1 week ago
by NewWarriorMan1 comment | 109 views
/ 2 ratings
Obama's science czar believes in eugenics Video 2
http://www.infowars.com/hol... In 1977, Obama's science czar John Holdren published this textbook on population reduction
- 17 Comments
- Add a comment
amnestymyazz 2 months ago
He thinks were mad at soldiers. we might march on his front lawn
WWTT is well versed on rhetoric. He's inadequate on reality.
amnestymyazz 2 months ago
They're advisors! Jesus Christ what the hell is with you people? We have a president who recogniz … Show full comment
You're a straight moron. Titles are for books. Authority is taken, not given. Obama has put people in high places. Their ability to manuever and effect the outcome of a given situation is predicated on the perception that they have the authority. It is fine and dandy to say something is illegal. Murder is illegal. Tell that to the victim. There are not a bunch of 'Czar police' running around watching the Czars to be sure they are not overstepping their boundaries. Again, legality and illegality is in the interpretation. The Czars are put there to help develop policy and get something done. That is power. Shut your mouth and open your eyes. You might be surprised at what you see.
Patriot Watch (Independent) - 2 months ago
You keep talking about legality. You seem to not understand what 'legal' means. It means however … Show full comment
He thinks were mad at soldiers. we might march on his front lawn
wayway2tall 2 months ago
You keep talking about legality. You seem to not understand what 'legal' means. It means however … Show full comment
They're advisors!
Jesus Christ what the hell is with you people? We have a president who recognizes that he doesn't have time to be an expert in everything that the executive branch oversees, so he hires experts to give him advice. How is this not a good idea?
I would understand an argument about decreasing the scope of executive power, but that isn't the issue, it's all these experts. If you think that there shouldn't be a pay czar, the argument you should be making is that the President shouldn't have the power to set regulate executive pay (in PW's case he should) not whether the "pay czar" has any power. --OOOOO the mighty pay czar is going to use his infinite power to spend 60 days investigating your compensation package so he can report back to the president on the most sensible course of action OOOOO--
You know what I think? I think every American who thinks they're 2nd amendment rights are being infringed upon should grab their closest gun and march on the nearest military base.
amnestymyazz 2 months ago
What power do any of these people have. The constitution puts no limits on the size of a presiden't … Show full comment
You keep talking about legality. You seem to not understand what 'legal' means.
It means however it is interpreted-and enforced. The 2nd Amendment provides our right to bear arms is not to be infringed. I don't see free and easy access to firearms as the law of the day. Furthermore one must carry a permit to carry one. A license to own. This is the law of the day in most states. Others regions have outright bans. Please tell me how this can be when the second amendment clearly states it is our right to bear arms? I'll tell you why? Interpretation. Obamas Czars are as powerful as the law provides them to be. It is a smple act of defining their place in government-interpreting their place. Who is doing the interpreting? Your naive belief that these Czars have no power is belied by the fact they exist and what their jobs are. If they have no power and therefore no place, they should have no job. No title. No pay.
Find me a law written in stone and I'll find a jurist to reduce it to rubble.
amnestymyazz 2 months ago
What power do any of these people have. The constitution puts no limits on the size of a presiden't … Show full comment
You keep talking about legality. You seem to not understand what 'legal' means.
It means however it is interpreted-and enforced. The 2nd Amendment provides our right to bear arms is not to be infringed. I don't see free and easy access to firearms as the law of the day. Furthermore one must carry a permit to carry one. A license to own. This is the law of the day in most states. Others regions have outright bans. Please tell me how this can be when the second amendment clearly states it is our right to bear arms? I'll tell you why? Interpretation. Obamas Czars are as powerful as the law provides them to be. It is a smple act of defining their place in government-interpreting their place. Who is doing the interpreting? Your naive belief that these Czars have no power is belied by the fact they exist and what their jobs are. If they have no power and therefore no place, they should have no job. No title. No pay.
Find me a law written in stone and I'll find a jurist to reduce it to rubble.
amnestymyazz 2 months ago
What power do any of these people have. The constitution puts no limits on the size of a presiden't … Show full comment
You keep talking about legality. You seem to not understand what 'legal' means.
It means however it is interpreted-and enforced. The 2nd Amendment provides our right to bear arms is not to be infringed. I don't see free and easy access to firearms as the law of the day. Furthermore one must carry a permit to carry one. A license to own. This is the law of the day in most states. Others regions have outright bans. Please tell me how this can be when the second amendment clearly states it is our right to bear arms? I'll tell you why? Interpretation. Obamas Czars are as powerful as the law provides them to be. It is a smple act of defining their place in government-interpreting their place. Who is doing the interpreting? Your naive belief that these Czars have no power is belied by the fact they exist and what their jobs are. If they have no power and therefore no place, they should have no job. No title. No pay.
Find me a law written in stone and I'll find a jurist to reduce it to rubble.
amnestymyazz 2 months ago
What power do any of these people have. The constitution puts no limits on the size of a presiden't … Show full comment
You keep talking about legality. You seem to not understand what 'legal' means.
It means however it is interpreted-and enforced. The 2nd Amendment provides our right to bear arms is not to be infringed. I don't see free and easy access to firearms as the law of the day. Furthermore one must carry a permit to carry one. A license to own. This is the law of the day in most states. Others regions have outright bans. Please tell me how this can be when the second amendment clearly states it is our right to bear arms? I'll tell you why? Interpretation. Obamas Czars are as powerful as the law provides them to be. It is a smple act of defining their place in government-interpreting their place. Who is doing the interpreting? Your naive belief that these Czars have no power is belied by the fact they exist and what their jobs are. If they have no power and therefore no place, they should have no job. No title. No pay.
Find me a law written in stone and I'll find a jurist to reduce it to rubble.
amnestymyazz 2 months ago
What power do any of these people have. The constitution puts no limits on the size of a presiden't … Show full comment
You keep talking about legality. You seem to not understand what 'legal' means.
It means however it is interpreted-and enforced. The 2nd Amendment provides our right to bear arms is not to be infringed. I don't see free and easy access to firearms as the law of the day. Furthermore one must carry a permit to carry one. A license to own. This is the law of the day in most states. Others regions have outright bans. Please tell me how this can be when the second amendment clearly states it is our right to bear arms? I'll tell you why? Interpretation. Obamas Czars are as powerful as the law provides them to be. It is a smple act of defining their place in government-interpreting their place. Who is doing the interpreting? Your naive belief that these Czars have no power is belied by the fact they exist and what their jobs are. If they have no power and therefore no place, they should have no job. No title. No pay.
Find me a law written in stone and I'll find a jurist to reduce it to rubble.
amnestymyazz 2 months ago
What power do any of these people have. The constitution puts no limits on the size of a presiden't … Show full comment
You keep talking about legality. You seem to not understand what 'legal' means.
It means however it is interpreted-and enforced. The 2nd Amendment provides our right to bear arms is not to be infringed. I don't see free and easy access to firearms as the law of the day. Furthermore one must carry a permit to carry one. A license to own. This is the law of the day in most states. Others regions have outright bans. Please tell me how this can be when the second amendment clearly states it is our right to bear arms? I'll tell you why? Interpretation. Obamas Czars are as powerful as the law provides them to be. It is a smple act of defining their place in government-interpreting their place. Who is doing the interpreting? Your naive belief that these Czars have no power is belied by the fact they exist and what their jobs are. If they have no power and therefore no place, they should have no job. No title. No pay.
Find me a law written in stone and I'll find a jurist to reduce it to rubble.
Patriot Watch (Independent) - 3 months ago
So what are you suggesting? That if John Holdren orders doctors to start sterilizing their patients … Show full comment
The czars have no power to do anything. You are a robot working for the Dems you liberal socialist with NO clue as to what you are talking about
WASHINGTON -- The Obama administration's "pay czar" is embarking on a review of proposed compensation packages for the top employees at seven companies that are on government life support, marking the first time a federal official will have veto power over how much private-sector executives are compensated.
Kenneth Feinberg, who ran the government's fund for families of the victims of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, has 60 days to approve or reject the compensation plans submitted this week from bailout recipients. They include American International Group Inc. and General Motors.
He is expected to complete his review by late October, although Treasury spokesman Andrew Williams said Friday that the 60-day clock will not start until Feinberg makes a determination that a company's submission is "substantially complete." He said it could take some days if not weeks for Feinberg to make that determination for each of the seven companies.
Friday was the last day the companies could submit proposed pay packages for their 25 highest earners. Feinberg is expected to negotiate the packages with the companies and will also approve broader compensation formulas that will apply to the 75 next-highest-paid workers at each company.
Tells again they have NO power
Patriot Watch (Independent) - 4 months ago
What power do any of these people have. The constitution puts no limits on the size of a presiden't … Show full comment
Each one of these people hold a salary of $177,000. Congress gave absolutely no OK on any of these people.
chiefly because, in america we need higher populations not lower ones well this sentance proves you are not a liberal.
Good Ole Boy (Republican) - 4 months ago
So what are you suggesting? That if John Holdren orders doctors to start sterilizing their patients … Show full comment
Obamaniac pretty well fits you, you have no grasp of reality.
wayway2tall 4 months ago
You seem to be woefully ignorant of what kind of power the czars have, they can instill administrati … Show full comment
So what are you suggesting? That if John Holdren orders doctors to start sterilizing their patients that they will do it for fear of having their liscence revoked? I can order a doctor to do something too, but they won't do it because I have no legal power. The exact same amount of legal power as one of these czars. The czars have no power to make anyone do anything. If someone acts on the czars orders to kill babies, it's the person who killed babies who broke the law, because the czars have no legal power.
Good Ole Boy (Republican) - 4 months ago
What power do any of these people have. The constitution puts no limits on the size of a presiden't … Show full comment
You seem to be woefully ignorant of what kind of power the czars have, they can instill administrative law. They are not confirmed by congress or elected. They are unconstitutional. http://www.hg.org/adm.html
wayway2tall 4 months ago
These are the people who control your lives ROBOTS The Compleat List of Obama Czars By Nancy Mat … Show full comment
What power do any of these people have. The constitution puts no limits on the size of a presiden't cabinet, and with senate approval Obama can have as many advisors as he wants. If any of John Holdren's suggestions in his book ever became policy we would have serious moral issues, but none of them are ever going to become reality, chiefly because, in america we need higher populations not lower ones. He wrote an academic book about an interesting topic, it's a little off base but who cares? Well... I know you do, but why?
Patriot Watch (Independent) - 4 months ago
These are the people who control your lives ROBOTS
The Compleat List of Obama Czars
By Nancy Matthis
Bypassing the authority of Congress, Barack Obama rules through czars — the beginnings of dictatorship:
1. Herbert Allison Jr., bailout czar, [replaced Bush bailout czar Neel Kashkari, Assistant Secretary of the Treasury for Financial Stability confirmed by Senate]
2. Alan Bersin, border czar
3. Dennis Blair, intelligence czar [Director of National Intelligence, a Senate confirmed position]
4. John Brennan, counterterrorism czar
5. Carol Browner, energy czar
6. Adolfo Carrion, urban affairs czar
7. Ashton Carter, weapons czar [actually Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics and so subject to Senate confirmation]
8. Aneesh Chopra, technology czar
9. Jeffrey Crowley, [openly gay white man] AIDS czar
10. Cameron Davis, Great Lakes czar
11. Nancy-Ann DeParle, health czar
12. Earl Devaney, stimulus oversight czar
13. Joshua DuBois, religion czar, aka God czar
14. Arne Duncan, education czar
15. Kenneth Feinberg, pay czar
16. Daniel Fried, Guantanamo closure czar
17. J. Scott Gration, Sudan czar
18. Melissa Hathaway, [soon to be] cybersecurity czar
19. David J. Hayes, water czar [a Deputy Interior Secretary and therefore subject to Senate oversight]
20. Richard Holbrooke, Afghanistan-Pakistan (Af-Pak) czar
21. John Holdren, science czar
22. Kevin Jennings, safe schools czar [nominated to be Assistant Deputy Secretary of Education, Office of Safe and Drug Free Schools, a newly created post; openly gay founder of an organization dedicated to promoting pro-homosexual clubs and curricula in public schools]
23. Van Jones, green jobs czar
24. Gil Kerlikowske, drug czar
25. Ron Kirk, trade czar
26. Vivek Kundra, infotech czar [Shoplifted four shirts, worth $33.50 each, from J.C. Penney in 1996 (source)]
27. Douglas Lute, war czar [retained from Bush administration, married to Jane Holl Lute, currently a Deputy Secretary of Homeland Security]
28. George Mitchell, Mideast peace czar
29. Ed Montgomery, car czar [replacing Steve Rattner, who stepped down amid controversy over his former firm’s role in a possible kickback scandal]
30. Lynn Rosenthal, domestic violence czar
31. Dennis Ross, Mideast policy czar
32. Gary Samore, weapons of mass destruction czar
33. Todd Stern, climate change czar
34. Cass Sunstein, regulatory czar
35. Larry Summers, economic czar
36. Michael Taylor, food czar
37. Arturo Valenzuela, Latin-American czar (nominee) [although this post is referred to as a czar, he is nominated to be Assistant Secretary of State for Western Hemisphere Affairs and so is subject to Senate confirmation]
38. Paul Volcker, economic czar number two
39. Elizabeth Warren, TARP czar [chair of the Congressional Oversight Panel for the Trouble Assets Relief Program; note that Herb Allison is more frequently called the TARP czar]
40. Jeffrey Zients, government performance czar [replaced original nominee Nancy Killefer who withdrew her name after issues with her personal income tax filings surfaced]
Positions established but not yet filled:
41. behavioral science czar
42. copyright czar
Positions being planned:
1. income redistribution czar
2. land-use czar
3. consumer financial protection czar, aka mortgage czar (source)
4. radio-internet fairness czar
5. student loan czar, to oversee a program of mandatory service in return for college money (source)
6. voter list czar
7. zoning czar
SPREAD THE WORD