Green jobs czar Van Jones steps down and out. From his statement:
"On the eve of historic fights for health care and clean energy, opponents of reform have mounted a vicious smear campaign against me," Jones said in his resignation statement. "They are using lies and distortions to distract and divide."
Jones said he has been "inundated with calls from across the political spectrum urging me to stay and fight."
But he said he cannot in good conscience ask his colleagues to spend time and energy defending or explaining his past.
"Lies and distortion to distract and divide"? We just wanted the truth about Jones' involvement with these wild 9/11 conspiracy groups, sort of the way Jones just wanted the truth about the BushCo complicity in bringing down the World Trade Center. Sort of.
As to the notion that Jones has been ""inundated with calls from across the political spectrum" urging him to stay and and continue to embarrass team Obama, well, sure, I can believe that.
COMEDY CLASSIC: The NY Times' first story about Van Jones covers his resignation, leading to some potentially awkward moments:
In a victory for Republicans and the Obama administration’s conservative critics, Van Jones resigned as the White House’s environmental jobs “czar” on Saturday.
Controversy over Mr. Jones’s past comments and affiliations has slowly escalated over several weeks, erupting on Friday with calls for his resignation.
The controversy has escalated for weeks, and his resignation finally forced the Times to cover it. Folks living in the Times bubble are possibly becoming accustomed to these moments of whiplash - the Times' first coverage of the Eason Jordan resignation at CNN also came with his resignation.
Here is more probing, in-depth Times reporting:
Mr. Jones’s involvement in the 1990s with a group called Standing Together to Organize a Revolutionary Movement prompted recent accusations by conservative critics that he associated with Communists. The group, according to a post-mortem written by some of its founders, was an anti-capitalist, antiwar organization committed to achieving “solidarity among all oppressed peoples” with “direct militant action.”
Those whacky conservative critics! Also prompting the accusation was the statement by Van Jones in a 2005 interview that he was radicalized following the 1992 Rodney King verdicts in Los Angeles and "By August, I was a communist." On Law and Order that would be known as a "clue" - maybe the Times should get one.
BASHING LIKE IT OUGHTA BE: Mickey Kaus thumps the Times.
SUDDENLY I'M WRITING COUNTRY AND WESTERN: Isn't there some pop song out there with a lyric something like "We said good-bye the day we met"? There should be! Or maybe I'm reading from the Times reporter handbook.
Time for a look at the "czars?"
Posted by: centralcal | September 06, 2009 at 09:43 AM
How does the NYTs explain to its readers why he wouldn't stay and fight? They haven't even mentioned the controversy.
Posted by: Sue The Skinny Bastard | September 06, 2009 at 09:48 AM
oops - should be all the "czars?"
Posted by: centralcal | September 06, 2009 at 09:54 AM
How much will Jones collect on the speakers circuit as the "bad boy" of lefty envirocrap? Maybe 10K/speech? More?
Posted by: Jim Ryan | September 06, 2009 at 09:54 AM
Tweet from Jake Tapper: I can certainly understand why liberals are upset - they think a conservative demagogue, followed by GOP lawmakers + MSM, chased good man...
I am so glad he can certainly understand.
I know who the conservative demagogue is and the GOP lawmakers, but pray tell who in the MSM chased this good man?
Posted by: centralcal | September 06, 2009 at 09:58 AM
Next!
Posted by: PeterUK | September 06, 2009 at 10:02 AM
Heh, CC, that would be Mickey Kaus.
======================
Posted by: You want some fun, check out the Tiljander proxy. | September 06, 2009 at 10:04 AM
"They are using lies and distortions to distract and divide."
Ah, yes, using his own words against him.
"""inundated with calls from across the political spectrum""
Ah, yes, from communists, to fascists, to far left progressives.
Posted by: Pofarmer | September 06, 2009 at 10:15 AM
CC--I agree. I think I'll blog something on that point.
Posted by: clarice | September 06, 2009 at 10:15 AM
CC.
"I know who the conservative demagogue is and the GOP lawmakers, but pray tell who in the MSM chased this good man?"
It would pay to go along with this line. The vicious jackals of the media pulling down a good man. Correcting this would be a mistake. Feed the paranoia.
Posted by: PeterUK | September 06, 2009 at 10:31 AM
Good one, PUK!
Posted by: centralcal | September 06, 2009 at 10:34 AM
How much will Jones collect on the speakers circuit as the "bad boy" of lefty envirocrap? Maybe 10K/speech? More?
So what; the fools would spend their money on other garbage anyway.
btw, on FNS Howard Dean, looking like he's coming off a major bender, called this "a major loss for the country". Also the meme per Juan Williams is to say that Van the troofer was some unimportant, lower level functionary with no real power. Um ok Juan; like having a $30 billion budget doesn't count for much (or maybe it doesn't in the new Trillion order that's been imposed on us). Also bothersome is that the rest of the panel were bothered more about the Truther allegations than the admission of being a communist. W.T.F.
Posted by: Captain Hate | September 06, 2009 at 10:34 AM
Wasn't Van Jones the guy whose organization led the boycott against Glen Beck? If so, I guess bit off more than he could chew. Too funny...
Upside for Van, there is always race baiting. Good money to be made in that racket.
Posted by: No one you know | September 06, 2009 at 10:37 AM
WaPo: Jones, a towering figure in the environmental movement..
WaPo has outdone Jones's supporters in hyperbole. So far, Sunday shows are trying in vain to get Republican guests to gloat. Let's hope that continues. The talking point is definitely that he was brought down by the vwrc, not himself.
Posted by: DebinNC | September 06, 2009 at 10:37 AM
One of my optimistic moments last week came from reading reporting from all over the US about the numbers of calls coming in to school districts regarding the Dear Leader speech planned for students.
This news got out via the internet well before it hit the MSM. I think with computers, cell phones, etc. - the media itself is being thrown under the bus.
Posted by: centralcal | September 06, 2009 at 10:38 AM
Next!
Posted by: PeterUK | September 06, 2009 at 10:02 AM
Valerie Jarrett
She openly admitted to be familure with his work in Oakland. She knew exactly what kind of left wing wack job this guy was, and that is exactly why they wanted him working in the White House.
JARRETT:. You guys know Van Jones? [Applause. Moderator injects: "This is his house apparently."]
JARRETT: Oooh. Van Jones, alright! So, Van Jones. We were so delighted to be able to recruit him into the White House. We were watching him, uh, really, he’s not that old, for as long as he’s been active out in Oakland. And all the creative ideas he has. And so now, we have captured that. And we have all that energy in the White House.
She's also a perfect example of how the corrupt system in Chicago works, where people like her and Obama talk about helping the poor, but just seem to keep getting richer and richer by stuffing tax payer money in their own pockets without doing any that really helps the poor.
Posted by: Ranger | September 06, 2009 at 10:39 AM
Also, I'm sure the likes of NYT thought the truther stuff was not a big deal. Didn't former DNC chairman Dean believe as much?
Lastly, if this was an episode of Law and Order, I'm sure the white person would be found guilty of something.
Posted by: No one you know | September 06, 2009 at 10:44 AM
Yes, DebinNC - a towering figure. A few minutes ago Chris Wallace did a "...but, but, but he wrote this book..." about the green movement. snort.
It is so easy to impress lefties. Just write a book. Worked for Dear Leader.
Posted by: centralcal | September 06, 2009 at 10:45 AM
...were bothered more about the Truther allegations than the admission of being a communist. W.T.F.
What bothered me most was that:
He had an actual 'Trojan Horse' plan to turn this country into a socialist state.
It is a realistic plan that sounds like it might work.
It was NOT a secret plan, but one that he was proud to talk about and was undoubtedly known to those who vetted him for the green czar job.
The President hasn't disavowed the 'Trojan Horse' plan to turn this country into a socialist state. (no one has asked him about it at all)
Posted by: Original MikeS | September 06, 2009 at 10:47 AM
Ranger,
The Obama administration seems to be made up of revolutionaries and mercenaries,so i is probably best to peel of the revolutionaries first,you can buy the mercenaries.
Two of the most dangerous demagogues are Sunstein and Dr Emanuel. Their somewhat psychopathic view on human life leaves them as creatures unworthy of sympathy,vulnerable to public outcry.
Posted by: PeterUK | September 06, 2009 at 10:50 AM
British officials claim Mr Obama and Mrs Clinton were kept informed at all stages of discussions concerning Megrahi’s return (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1211495/No-10-turns-Obama-Clinton-criticising-decision-release-Lockerbie-bomber.html).
Posted by: justonebullet | September 06, 2009 at 11:02 AM
How many New Yorkers get hacked off when they notice their morning paper hides stuff from them?
Posted by: Jim Ryan | September 06, 2009 at 11:07 AM
The link above. A snake fight!
Posted by: PeterUK | September 06, 2009 at 11:08 AM
PUK,
A good point, but I think the key here is to follow up on success. Jerrett is the next in the line of fire based on what she said and the excitement she showed about having Jones on board. To save her, they will have to find someone else to sacrifice. The point to make now is that this is not only about Jones, but how a man with his views could be appointed to such a powerful position in the first place.
Posted by: Ranger | September 06, 2009 at 11:19 AM
This administration certainly has some unique job titles like Office of the President Elect Chief of Staff. ARe there any others? How about Office of Zany Vice Presidents?
Posted by: jorod | September 06, 2009 at 11:20 AM
PUK, what a link!
This administration is a JOKE. Carter was a garden-variety bad administration. This is a JOKE.
What do you get when you hire a 47-year-old man who has never accomplished anything in his life and put him in the CEO position?
Gee, I can't think... Oh! I know! You get a JOKE.
Posted by: Jim Ryan | September 06, 2009 at 11:20 AM
Ranger,
But is is Jarrett expendable? Are you just taking down pawns?
Posted by: PeterUK | September 06, 2009 at 11:25 AM
Jim,
Our communist government are just as poisonous as your communist government. It should be interesting.
Posted by: PeterUK | September 06, 2009 at 11:27 AM
PUK, I'm popping plenty of popcorn. I love jokes. Too bad the joke is on the next generation.
Posted by: Jim Ryan | September 06, 2009 at 11:32 AM
PUK,
Institutionally, Jarrett is not that important. She's in charge of congressional liaison. But, on a personal level, she is at the heart of the Obama administration. She's known both of them since Barry got to Chicago after law school. Making her hurt will make Barry hurt (if he is capable of feeling anything for anyone other than himself that is). Going by Alinsky's rules: attack people, not institutions, people hurt faster.
Posted by: Ranger | September 06, 2009 at 11:33 AM
Ranger,
Take her down and Cass Sunstein gets his Fairness Doctrine for the Internet that bit faster. You have to be undermining some of the ideologues.
Posted by: PeterUK | September 06, 2009 at 11:47 AM
If possible, the next appointee target should be white. Beck is introducing America to the radical goals of Mark Lloyd (black), but also Holdren and Sunstein (white). I wish he'd now showcase the incompetence of Ortzag (white) and Roehmer (white), who've been demonstrably, ruinously wrong. Going after Valerie Jarrett now would be a terrible mistake imo, especially as she seems to be helping us more than she is hurting. The race card will be played, but we shouldn't give those playing it any grounds for doing so.
Posted by: DebinNC | September 06, 2009 at 11:48 AM
"How many New Yorkers get hacked off when they notice their morning paper hides stuff from them?"
How many notice?
Remember, some of these people think "Mary Jo might have thought it was worth it considering all of Teddy's accomplishments".
Maybe its worth being lied to if it advances the cause.
Posted by: ben | September 06, 2009 at 11:54 AM
Goldberg contrasts this joke of an adminstration to Clinton's. Also points out just how moronic a joke Tom Friedman is today.
Posted by: Jim Ryan | September 06, 2009 at 11:58 AM
"Our communist government are just as poisonous as your communist government"
I don't know, PUK, your communists are more pragmatic than our communists...and our George Galloways are actually in the executive branch, they are Czars...
Posted by: ben | September 06, 2009 at 11:59 AM
Glen Beck is the guy who gets a plus in his column for Jones. He started it, and everyone else (well bloggers) ran with the ball. And yes Jones was the guy who started the Beck boycott. So I guess the message is: Don't mess with Glen.
Posted by: Jane | September 06, 2009 at 12:03 PM
Jane, I gather Gateway Pundit uncovered the trutherism of Jones which is really what sunk him. If so, at least half the credit goes to GP.
Posted by: Jim Ryan | September 06, 2009 at 12:10 PM
Goldberg: "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."
I think part of the MSM self-censoring that is going on (blackout of anything that even potentially reflects badly on Obama) is tied to job security...and hopes of RIF'd journos of landing a spot in the only growth industry in America - government. They dare not bite the only hand that might feed them.
Posted by: DebinNC | September 06, 2009 at 12:11 PM
Yeah--Friedman is a terrible joke today..Nasty old internet.
I think they are covering for Obama because they think on the big things he stads for what they do ---and because he's black and coool and they like to think of themselves as cutting edge and oh so nuanced and brilliant.
Posted by: clarice | September 06, 2009 at 12:27 PM
too many people will self-censor themselves so they can get government jobs.
Whats new? That has been the Democrat Party election plan since one George McGovern did his Wiley Coyote impersonation.
Posted by: Gmax | September 06, 2009 at 12:29 PM
TM--your country and western reference made me laugh out loud. You are my REAL favorite but don't tell the others.
Posted by: clarice | September 06, 2009 at 12:29 PM
What I don't understand is Meg Whitman thinking Van Jones is terrific!
Is she not running as an R for governor of CA? Where is her vetting process?
Posted by: glasater | September 06, 2009 at 12:37 PM
SUDDENLY I'M WRITING COUNTRY AND WESTERN:
You're probably thinking of that old classic --"Thank God and Greyhound she's/he's Gone"---
But behind Lee and Jones is an influential network of communists known as the Committees of Correspondence for Democracy and Socialism (CCDS). Lee was a secret member of the group, a spin-off of the Communist Party USA, while Jones was the keynote speaker at a 2006 CCDS fundraiser.
Is this next quote why we know so little about Obama?
My guess is every communist site is being scrubbed as we watch this day go by.
I've spent the morning reading different sources about Van Jones. Probably at least, 30 different articles. Almost all of them have new revelations about the background of Van Jones. He appears to be one of the most active far far leftists in America.
Posted by: pagar | September 06, 2009 at 12:37 PM
The US President has Marxist and Islamic interests and sympathies. He is therefore unfit to be the President. Who hired Van Jones? Hussein Obama and his radical, hate filled wife, Michelle. That's who.
He must be forced to resign. He is unfit.
A race based, poverty pimping lawyer, who is an economic illiterate, driving our nation off the edge economically. There will be no economic recovery without economic growth. He is against growth - he is for windmills.
He is a man with contempt for our country. He never worked a job in HIS LIFE. He's a professional speechmaker; that's all.
Time to remove him from office - peacefully and politically. He is unfit.
Posted by: btw | September 06, 2009 at 12:39 PM
Nicholas II's Revenge on the Commies, or Brobambi can be rolled. Look out Cass Sunstein, the Anarcho-Syndicalist Czar[ina] of Administrative tweaking....
Posted by: daveinboca | September 06, 2009 at 12:41 PM
Friedman in his recent book Hot, Flat, and Crowded: "We have a target. We want to avoid the doubling of CO2 by mid-century and to do it we need to avoid the emission of 200 billion tons of carbon as we grow between now and then."
Thomas Friedman's home
Posted by: DebinNC | September 06, 2009 at 12:44 PM
LUN for my 12:37 post.
Scroll to the bottom of the article and they have a lot more on the subject of Van Jones. They are all worth reading.
Posted by: pagar | September 06, 2009 at 12:44 PM
I was just reading the Week in
Review. They have an article about advice to college freshmen. Here's a little tidbit from Yale Prof. Harold Bloom, after recommending the classics:
"whatever our current travails, we now have a literate president capable of coherent discourse, but too many other politicians are devoid of syntax and appear to have read nothing. Aggressive ignorance in aspirants to high office is another dismal consequence of the waning of authentic education."
What can you say? The academy and the paper of record are in deep denial about the obvious.
Posted by: peter | September 06, 2009 at 12:46 PM
With Ron Dellums as Mayor, what do you expect from Oakland/Berkeley? Jerry Brown was the last mayor...There is a tradition of crazy ass hard leftism there that outshines even the Marin - San Francisco axis. It pollutes all of Northern California.
Now, do we get to take Jones out to Ekaterinberg since he was a czar and all?
Posted by: matt | September 06, 2009 at 12:47 PM
glasater--I expect it is like Delay's comments about Thurmond--just polite pap for political operatives without reference to their backgrounds at all. In Whitman's case a nod to a powerful figure in Berkeley politics who sounded good when there was no good examination of his background (good looking black guy with a Yale law degree who had a lot os support in the ghetto) and in DeLay's just a sop to an old fart on his way out of town--at last.
Posted by: clarice | September 06, 2009 at 12:48 PM
My goodness, dave, I think if you threatened to sic your cat on him, Sunstein might skedattle. That's one impressive feline.
Posted by: DebinNC | September 06, 2009 at 12:50 PM
She 'chose poorly' like the line from "Last Crusade" had she gone to Juneau instead, in the summer, she wouldn't have had that problem.
Posted by: bishop | September 06, 2009 at 12:52 PM
I shocked, simply shocked!
Posted by: Paul Krugman | September 06, 2009 at 01:04 PM
it's all Bush's fault, and I need a man!
Posted by: Mo, the crazy lady | September 06, 2009 at 01:05 PM
Clarice--I know you're right in saying nice things about a power broker.
I can understand Meg Whitman--if she is really serious about running for governor of CA--might be tempted to saying something positive about a so-called power broker in the Bay Area.
But tuned in Ignatz had never heard of the guy.
Van Jones has/had a very narrow audience. Although I am concerned that given the rukus over his appointment and now resignation he will have gained a larger national profile and considerably more power in totally undesirable circles.
Posted by: glasater | September 06, 2009 at 01:12 PM
Ignatz was not in the habit of attending World Cant Wait and other CPUSA functions, Black Panther meeting either. Ignatz probably would have crossed the street to avoid a confrontation with a ragtag smelly group of truthers too.
So as has been showed, Ignatz was just fishing in different fishing holes. He does not like sewer trout so he does not fish there. The far left, find it a delicacy.
Posted by: Gmax | September 06, 2009 at 01:17 PM
I think Clarice has it exactly right about Meg Whitman.
Posted by: centralcal | September 06, 2009 at 01:23 PM
More from Clarice
Posted by: DebinNC | September 06, 2009 at 01:29 PM
You know. I'd forgotten or I'd have added it to the blog--that Mueller apparently was not informed about Clinton and Obama's contacts with the Brits--That's something--he sent a letter to the Brits opposing the transfer and he surely wouldn't have done that had he known.
Maybe he'll resign in outrage.
Surely this is the next big scandal with Sunstein et al being appetizers and entre' acte yummies.
Posted by: clarice | September 06, 2009 at 01:38 PM
Van Jones operated behind the scenes, much like all of Soros's projects, like the KGB's
astroturf efforts in the nuclear freeze movement, he helped spread the "Bush doesn't care. . ." meme, throught the Ella
Baker center, he furthered the Mumia scam,
was part of the illusion of the broad dissent against the Iraq War, nothing was as it seems. Alinsky was proven right again, focus on the person, not the institution, although it was really one and
the same
Posted by: bishop | September 06, 2009 at 01:44 PM
A repost from the other thread -
Off topic, but JOM tea party related -
If anyone is in town this coming week for the festivities, I'd like to invite you to our monthly packing night for the Troops. Tuesday, Sept.8th at 7pm at Mclean Bible Church (8925 Leesburg Pike - directions LUN)
We have all the "stuff", but welcome all to help set up, write letters,and pack. We usually send out 60-100 big boxes. lots of nice people. Come early to help set up. The ministry is called operation kindness.
Posted by: Janet | September 06, 2009 at 01:44 PM
Mueller condemns release of terrorist Clarice is right; this could be huge. Would Mueller have sent such a letter without clearing it first? Was he speaking as the one who prosecuted the case or as the FBI head? Very strange.
Posted by: DebinNC | September 06, 2009 at 01:54 PM
Thank you. I think he HAS TO resign ..His letter called the release an insult to the grieving families and an incitement to further terrorism PLUS this was something he should have been informed about.
And when he resigns this will be a scandal even the NYT can't avoid.
Posted by: clarice | September 06, 2009 at 01:56 PM
The President hasn't disavowed the 'Trojan Horse' plan to turn this country into a socialist state.
You know, I was thinking about this this morning. I'm not quite sure what to do about it, but I think — in the name of intellectual honesty, as well as for argumentative purposes — we need to think a little more deeply on this term. "Socialist" and "Leninist" aren't the same thing, and while I doubt you could get them to say it in so many words, I suspect it's most accurate to say that Obama and his minions are European-style social democrats.
Now, I don't think a European social democrat would be a lot more popular in the US than an outright Leninist or Chavista, but it's a lot easier for the Juan Williamses of the world to make fun of the notion of Obama being a new Lenin than if we could make it clear somehow we're talking about mere paralytic European social democracy.
Posted by: Charlie (Colorado) | September 06, 2009 at 02:00 PM
Are you just taking down pawns?
For a second I thought we were talking about District 9.
Posted by: Charlie (Colorado) | September 06, 2009 at 02:02 PM
I think he HAS TO resign
On his own because of conviction/integrity or because an enraged Obama forces him out?
Posted by: DebinNC | September 06, 2009 at 02:03 PM
From the end of the LUN:
Mueller, who was the top U.S. Justice Department official who oversaw the investigation of the bombing, said in the letter MacAskill's action was "as inexplicable as it is detrimental to the cause of justice."
The problem he's one of the few good guys still left in the natl security establishment, can you imagine his replacement
Posted by: bishop | September 06, 2009 at 02:04 PM
What I don't understand is Meg Whitman thinking Van Jones is terrific!
She said the next day after that that she'd just met him during one of those issue cruises, that he said some good things about new jobs in California, and she didn't run a complete background check on him after dinner.
Let's try to keep our self-respect intellectually, shall we?
Posted by: Charlie (Colorado) | September 06, 2009 at 02:09 PM
Can you imagine how the msm could possibly ignore his resigning over the Obama-Clinton conduct (including their keeping him uninformed of this stupid decision?)
Obama won't force him out out of pique,Deb. If he has any honor he'll hace to resign.
Posted by: clarice | September 06, 2009 at 02:11 PM
He must be forced to resign.
While you're at it, I want a unicorn, a jetpack, and $20 million with which to endow a japanese tradition Buddhist monastery in Boulder.
Posted by: Charlie (Colorado) | September 06, 2009 at 02:11 PM
Charlie,
There is no such animal in power in Europe,the EU doesn't do democracy. What exists is soft fascism.
Posted by: PeterUK | September 06, 2009 at 02:12 PM
Mueller can always say he is leaving to spend more time with Van Jones.
Posted by: PeterUK | September 06, 2009 at 02:14 PM
"Aggressive ignorance in aspirants to high office is another dismal consequence of the waning of authentic education."
The hell of it is that I agree with him. (It's never too safe to disagree with Bloom.)
The problem is that Bloom fell for the conventional wisdom that Yale and Harvard professional-school grad Bush was "aggressively ignorant" and unschooled, while Columbia and Harvard professional-school grad Obama is both educated and wise. (It's also never safe to agree with Bloom.)
Posted by: Charlie (Colorado) | September 06, 2009 at 02:16 PM
Mueller may have mistakenly believed Obama's public reaction to the release was truthful.
Posted by: DebinNC | September 06, 2009 at 02:18 PM
There is no such animal in power in Europe,the EU doesn't do democracy. What exists is soft fascism.
Yeah, that's what I said. "Social Democrat."
Posted by: Charlie (Colorado) | September 06, 2009 at 02:19 PM
It is also never safe to underestimate a lefty smooching a derriere.
Posted by: PeterUK | September 06, 2009 at 02:19 PM
"Yeah, that's what I said. "Social Democrat."
Nope! The era of representative democracy is over here. Voting changes nothing,not even the government.
Posted by: PeterUK | September 06, 2009 at 02:21 PM
Van go. First, went Churchill's bust back to England. Now, Barry hangs Van go over his desk. Or, is it just a report of another one going under the bus?
Posted by: Snarky | September 06, 2009 at 02:23 PM
Let's try to keep our self-respect intellectually, shall we?
You're being a blowhard Chaco!
I wasn't asking for Meg Whitman's ideological purity--just questioning a little how/where she gets her information.
Posted by: glasater | September 06, 2009 at 02:33 PM
I want a unicorn, a jetpack, and $200 million with which to hire a great plastic surgeon, buy a yacht, hire a crew and go shopping in Milan for a new wardrobe.
Posted by: clarice | September 06, 2009 at 02:34 PM
Amen Clarice--very good article at AT and thanks.
Posted by: glasater | September 06, 2009 at 02:37 PM
I'll settle for the unicorn.With one of those, you can get the rest. Besides,it will save cutting the grass.
Posted by: PeterUK | September 06, 2009 at 02:38 PM
TM, how about, "You lost me at hello."
Posted by: bad s##t | September 06, 2009 at 02:39 PM
Gateway Pundit has a Gateway Pudit roundup in re Jones.
Does the record show that it was GP's nailing Jones's Trutherism that got Jones ousted and not Beck's bemoaning Jones's communism? If so, the blogosphere has two trophy heads now: Rather and Jones.
Posted by: Jim Ryan | September 06, 2009 at 02:39 PM
Chaco:
I like Steve Diamond's description:
And more Diamond:
From the longer article:
Who is the Real Barack Obama - Oct 2008
Posted by: Sara (Pal2Pal) | September 06, 2009 at 02:40 PM
If you two are not careful you are going to bid the number up right into stimulus money range. Some lawmaker may hear you and file the legislation, and damned if I am paying for unicorns.
Posted by: Gmax | September 06, 2009 at 02:45 PM
I suspect it's most accurate to say that Obama and his minions are European-style social democrats.
Except Obama et al are quite a bit more hostile to the United States than the Europeans are. Of course, the Euros haven't been subjected to the slavemaster's lash the way the Obamas, Van Jones, Valerie Jarett, and assorted other millionaires have been in this country.
Posted by: bgates | September 06, 2009 at 02:46 PM
No, he's more of a African colonial mindset, described by Ikenga in the series on American Thinker. But this isn't colonial Africa, or Latin America (even in Miami)or Czarist Russia. That kind of misunderstanding is called 'category error'
Posted by: bishop | September 06, 2009 at 03:02 PM
Mr. Jones:
Please email me regarding your future employment. I have a proposal that may be quite attractive to you.
Most of the yardwork is quite light. I will need a tree taken out, though. Having a problem growing the back lawn. Hourly, $8. (In cash!) About five hours/week. Seasonal.
Posted by: Jim Ryan | September 06, 2009 at 03:07 PM
In Cash
Too bad Geithner has a steady gig, otherwise he might be up for that. No questions asked, of course.
Posted by: Gmax | September 06, 2009 at 03:12 PM
Is Sopists R Us running a contest to find the most "acceptablel" descriptors for commie bastards today? Is first prize tea with Juan Williams or cocktails with Tom Friedman?
Posted by: Rick Ballard | September 06, 2009 at 03:12 PM
Van Jones deserves 10K per speech when he can land a real job that actually contributes to capital growth.
Meh. Van is small potatoes. What you really want to spoil is not the soil where they grow but their source for water *cough*Tides*cough*Ford*cough*Rockefeller*cough*Soros.Van gets picked, chopped up, consumed, and spit out. The water supply remains for the next seed to blossom.
And you can't do anything about the soil. Oakland is radical central. It would take a huge cultural shift to change that. I thought the Sandlers were doing that by moving those that wanted to depart the radical culture 2 hours west so they could own homes. But then the Sandlers um, ran into, oh what is it? Budgetary issues.
Posted by: Gabriel Sutherland | September 06, 2009 at 03:17 PM
My thoughts exactly.Rick. I say call them statists and the hell with it.(Black Shirts, brown shirts, ref scarves--all the same to me--UGH)
Posted by: clarice | September 06, 2009 at 03:19 PM
***reD scarves****
Posted by: clarice | September 06, 2009 at 03:19 PM
verryyy interesting get on Mueller, clarice
if he is what he writes, he'll resign. Good decent people must not be bought by the likes of Mohammar Khadafi-imagine the outrage the families must feel on top of the anger they already had. To know their government was complicit in that scam!!
DebNC--that pic of Friedman's house should be background on Beck or O'Reilly as his cowardly remarks on MTP are played! I am so tired of hypocrits making money off the backs of "Mom & Pop America". We labor, they take the $$ and sneer at the peons, while worshipping Fidel and Saul.
Posted by: glenda | September 06, 2009 at 03:33 PM
Our old friend, Deborah Solomon (sarc) is at it again, asking Norman Podhoretz, the
rhetorical equivalent of 'when did you stop
beating your wife' in the LUN
Posted by: bishop | September 06, 2009 at 03:36 PM
Look at the ages of all these old fools - Rangel 78, Stark 77, Levin 77, ...LUN
Writing the tax laws that we have to obey & they don't.
Posted by: Janet | September 06, 2009 at 03:39 PM
To President Obama,
Van Jones has resigned, or possibly you have fired him.
Please tell me, what is new to you about this recent information about Van Jones? If you already knew about these aspects of his history, then why should you allow him to resign? If you already knew, then you should fight to oppose the misinformation or extremism directed against him and keep him in your administration.
If you want him out, based on recent information that is new to you, then what's new, and why is it unacceptable to you? Please explain.
Van Jones: What's New?
Posted by: Andrew_M_Garland | September 06, 2009 at 03:46 PM
Gateway Pundit got a lot on Van Jones out in the internet public eye, but imo, the real digging was done by RBO.
If one is really interested in the Communist goings on in the Obama Administration, check the Real Barack Obama blog (LUN)first. Trevor Loudon from the New Zeal blog in New Zealand covers Communists like no one else and he feeds the reports into the RBO blog.
Posted by: pagar | September 06, 2009 at 03:50 PM
bishop, Goldberg has some good points on that at 12:54 in the Corner today. (Permalink doesn't work.)
Once a conservative buys into the leftist term "right" or "right wing," he's almost sure to end up sewing confusion. The commies labeled Hitler "right wing" and any conservative who accepts the label is being played. Podhoretz got played.
Whenever someone labels me "right wing", I say "I don't know what you're talking about. The right is occupied by fascists and other socialist totalitarians. I'm a conservative." Don't let leftists lay out the spectrum of political positions. If you do the only choices are which totalitarian position to ally yourself with: theirs or their competitors. Podhoretz should have known this.
Posted by: Jim Ryan | September 06, 2009 at 03:52 PM