O-bum-a and Van Jones

[Birdieman]

What's amazing is not one leftist liberal coming to Van's defense on this site. Wil, cheesebro, 2112, wakeup, Robert, where's all the defense of your savior at his time of need??

[RanchHQ]

Monday, September 07, 2009

Obama White House Misled American Public On Van Jones


Last November after the national election Team Obama announced to the American public that they would initiate the most extensive and invasive application process ever. Their vetting process would "go beyond what might have been expected."

The Obama White House was committed to "change."
The New York Times reported:

A seven-page questionnaire being sent by the office of President-elect Barack Obama to those seeking cabinet and other high-ranking posts may be the most extensive — some say invasive — application ever.

The questionnaire includes 63 requests for personal and professional records, some covering applicants’ spouses and grown children as well, that are forcing job-seekers to rummage from basements to attics, in shoe boxes, diaries and computer archives to document both their achievements and missteps...

...Mr. Obama has elevated the vetting even beyond what might have been expected, especially when it comes to applicants’ family members, in a reflection of his campaign rhetoric against lobbying and the back-scratching, self-serving ways of Washington.

“President-elect Obama made a commitment to change the way Washington does business, and the vetting process exemplifies that,” said Stephanie Cutter, chief spokeswoman for the Obama transition office.

Here are a couple examples from the questionaire (pdf).
Imagine Truther-communist cop-killer supporter Van Jones' response to question number 8:

8.) Briefly describe the most controversial matters you have been involved with over the course of your career."

Or, how about question number 12?
Again, imagine communist-Truther Van Jones' response to this question:

12.) Speeches: Please identify all speeches you have given. If available please provide the text or recordings of each such speech.

Here's another one:

46.) Have any members of your family or close social or business associates ever been arrested for, charged with, or convicted of a crime other than a minor traffic violation?

(Van Jones was arrested in San Francisco in 1992 for participating in a demonstration following the acquittal of four LA police officers accused of beating Rodney King.)

If the Obama Administration had actually used this template to screen Van Jones his controversial speeches, his past arrest, and his musical collaborations with cop-killers should have raised a red flag or two with the administration.

Either Team Obama ignored Van Jones' past-- accepted and agreed with his past-- or completely misrepresented their vetting process to the American public.

Just how exactly did such a radical hater like Van Jones make it through such an extensive and invasive screening?
The administration has some explaining to do.

LINK: Gateway Pundit

[RanchHQ]

Dan
Calabrese

September 7, 2009
Why Van Jones Had to Go: Exposing the Left’s Family Secrets

If you want to avoid making headlines with your resignation-under-pressure, it would be hard to pick a better time than around midnight on a Saturday night during a holiday weekend. But then again, the controversy surrounding Van Jones hadn’t been making much in the way of news coverage anyway.

President Obama’s so-called “green czar” turns out to have been a 9/11 truther with near-communist ideological proclivities. He had called for a revolution against the U.S. government, and perhaps least troubling of all, had referred to Republicans as “assholes.”

Hey, some are.

Even though the story was completely ignored by the New York Times, the major networks and most other members of the dying old-guard media, Jones’s radical affiliations generated enough buzz on Fox News and Internet-based media that the White House could feel the heat nonetheless.

The real reason Jones had to go was not his ideas per se. He thinks the way President Obama thinks. Jones had to go because his presence in the administration revealed so much about how the left operates – and these are supposed to be closely guarded family secrets.

Perhaps the most unintentionally hilarious statement about Jones came from the Washington Post in its wee-hours Sunday morning coverage of Jones’s resignation:

Jones, a towering figure in the environmental movement, had worked for the White House Council on Environmental Quality since March. He was a civil-rights activist in California before turning his focus to environmental and energy issues, and he won wide praise before joining the Obama administration for articulating a broad vision of a green economy Democrats could embrace.

This is hilarious because you’d think from reading it that Jones just happened to develop this new interest, environmental and energy issues, and changed careers. And he became so good at his new career that he got a job advising the president on it!

All Jones did was adjust the focus of the same “career” he’d always had – that of radical left-wing activist – to focus on pushing the latest fashionable excuse for all the same policies the left always wants.

The “revolution” Jones seeks would re-order the entire economy to take state control of private wealth and redistribute it to the hapless proletariat. This is the same agenda the Democratic Party has embraced for more than a generation, offering whatever excuse might sell the idea. They’ve been trying to sell poverty and health care as excuses to do this since at least the 1960s. Even the anti-war movement is, at least in part, about wanting to re-allocate the Pentagon budget for social do-gooder programs administered by the agencies and nonprofits that employ so many of these people.

Now the environment is the excuse to impose massive new taxes and regulations on industry.

It’s all to accomplish the same thing, and that’s why Jones the civil-rights activist became Jones the environmental activist. Every problem that has ever existed is solved by massive taxes and government regulation, and Jones – formidable radical activist that he is – knew how to pivot from issue to issue while really pursuing the same end goal.

That’s why he had to go. The career of Van Jones is a microcosm of the American left itself. It is always pursuing the same goal – redistribution of wealth through the favored vehicles of federal agencies, nonprofits and labor unions – and is always ready with a new excuse for why we need to do this.

Of course, in the past, a Democratic administration could have employed lots of people like Van Jones, because the establishment media would not report on his radicalism (nor did it do so on this occasion) and there was no non-traditional media to do the job in their stead. Who knows how many guys like this wandered the halls of the federal government during the Carter and Clinton administrations?

It’s a new age, though, and it’s hard for President Obama to pretend he is a mainstream thinker when one of his “czars” is all over YouTube calling for a revolution, and signing 9/11 truther petitions.

Then again, there are plenty of Obama’s own radical statements – about single-payer health care, disarmament and lots of other juicy items – floating around on the Internet as well. Maybe now that we know a little more about the kind of people he brings on board to work in his administration, people might start to consider that Obama, too, meant the radical things he said in the past. And still does.

LINK: North Star Writers Group - Syndicated Commentary: Opinion, Humor and Features

[RanchHQ]

[RanchHQ]

The White House Knew All About Van Jones — and Hired Him Against the Advice of WH Counsel

posted at 1:17 pm on September 8, 2009 by HowardPortnoy


Just in case President Obama was getting ready for a statement to the press asserting that “this was not the Van Jones I knew,” this little nugget courtesy of The Prowler at American Spectator should give him second thoughts — not to mention one or two nightmares. It seems the Office of the White House Counsel raised concerns about the hiring of Jones when “inconsistencies” were discovered in Jones’ completed Questionnaire for National Security Positions, a form routinely given to individuals who have been slotted for potential White House appointments. A copy of the form can be found here.

It also now appears that Jones wasn’t entirely truthful about his views on the 9/11 truther movement. Jones’ initial reaction to the press was that he doesn’t support the truthers and that his signing of the 2004 petition was a mistake. (Howard Dean on Fox News Sunday described it as an example of a politician innocently signed clipboard shoved in front him.) Yet, documents have come out that suggest Jones helped organize a 2002 truther protest march in San Francisco.

Care to comment, Mr. President?

SOURCE: The Greenroom Forum Archive The White House Knew All About Van Jones — and Hired Him Against the Advice of WH Counsel

[RanchHQ]

Obama Caves, Demotes Van Jones From Czar To Archduke

>


Bowing to a growing uproar from conservatives as well as pressure from White House insiders trying to avoid a costly distraction, President Obama today demoted embattled Environmental Czar Van Jones To Environmental Archduke.

“After careful consideration, I have decided that some of Van Jones’ actions do not meet the exacting criteria I have established for the Czar position,” said the President. “First, it appears that Mr. Jones twice signed documents supporting the theory that the Bush Administration was somehow complicit in the 9-11 attacks. Hogwash. That Mr. Jones apparently still clings to a tired old theory when anyone with half a brain knows that fire can’t melt steel tells me the young man still has some learning to do.”

“Second, Mr. Jones called Republicans ‘assholes.’ Wow, that’s creative. With the myriad insults we’ve developed for the dumber party– Rethuglicans, Repukes are just two that come to mind– my Environmental Czar goes for the sphincter? I don’t think so.”

“It’s my belief that Mr. Jones will benefit from honing his craft a bit at the Archduke level. In fact, this is not the first time we have used a temporary demotion to motivate and train. I believe Joe Biden will tell you that the six weeks he spent as ‘Junior Vice President’ were invaluable to his development.”


LINK: Obama Caves, Demotes Van Jones From Czar To Archduke The Nose On Your Face

[Robert]

Originally Posted by Birdieman

What's amazing is not one leftist liberal coming to Van's defense on this site. Wil, cheesebro, 2112, wakeup, Robert, where's all the defense of your savior at his time of need??

My savior happens to be Jesus. I do not feel it's necessary to defend him. That is what he did for me...and you.

[Birdieman]

Originally Posted by Robert

My savior happens to be Jesus. I do not feel it's necessary to defend him. That is what he did for me...and you.

Cop out. Only a liberal when it suits you, eh Robert?

[Maximus]

Robert, I know the Bird was making a point but you read it literally and responded. I gave you a thank you for literally what you said.

But you skipped over what the Bird meant. Do you want to defend Van Jones? And as an extension of that, do you want to defend the President for appointing him? I wouldn't.

Good grief. The man said, "I am a communist" and it took weeks for him to resign. How long do you think it would take him to get bounced out by a Republican?

[RanchHQ]

Van Jones resigned 'cause:

"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. "They are using lies and distortions to distract and divide."

He continued: "I have been inundated with calls -- from across the political spectrum -- urging me to 'stay and fight.' But I came here to fight for others, not for myself. I cannot in good conscience ask my colleagues to expend precious time and energy defending or explaining my past. We need all hands on deck, fighting for the future."

Not 'cause of his past actions, but because "opponents of reform have mounted a vicious smear campaign against me".

In other words, in his eyes, he has done nothing wrong.

I guess that is how the Hard Left thinks, I don't know.