About Me

Name: Catmman
Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Van Jones: A Controversy the MSM Ignored

Full recap of the Van Jones 'saga' (everything you wanted to know about Jones' radicalism is there, go see it!)

I think this paragraph from Allahpundit sums things up as well.:

Three points to take away from this, though. One: We were told during the campaign that Wright and Ayers were non-issues because they wouldn’t be part of the administration, but has Wright, for instance, said anything vastly worse than Jones has? If he’s persona non grata on Team Barry, why wasn’t Van the man? Two: As noted by Driscoll and Mickey Kaus and doubtless dozens of others, so astonishing was the press blackout on this story that millions of people will wake up today, see the headline, and wonder, “Who the hell is Van Jones?” This isn’t as sexy a media-bias scandal as Rathergate or the silence on Edwards during the primary, but it’s significant. And three: To keep beating a dead horse, this never would have happened had Jones been forced to sit for a Senate confirmation because the White House never would have nominated him. They knew he was toxic and they knew Republicans would force the press to cover that fact at a hearing. That’s the whole point of having “czars” — to install people in positions of cabinet-level power without having to deal with the Senate’s pesky check-and-balance. It needs to change. Soon.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

BREAKING: Van Jones Resigns

President Obama's "Green Jobs Czar" and noted radical, commie, 9/11 Truther and all around progressive pantywaist, has resigned

No real details yet as you would expect from dumping this at 11:50PM (CST) on a Saturday night.

More to follow.

UPDATE:  This just found on a CNN Twitter feed'White House green jobs czar Van Jones resigns, blames lies and "vicious smear campaign" against him.'

The irony of that statement is almost beyond comprehension...

More to follow.

UPDATE from the WaPo"I am resigning my post at the Council on Environmental Quality, effective today," Jones said in a statement dated Sept 5 released around midnight on Sept 6.

"On the eve of historic fights for health care and clean energy,
opponents of reform have mounted a vicious smear campaign against me.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."

So.  Pointing out the guys' radicalism and wacko beliefs is a "vicious smear campaign"?  More to follow I'm sure.

UPDATE:  Here's the spin from NBC.  They're saying he resigned due to "Republican attacks" and only mention some "inflammatory statements" Jones made (obviously referring ONLY to his calling Republicans a-holes) - no mention of his 9/11 Trutherism, his support of cop killer Mumia Abu Jamal, his communism - nothing else.  Way to report the facts NBC!
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Recap: Van Jones' "Truther" defense

I didn't get to close out my last post very well, so here is a recap of what may be turning into some defense of Obama's Green Jobs Czar Van Jones' defense of his conspiratorial 9/11 beliefs (as well as why this defense is bull):

Signatory: Leftist Historian Howard Zinn

Claim: He's not really a Truther

Evidence for His Claim: He says so

Evidence against His Claim: He's really a Truther

Fact: He's really a Truther

...

Signatory: Leftist Rabbi Michael Lerner

Claim: He's not really a Truther

Evidence for His Claim: He says so

Evidence against His Claim: He's really a Truther

Fact: He's really a Truther

...

Signatory: Leftist Agitator Van Jones

Claim: He's not really a Truther

Evidence for His Claim: Howard Zinn and Michael Lerner claim they've been somehow misrepresented, so maybe Van Jones was misrepresented too

Evidence against His Claim: Howard Zinn and Michael Lerner were not misrepresented, because they're really really Truthers

Fact: TBD*

* I don't really agree with Ace in this TBD of Van Jones beliefs.  Of course he's a 9/11 Truther nutjob.  He's a radical.  He's a commie.  He supports cop killers and accuses "whitey" of poisoning minorities and other assorted jackassery.

What IS TBD is his fate.  Will Obama keep this wacko in the White House?  He's not gone yet.  Time will tell.

Also, h/t to AoS for the information from my last post.  I didn't get a chance to post that.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

A Van Jones 9/11 Defense Unfolds?

Van Jones has claimed that the views expressed in the 9/11 Truth petition he signed about BushCos involvement in 9/11 doesn't, in fact never has, reflected his views on 9/11.  Those views being, in essence, that President Bush and his administration either had direct culpability in the commission of the 9/11 attacks, or allowed those attacks to take place (with fore-knowledge) as a pretext for war in the Middle East.

There really is no defense of this viewpoint, since it can be taken apart piecemeal.  As has been supposed, if this is in fact Van Jones defense, there are one of two possible options: 1) He's lying.  Of course he's lying.  For his defense to hold any water his objection to his signature on the truther website would have been an issue at any time in the last four or so years since he signed the bloody thing (before it became a possible political liability for President Obama).  Additional evidence reveals that as far back as 2002 Van Jones supported 'Trutheriness", which also give lie to this particular defense.  2)  He's stupid.  That all of a sudden this person who never met a leftist radical conspiracy theory he didn't like (including the 'framing' of cop killer Mumia Abdul Jamal), wasn't smart enough to glean from the 9/11 petition he signed that it said exactly what it indeed says.

So, in an effort to bolster his "I was misled" defense, some other 9/11 Truthers have come out saying that basically they were misled too.

Howard Zinn and Rabbi Michael Lerner have come out saying they were misled as was Van Jones and the petition they signed didn't represent their views on 9/11.  Really?  Hmmm (remarks from Zinn and Lerner are italicized):

Howard ZinnWhether one views the 9/11 "terrorist" attacks as blow back, a wake-up call, or an unjustified outrage, they have deeply affected the American psyche and our attitudes toward war, the future, and the world. As a historian trying to understand this phenomenon, I tend to view the government's behavior, before and after 9/11, in the context of its leaders' past actions.

Before 9/11, Bush's inner circle of neoconservative advisors proclaimed the need for a dramatic expansion of U.S. military might entailing "full spectrum dominance" over all other nations and regions (including outer space), long term petro-resource control with permanent Middle East bases, and a preemptive First Strike policy against recalcitrant states. In September 2000, however, the neocon's flagship think tank, the Project for a New America Century, warned that this "process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event - like a new Pearl Harbor."

Michael LernerIn an essay entitled “What If We Succeed in Exposing 9/11 as a Fraud...What Next?” Rabbi Lerner writes: “...I salute the people in this collection of articles who are doing an amazing job of exposing what may prove to be one of the most perverse conspiracies in the history of democratic governments.” The essay will be published in 9/11 and the American Empire: Jews, Christians and Muslims Speak Out (Interlink, fall 2006).

Rabbi Lerner strongly suggests that the prosecution of American architects of the 9/11 attacks
could provide an opportunity for positive social change: “In fact, the kind of psychic trauma that would happen were the charges of intentional involvement in 9/11 by the president, vice president, and other high office holders or leaders of our security apparatus ever proved in a court of law would almost certainly open up political space for a serious discussion of the kinds of radical changes I’m suggesting in the direction of our approach to foreign policy and homeland security.”


Even a cursory analysis shows that both Zinn and Lerner agreed with, indeed believed in, 9/11 Truther nonsense.  There supposed "we were mislead" meme is just an attempt to give cover to Van Jones. 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Where are you 'Truthers'?

One of your own is under attack and you haven't come to his defense!

Where are you?

Where's Rosie O' Donnel, Jesse Ventura, all the wacked-out Paulbot nutjobs who are 'truthers'?

He is one of you, isn't he?  He believes in the same conspiratorial claptrap as you, right?  Is it because he's also a racist commie eco-windbag?  Is that why you won't come to his defense?  Where's Alex Jones and the "Loose Change" guys calling for investigations into the destruction of Van Jones character?  He is a true believer, having attached his name to various 9/11 'Truther' events and materials.  Why aren't you speaking up for him?

Why no outcry from you idiots?  Especially now nearing the anniversary of Bush's crime? 

Could it be that you're alacrity has cooled with Bush out of the White House?  Could it be that your paranoia has been tempered, now that you see the types of people, the types of radicals like Van Jones who think like you do?  Maybe, just maybe, it was all about Bush after all? 

Where is the courage of your convictions? 

Perhaps your courage runs as deep as Van Jones himself who has already attempted to distance himself from this topic  Perhaps you finally see how pernicious true hatred really is.  Perhaps you finally see where your paranoia leads. 

Perhaps you see a little too much of Van Jones in yourself, and you are ashamed.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Why didn't the Stimulus 'save' these jobs?

Unemployment rate 9.7%, up .3% in one month.

Are you wondering how many jobs are out there

So the stimulus is working so well, is saving so many jobs, that unemployment continues to increase and the availability of jobs continues to decrease.  The Stimulus was supposed to decrease unemployment and increase jobs.

We have always been at war with Eurasia.  Eurasia is our ally.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

"Not now or ever" a 9/11 Truther?

VANeee, you got sum 'splainin to doooo:

Too funny. It took 12 hours for the White House to come up with this ridiculous response...
Van Jones, Obama's communist Green Czar, released a statement today saying that he is not now and never has been a 9-11 Truther. Of course, that doesn't explain how his signature landed on the 9-11 Truth.org statement demanding an investigation into the Bush regime for orchestrating the 9-11 attacks...


Also funny is that after his renouncing he was and never has been a Truther, this information surfaces showing he was involved with the '9/11 Truth' movement going back to 2002:

Yesterday, news broke out that Barack Obama's communist Green Czar was a 9-11 Truther. The administration much later in the day released a statement saying Van Jones was "not now or ever" involved in the 9-11 Truther movement.
Jones said the petition he signed in 2004 did not reflect his views and that he did not carefully review the language in the petition before agreeing to add his name..

Not true.
This article at Rense.com from 2002 links Van Jones to the 9-11 Truther movement at its infancy...

So, not only is Van Jones a commie, eco-wackjob radical, he's a LYING commie eco-wackjob radical.  Shocka!

The current conventional wisdom is he will be gone by Monday (Labor Day) at the latest.  Since the administration seems to have been fine with these revelations for the past couple of days, I'm not so sure.  It would not surprise me at all the administration would put out some weak, "out of context" (even though you can't really take this stuff out of context) or some such other defense, at least as a trial balloon before throwing this guy under the bus.

I could be wrong of course.  This administration has no problem throwing anyone under the bus, but that brings up another question:  what is it about this guy Jones which hasn't led to his being tossed already?

It will be interesting to see how this plays out over the next few hours and days.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (4) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Another example of Democrat Imperiousness

This one coming from Baron Hill (D-IN).  Watch the video:


Notice he tells his constituents, the very people who elected him to office, that it is his townhall meeting.  He makes the rules.  He's speaking of this meeting as if he's doing his constituents a favor by gracing them with his presence.  Notice also how he tells the people who elected him that they will NOT tell him how to run his congressional office.  Is this guy for real? 

He is right about his concern with videos showing up on You Tube.  Unfortunately for him in this case, the video, nor his remarks, are taken out of context.  It should also be noted that if not for You Tube and other technology, this mans imperiousness and hubris would be known only to those at the meeting instead of his entire district and the entire country. 

(H/T: Hot Air)
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (3) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Remember those "600,000 jobs over the Summer"?

Ah, the heady days, way back on June 8th, when this promise was made (emphasis mine):

From FOX NewsPresident Obama pledged Monday to pump stimulus money into the economy over the next several months as part of a plan to create or save more than 600,000 jobs this summer...

From ReutersPresident Barack Obama said on Monday accelerated stimulus spending would create or save 600,000 jobs over the next 100 days, pledging action to slow the growth of unemployment that has reached a 25-year high.

From Swamp Politics:

President Barack Obama today will promise to deliver more than 600,000 new jobs this summer with accelerated spending of some of the $787-billion economic stimulus that Congress approved at his urging earlier this year.

The promised boost in employment will not offset the job losses of recent months - with more than 1.6 million jobs shaved from the economy since Congress approved the stimulus plan in February. Unemployment last month reached 9.4 percent, the highest since 1983.

Those are links to just the first three results of 117,000 if you Google "600,000 jobs over the summer".  There was a parsing to "over the next 100 days" but it's all the same.  Where are we at?  Take a look:

June job losses: 467,000

July job losses:  247,000

August job losses:  298,000

Total jobs LOST Summer 2009:  1,012,000 jobs lost.

That's over ONE MILLION JOBS LOST just since President Obama's pledge to create those 600,000 jobs back on June 8th.  Unemployment tacked down a bit in July, but will rebound back up with Augusts numbers.  I'm no economist, but the numbers will probably continue to head down until the holiday shopping season with seasonal hires, which won't do much to decrease unemployment numbers as to stabilize them for a month or two.  Then the important numbers will be how much consumers are spending as opposed to simply unemployment. 

Of course there is to be much parsing of these numbers and we cannot forget the probability that no matter what the facts are, this administration will claim victory using the "jobs saved" meme.  Yes, job losses have slowed over months past, but how is that a decent indicator of "jobs saved"?  If those "saved jobs" weren't lost, then were they ever in any real danger of being lost, and if not, then how exactly were they saved and how do you measure that?  So anything about "jobs saved" is pure bullshinola spin to CTA (cover their a%^).

Over one million jobs were lost this summer.  President Obama promised to create 600,000 jobs over that same time.  He made the pledge.  The numbers speak for themselves.

Of course we can revert to the "100 days" standard.  If this is our rubric, Obama has about 10 days to come up with those 600,000 jobs.  Even if those jobs were somehow "created" how about the over 400,000 jobs (using Obama/Democrat financial logic) which "weren't saved"?

Or we could just forget about all of these numbers and economic talk and call things like they are:  Obama, faced with mounting unemployment, said what he needed to say to cover the fact that his 'stimulus' plan didn't (and isn't) working and that he said what he did just to push the topic a few months down the field, hoping the American people would forget his numbers and his pledge.

 

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

'Green Jobs Czar' also a 9/11 Truther

This guy (Van Jones) is just the cats meow when it comes to radicalism:

Barack Obama's communist Green Czar Van Jones is a TrutherHe believes the Bush Administration was behind 9-11 and signed the official 9-11 Truth Document demanding a further investigation.

More here.

(H/T: Hot Air headlines)
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

If puppet shows weren't politically correct

The funniest thing you'll see today.  WARNING:  Protect computer screens and keyboards appropriately:



Imagine being able to teach children how nature really is with this medium...

(H/T: AoS)
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

The 'Tolerance' of the Left

Here is the much-vaunted 'tolerance' of the Left on full display (using health-care as our case study).  This is just over the past month:
 
Video of HCAN (Health Care for America Now) instructing on how to disrupt health-care townhalls:
 
 
 
 
The DNC begins the meme of "angry mobs attacking our Townhalls" as well as Obama telling his cultists to "get in their faces".
 
Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA) on how townhall protesters must be fake...because they are too well dressed:
 
More "mob" nonsense from the DNC in this paid political ad:
 
 
More from HCAN about "taking away the right-wingers opportunity to talk to reporters..."
 
Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) calling Townhall attendees "astroturfers".  Also her now famous (or would that be infamous) accusations of townhallers carrying swastikas, implying those attending the townhalls are somehow nazis or fascists since they oppose Obamacare.
 
Organized Labor (read Unions) organizes to confront the "corporate-funded" right-wing "mobs".
 
Senate Leader Harry Reid jumps on the bandwagon, showing how stupid he is.
 
"If you get hit, we will punch back twice as hard"
 
Stacking the deck with SEIU union members while townhall protesters are locked out.
 
President Obama doesn't want you "to do a lot of taking", just "get out of the way":
 
 
SEIU 'volunteers' attack a Obamacare opponent:
 
 
After watching the above video, watch this one of SEIU spinning the debate.  Especially egregious is their spin of the SEIU attack shown above -  by portraying it as an attack on the SEIU!
 
 
 
Speaker Pelosi and Steny Hoyer call Obamacare protests "un-American".  Remember when dissent was patriotic?  Those were the days...
 
I thought it was the "right-wing extremists" who were getting bg, big outside funding cash for protesting Obamacare?  Not so much it seems.
 
SEIU wants to "drown out" opposition to Obamacare.  I thought they wanted real debate, as their video above says.  Hmmm.
 
Health-care protester who spoke out at a Dingell townhall is threatened.
 
John Dingell (D-MI) calls Obamacare townhall protesters the equivalent of Ku Klux Klan members and racists:
 
 
Speaking of "mean signs" and swastikas at protests...
 
President Obama go after those treacherous tonsil terrors and foot hoarders, Doctors.
 
Shelia Jackson-Lee (D-TX) takes a call while one of her constituents tries to ask her a question (at the 4:30 mark):
 
 
Townhall "nazi" protesters actually La Rouche Democrats angry that Obamacare doesn't go far enough to the Left.
 
Turns out President Obama is the actual astroturfer when it comes to health-care townhalls.
 
Baron Hill (D-WGAF) calls Obamacare opponents "political terrorists":
 
 
Taking 'astroturfing to a new level, supposed 'doctor' (who isn't), a member of Organizing for America and a Obama advocate during his campaign.  Turns out this 'doctor' attended this Jackson-Lee townhall with another Obama supporter, a big fan of Che Guevarra.
 
 
More 'nuance' from Senate Leader Harry Reid, who in his fondness for Obamacare opponents calls them "Evil-mongers".
 
Obamacare townhall protesters the equivalent to those who attacked civil rights marchers.
 
Richard Durbin (D-IL), feels that health-care townhalls with his constituents just "wouldn't be productive".  Meetings with lobbyists however on health-care - priceless.
 
Eric Massa (D-NY) doesn't care what his constituents think.  He's voting for single payer whether they like it or not.  A rather apropos name, Massa.
 
Barney Frank (D-WGAF) has a constituent ejected from one of his health-care townhalls and does other things Barney would do.
 
More nonsense from Massa.  Opposition to Obamacare, indeed Obama himself (as suggested  by another in this video) is Treason:
 
 
MSNBC edits video clip to keep "racism" meme in Obamacare alive.
 
Howard Dean, chairman of the DNC, says if you oppose Obamacare, you're "undermining the country".
 
 
 
Union thugs interrupt and cause probems at this townhall.  I thought it was the right-wing who were the intolerant, violent ones?  (skip ahead to 3:45)
 
 
Democrat Dianne Watson calls opponents to Obamacare racists.  Obviously missing a point:  how can people who opposed this very same thing from a white president (Clinton in 1993) be racists?  She's also a big fan of commies:
 
 
Democrat Carol Shea-Porter has a man arrested at her townhall.  Why?  No one really knows, except that he may have not have received a so-called "Golden Ticket" to speak.  Who would have thought that a constituent needed permission to address his public servant:
 
 
And finally, we have a Obamacare supporter interrupting a Tuscon, AZ Tea Party meeting.  It wasn't even a congressional townhall.  It was a meeting of Tea Party folks talking about health care (amongst other things I'm sure).  He decides he would be a good example for his cause by throwing an elbow and attacking one of the attendees.  The 'teabaggers' are so violent they immediately kick the crap out of the guy.  Well, no, not really.  One of them wants to, bt is kept back by the guy who was hit.  Such a example of right-wing extremism... (the video is a bit dark, but follow this link for a link to clearer video):
 
 
All of these videos and links come from one blog, Hot Air, over the course of just the last month (1 August -1 September).  What's funny is this large sample isn't even all the videos and links I could have used!  Thanks definitely need to go out to HA and other blogs.  Many of these events were ignored by the MSM and would not have been reported at all had it not been for blogs an other alternative media.
 
The Left will stop at nothing to get what they want (in this case Obamacare).  No hyperbole, rhetoric or accusation is too extreme.  When nuance fails, they go right for the throat.  They will denigrate, castigate, intimidate and in some cases will indeed resort to violence to achieve their ends.
 
Do not give these people any credit and do not underestimate them.  Forewarned is forearmed as it were.  "Honest debate" is not their goal, simply to take and wrest control. 
 
Any public officials who would treat their own constituencies like this would have been hung from a yardarm 200 years ago.  Now, we simply laugh it or shrug it off.  But when you take it in its totality, their objective becomes clear - control.  These pols complete and utter disrespect and lack of accountability should also not be underestimated.  They feel themselves a privileged, political upper class.  They know better than you.  They wish to make you completely subservient to them and will use any tactic, any trick, any words, any force necessary.
 
This really isn't about health care anymore, their own rhetoric and examples show this.  They admit it's about government control.  They admit their fondness, indeed their open exultation of foreign dictators and systems of government (communism, socialism).  They admit they want us to be more like 'them'.  It's about silencing you, in any way they can get to stick.  If their words won't work, they'll use a boot. 
 
The evidence is right there.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous12345Next »