Van Jones' Departure: A costly error for the Obama administration?
Published September 06, 2009 @ 08:46AM PT
Van Jones, green jobs advisor to the White House Council on Environmental Quality, resigned his Obama administration post early this morning.
"Jones found himself in conservatives' crosshairs after it was revealed that he signed a petition in support of 9/11 "truther" conspiracy theorists and called Republicans "assholes" in a video taped before he was tapped to head up the White House's green jobs program," reports Slate. "Sen. Kit Bond, R-Mo., [photo, left] was calling for a congressional inquiry into Jones' past," which included membership in activist groups that some, including Fox News fantasist Glenn Beck, have termed "radical."
The most immediate downside here is that one of the nation's most eloquent, effective advocates for improving the lives of millions of lower-wage workers, and righting long-endured social and economic injustices -- all via creating a low-carbon, more climate-neutral economy -- will no longer be at the service of the president.
That's a loss to the entire nation.
This debacle is unlikely to be the undoing of Van Jones, however. He is inspired at communicating and realizing his vision of an inclusively better future, and well-respected in the progressive political community.
If and as the truth emerges, I don't think it will be those 9/11 investigation endorsements that led the Obama administration to toss Jones overboard. Yes, he should have given those petitions a closer read. But remember how you were feeling about the attacks and the Iraq war in 2004? 'Nuff said.
It won't even be for calling Republicans assholes in public.
[[I mean, really: Who hasn't called Republicans assholes?]]
This sort of thing is equal opportunity. Recall that in 2004, then-Vice President Dick Cheney told Sen. Patrick J. Leahy (D-Ver.) to "Fuck yourself" on the floor of the Senate. It far from ended his political career.
What may have Jones too much of a liability for the Obama administration is that he has often let his anger about racism show. Keeping a telegenic, iconic "angry black man" in-house would threaten President Obama's carefully composed, hard-won posture of ushering in a new era in post-racial politics.
Still, cutting Van Jones loose could prove to be a costly loss for the Obama administration.
This wasn't so much about Glenn Beck and his vast green jobs conspiracy theory, however enticing a target the Fox Newser makes himself.
It was about how some Republican legislators took advantage of Beck's well-distributed crazy to hassle and distract the Obama administration -- enough to ultimately set back energy, economic, and climate policy reforms.
And it's about the administration's outsized sensitivity and suprise at this sort of clamor from a small (if vocal) portion of the electorate -- and its avatars -- that will not be swayed by reason or truth.
With Jones' departure, there's blood in the water, and these sharks are going to move on to their next prey among the president's advisors and appointees.
The Democrats are in the Congressional majority. But unlike their colleagues across the aisle, they're much less monolithic in their ideology and goals. As Will Rogers famously said, "I am not a member of any organized party — I am a Democrat."
As long as the Democrats remain at odds within themselves on climate and energy policy, and the Obama administration holds back on expending some political capital on these reforms, the minority GOP legislators retain enormous power to derail greenhouse gas pollution cuts, the phase-out of coal-fired power, and the rapid expansion of clean energy generation.
These particular legislators seem impervious to facts -- as my Grist colleague Dave Roberts puts it, this is all about "bitch-slap politics." But they are weak when it comes to increased public scrutiny, to craving approval, and ultimately, if the Democrats can get it together, to being rendered largely irrelevant in energy and climate policy reform.
These are the people who climate action advocates will focus on -- bluntly, directly and aggressively -- if they want to win.
If they want to lose, they'll focus on Glenn Beck.
Share this Post
Facebook
Twitter
Digg
StumbleUpon
Delicious
EmailRelated Posts
-
Developing World Stands Up To Developed Nations
-
Eight Responses to Senate Climate Change Bill
-
Over a Dozen Senators Working to Strengthen Climate Bill
Comments (65)
Comments on Change.org are meant for further exploration and evaluation of the ideas covered in the posts. To that end, we welcome constructive comments. However, we reserve the right to delete comments that are offensive, abusive, or off-topic; that contain ad hominem attacks; or that are designed to subvert or hijack comment threads rather than contribute to them. Repeat offenders may be permanently removed from the site at our discretion.
Author
-
Emily is a journalist and editor covering the environment and science, and has been working in online news, community and content since 1994.
Featured Global Warming Actions
-
-
Protect Polar Bears from Global Warming
13791 People
-
Protect Polar Bears from Global Warming
-
-
Now is the Time to Lead on Climate Change
5418 People
-
Now is the Time to Lead on Climate Change
Does the word "objectivity" mean anything, even in an opinion piece?
No objective person would say that a majority of Americans would not be extremely concerned at a MINIMUM with an unelected individual, not confirmed by the Senate, in the President's inner circle who is so "eloquent" as to: (1) refer to the President as a crack-addict complete with acting skit; (2) broadbrushing all of a group "assholes"; (3) indicating that white environmentalists are funneling poison into minority communities; (4) signed said petition without reading it (YEAH RIGHT); (5) only white kids are capable of school massacres; (6) and say "I met all these young radical people of color - I mean really radical: communists and anarchists. And it was, like, 'This is what I need to be a part of.' I spent the next ten years of my life working with a lot of those people I met in jail, trying to be a revolutionary."
He may be very intelligent, committed, successful and have done some good things; but that doesn't mean, as he claimed, that he is a victim of lies and distortion.
That lack of candor is what the average American hates about politicians and activists.
Posted by James Dunham on 09/06/2009 @ 09:53AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
If he's really done all those things you said, I think he should run for the presidency, I'd vote for him.
Posted by Cole Burns on 09/06/2009 @ 10:08AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Well, he has Comrade. But not so sure he is pro-voting for the "useful idiots", however.
Posted by James Dunham on 09/06/2009 @ 10:29AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Well mr. dunham...
Considering what lush dimbulb's been saying about president obama and/or his policies...
And what many repuke-a-thons are saying about obama, homosexuals, liberals and democrats...
I could care less that they got their diapers in a twist over him...
He shouldnt have resigned.
Posted by Thomas McHugh on 09/07/2009 @ 03:12AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Stick and stones, Mr. McHugh, sticks and stones.....You are entitled to your opinion.
Posted by James Dunham on 09/07/2009 @ 10:11AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
The president is the guy who won the election. One of the prerogatives of winning the election is that you get to execute the will of the majority that put you in office, by putting the people in place who will carry out your policy goals.
Every administration gets to fill hundreds of political appointments sans recourse to Congress. That's just how it works.
As I say above, this is simply all about the game of power politics. The Obama administration has made a bad move.
The GOP legislators involved could care less about this whole "czar" thing, because their side gets to make just the same kinds of appointments when it's in the White House. But they sure know how to whip people up about irrelevancies.
Posted by Emily Gertz on 09/06/2009 @ 10:30AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
You don't get to say to the American people, "Because you elected me, your collective opinion doesn't matter anymore because I get a blank check to do whatever I propose despite the will of the People." That argument would never fly when used to support a Republican administration; so it shouldn't fly now.
It also perpetuates the implicit falsehood that because you got the majority of votes (however slim) that you have "the will of the majority" in support for all you do. That is illogical on it's face and the polls additionally indicate otherwise.
Appointments are a regular practice, true. However, even Senator Byrd (D) has a problem with the unprecedented number of Czars and their function in this Administration. He has authored a letter to that effect. So I think there is bi-partisan concern.
And let's be honest, this guy was a self-proclaimed radical. At least he was proud of it until the American people realized who he was.
Just be who you are and be honest about it; conservative, liberal, radical on either side. Otherwise it has an appearance of political hoodwinking.
To say this was "just politics" does a disservice to the folks who have legitimate concerns as I stated above, and can only be viewed as partisan. If the sho were on the other foot, I am sure you would agree.
Posted by James Dunham on 09/06/2009 @ 11:14AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
James Dunham you are so right. Just because Obama won does not give him the right to appoint all these Czar without Congress doing some background checks. Obama went around congress when he appointed these people. Van Jones did have a good idea for Green jobs i'll give you that Emily Gertz. But Obama should have hired someone for green jobs the right way through congress. who knows we may have gotten someone better than Van Jones for greens job. I hope now Obama will do it the right way so we have no fear of something really bad happening. I hope you do well Emily Gertz. i really do mean it. i hope you do well.
Posted by Kevin Madden on 09/06/2009 @ 04:04PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
To mr. dunham and mr. madden...
What makes ya'll think that wrong way bush didnt do similar things ?
Posted by Thomas McHugh on 09/07/2009 @ 03:15AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
bush did the same-thing and he should be punished too. when you appoint someone with this ability without congress giving you the "OK" then you can't do that. you can check the law yourself. it says "The President may also appoint judges, ambassadors, consuls, ministers and other officers with the advice and consent of the Senate. By law, however, Congress may allow the President, heads of executive departments, or the courts to appoint inferior officials." The Czar's are not in inferior, they are to be checked by congress. Obama didn't do that so he should be fired, If MaCain were president i think you would have a different tone and you would agree with me that he should be fired for that. I don't care what color of skin you have or what party you are from but when brake the United States Constitution you should be punished. i don't think he is going take over the world as you people may think that i think that, No. I'm talk about the Czar's because they didn't go through congress there by breaking the United States Constitution over and over again. I think if he really job that he should stop all these hiring of Czar's at this rate and let them be checked by congress that He should get fired. Plain and simple. No one should think any president is above the law. People think Obama hired these Czar's the legal way. he did not.
Posted by Kevin Madden on 09/07/2009 @ 07:29AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Van Jones' departure is a serious costly error. He was needed and valuable. His being tossed also empower inflexible abusive types who have now been rewarded. Now the administration is at even greater risk of repeating the Clinton errors: becoming a voluntary lame-duck to appease the most unreasonable elements of his opposition. The administration needs to grow a spine. Rev. Bookburn - Radio Volta
Posted by Rev Bookburn on 09/06/2009 @ 10:38AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
I think he just might have spoken the truth. You can't do that in Washington DC!
Right???
Sigh.
Posted by Cdin Org on 09/06/2009 @ 01:42PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Which of these statements/facts, in your opinion, were true and which were false? And which "truths spoken," in your opinion, cost him his position? When he
(1) referred to the President as a crack-addict complete with acting skit; (2) broadbrushed all of a group "assholes"; (3) indicated that white environmentalists are funneling poison into minority communities; (4) signed the 9/11 petition without reading it (YEAH RIGHT); or (5) said only white kids are capable of school massacres?
Posted by James Dunham on 09/06/2009 @ 02:10PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
None of those that you mentioned. I have often noticed that it's difficult to quote and re-interpret what people say. Often it's not the same at all, and small nuances are missed.
Perhaps he was emotional when he used the term "asshole," perhaps he meant that there's much too much junk food plied into minority neighborhoods, and perhaps he meant that a majority of school massacres are NOT committed by black children so let's not pick on any particular race.
Perhaps he meant NOTHING of what I just said and maybe he's a terrible terrible person bent on doing terrific evil. But i don't think so.
We all have our imperfections. And, we are all misinterpreted at times.
Perhaps he may be vilified right now.
When you have two opposing parties at "war," it's only "natural" to bring down anyone and everyone that you can. By whatever means...
But like all war, much good is destroyed, and much bad is released.
We can only hope that good will win out, and reason will prevail.
Posted by Cdin Org on 09/07/2009 @ 01:07PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
I don't disagree with he observaton, but you get a lot less wiggle room when you are on video. For example, your speculation over the "a-hole" comment is belied by the video.
I share in your hope.
Posted by James Dunham on 09/07/2009 @ 01:34PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Worth noting is that Jones also labeled himself an a-hole in that talk. His essential point seemed to be that politics is a rough game, and the job of people like himself is/was to be down in the trenches, so that the president could continue to maintain civility and forge coalitions across the aisle.
Posted by Emily Gertz on 09/13/2009 @ 08:34AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Emily,
I agree with you 100% there. Unfortunately, the President hasn't been doing that.
Posted by James Dunham on 09/13/2009 @ 12:46PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Last I checked Bob Beckel wasn't a right-wing nut, but a big fan of this Administration. He said of Jones:
"He's got every right in the world to be a self-avowed communist, but the Secret Service would no more allow a self-avowed communist into the White House as they would Charlie Manson, so that's what I don't get....There's something more in here about the breakdown of the system. Yes, it broke down with the Obama administration, but it also broke down with those people who are responsible for doing the background check."
Posted by James Dunham on 09/06/2009 @ 02:29PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
at least someone here knows what he is talking about.
Posted by Kevin Madden on 09/06/2009 @ 03:44PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
James Dunham if you would like to sign my petition you may do so at http://www.change.org/actions/view/obamas_czars
anyone can send there own message to your Governor, Members of your State Senate, Members of your State House, the President of the United States, Members of the U.S. Senate and Members of the U.S. House of Representatives when they sign my petition. let your voice be heard!
Posted by Kevin Madden on 09/06/2009 @ 05:04PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
It is well documented is that Jones has a lengthy and distinguished history of working within the system for social change.
I haven't seen that mentioned in any of the articles or blog posts that took up Beck's witch hunt, or statements from legislators who fed off Beck's crazytalk.
From what I've been able to tell, this "self-avowed communist" meme is based on some things Jones recalled about experiences of racism that radicalized him, while he was a law student at Yale. There isn't a ton of good information to go on.
Here's a 2007 article by Jones that I've found:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/van-jones/15-years-ago-rodney-king-_b_48361.html
In it, he's looking back at his younger activist self, in the wake of the Rodney King verdict:
"Recently, I discovered an essay that I wrote at the time. It captures the pain, frustration and aspirations of a much younger person. But I think it speaks well to the thought process of many young activists at that time," he writes.
That's honest; and speaking from personal experience at the time, when confronted with the irrationality of the first Gulf War, a lot of people working in social change and environmental advocacy felt and thought the way Jones describes.
Toward the end of that 1992 essay that Jones found, here's what his younger self wrote:
"...we have no real answers when racist juries acquit racist cops. Because we have already accepted the system that makes racism and police abuse necessary and inevitable.
And, having abandoned socialism as unworkable (or at least unfashionable), we no longer have a credible, well-developed, counter-view of how we would like to see wealth created and distributed.
Therefore, standing in the ashes and rubble of Los Angeles, we must blame ourselves as much as the state. We must recognize that our opposition has become ideologically, tactically and morally bankrupt.
As we rebuild that proud city, let us also build a radically feminist, anti-racist, green and humanitarian people's movement -- complete with a revolutionary theory that will both describe our dilemma AND point a way out."
So, what is he saying here? I believe he's saying that the left needs to articulate a vision of change that is original and coherent -- not based on either the truisms of the free market, capitalist system, or on the increasingly discredited and/or unpopular tenets of socialism.
As for "revolutionary" -- well, hm, I hear this word used on both the right and the left.
I think Rep. Michelle Bachmann (R-Minn.) has used similar language a lot recently...ah, here it is: she said that she wants "people in Minnesota armed and dangerous on this issue of the energy tax because we need to fight back."
Bachmann appears here to be inciting the people to armed resistance against a democratically elected leadership. Which is kind of what the witch hunters have accused Van Jones of doing.
Why not call for her resignation?
On the other hand, if people accept her explanation that she was speaking rhetorically, shouldn't they extend Van Jones the same benefit of the doubt?
Posted by Emily Gertz on 09/06/2009 @ 04:27PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Rep. Michelle Bachmann needs to be removed as well. She is nuts.
Posted by Kevin Madden on 09/06/2009 @ 04:55PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
i have found a video on CNN http://www.cnn.com/video/data/2.0/video/politics/2009/07/20/ldt.allthepresidents.czar.cnn.html
this is how i feel about the czars. and i don't get a lot of my information from fox. i get mines from CNN. I feel that czars must go throgh congress to make sure these guys are good and when obama aviods congress and appoints these people behind are back and we can hardly talk to these guys then there is not a lot of trust. he needs congress to go through these czar or else they should be fired.
Posted by Kevin Madden on 09/06/2009 @ 05:17PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Yes Kevin,
The fundamental issue this Adminsitration is having is that it has lost the trust of the majority of the American people. The most obvious ones are:
the stimulus would "jump start" the economy
unemployment would not exceed 8%
the President's promises did not match CBO analysis of the offered and defended House Bill
This site http://newsgnome.blogspot.com/2009/03/official-list-of-obamas-broken-promises.html also lists:
OBAMA SAID:
I will have transparency-generals must sign secrecy Oath........Broken
I will cut the deficit in half by doubling spending-say what.......Broken
I will change the Washington culture of corruption.......................Broken
I will reach across the isle (I'm ready to fight Republicans)....Broken
I will have no earmarks in stimulus, there are 9000..................Broken
I will have transparency in White House emails except mine....Broken
I will demand human rights for China and Tibet..............................Broken
I will put legislation on Internet for all to read before votes....Broken
I will have honest advisers, except those who take free rent......Broken
I will have my administration pay their fair share of taxes........Broken
I will eliminate rendition of terrorist combatants..........................Broken
I will have a transparent admin. with the media.............................Breaking
I will bring charges against Bush admin. war crimes.....................Broken
I will have new blood in admin. but names Panetta to CIA..........Broken
I will have a transparent government..................................................Broken
I quite smoking (admits to bumming cigarettes)...........................Broken
I will apply windfall taxes on big oil companies.................................Broken
I will change US Foreign Policy, appoints Hillary Sec. State......Broken
I will change the defense department, YET keeps Gates............Broken
I will close Guantanamo............................................................................Breaking
I will sit down with dictators with no pre-conditions....................Broken
I will stop waterboarding and CIA interrogation techniques......Breaking
I will use federal campaign funds..........................................................Broken
I will get US troops out of Iraq in 16 month....................................Broken
I will change Washington with new faces............................................Broken
I will not hire lobbyists, hires lobbyist Daschle (he's out but here are the others)....Broken
* Melody Barnes, lobbyist for American Civil Liberties Union, the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights, the American Constitution Society and the Center for Reproductive Rights.
* William Corr, lobbyist for Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids,
* Patrick Gaspard, lobbyist for Service Employees International Union.
* David Hayes, lobby San Diego Gas & Electric.
* Eric Holder, attorney general nominee, lobbyist for bankrupt Global Crossing telecommications.
* Ron Klain, lobbyist for Asbestos Resolution, U.S. Airways, Airborne Express and drug-maker ImClone.
* William Lynn, lobbyist for Raytheon.
* Cecilia Munoz, lobbyist for National Council of La Raza
* Mark Patterson, lobbyist for Goldman Sachs.
* Mona Sutphen, lobbyist for Angliss International.
* Michael Strautmanis, lobbied for the American Association of Justice.
* Tom Vilsack, lobbyist for NEA.
And these are not all of them. Thanks for pointing out that he has nominated a huge number of lobbyists that he promised not to appoint.
I will be non-partisan. Hires highly partisan Emanuel..................Broken
I will eliminate Bush tax cuts.................................................................Broken
I will dump Patriot Act wire tapping....................................................Breaking
I will eliminate tax breaks for wealthy..................................................Broken
Adding to the list a record-setting number of Czars with views like Van Jones, clearly FAR left and to most Americans radical if not crazy, does not move the trust factor in the right direction. It further squanders it.
Posted by James Dunham on 09/06/2009 @ 11:23PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Emily,
I respectfully suggest that we need not look much farther than the phrase you copied above: "counter-view of how we would like to see wealth created and distributed."
The government doesn't create wealth, and I sure as heck don't want it doing any more than it does already to redistribute wealth.
Interesting to note that Mr. Jones never denied being a Communist, only a 9/11 Truther.
Posted by James Dunham on 09/07/2009 @ 12:04AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Miss gertz...Good article.
And its very sad that many in the obama administration are being attacked because of their past even though we were dumb enough to elect a "recovering" alchoholic as president...Twice.
Personaly, I'd rather have an outspoken person in charge rather than a drug addict that could easily fall off the wagon at any time.
Posted by Thomas McHugh on 09/07/2009 @ 03:20AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
I dont deny being a communist either mr. dunham...But then...I never was a communist so theres nothing to deny.
Posted by Thomas McHugh on 09/07/2009 @ 03:22AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
James, if you believe the government is not involved in the creation and distribution of wealth, then your grasp of just how involved the government is in the economy with subsidies, tax breaks, and regulations preferential of industry over consumer rights and interests -- even before last year-- is incomplete.
Posted by Emily Gertz on 09/07/2009 @ 06:21AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Thomas,
Your comment about the President as a recovering alcoholic is an insult to all alcoholics who have battled that disease.
And Mr. Jones was a "self-proclaimed" communist and radical. So I agree with you. You don't need to deny being what you never were, but you certainly would deny being what you in fact once were. That is not even debatable in this case.
Emily,
I acknowledged that the government is in fact involved with redistribution already, which is the examples that you gave, and of which I indicated I did not want to see a massive expansion. None of those examples are a true example of creating wealth, however.
Posted by James Dunham on 09/07/2009 @ 10:03AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Van Jones was a terrible choice and should have been vetted before the so-called "smear campaign" forced him to resign.
It looks like "green" is the new "red" to obama and his people. There have been more czars appointed by obama than there were in the 300 years of Imperial Russian Czars. Sad.
Here is a revealing video, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VO2vNF2jXPw
Posted by jack barr on 09/07/2009 @ 12:35PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
"more czars appointed by obama than there were in the 300 years of Imperial Russian Czars."
Interesting -- I've seen this meme ("more czars than Imperial Russia") repeated several times now, here and elsewhere.
Is it one of the new reactionary talking points?
Posted by Emily Gertz on 09/08/2009 @ 07:28AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
I was discussing the current problem of the czars with some friends and one of them mentioned the Czars of Russia and made a point of that "meme".
It is not right-wing propaganda, it's true! The czars of obama have no responsibility to answer to anyone. They have not been approved by congress, nor have they been vetted. The obamabots are accepting the overstepping of executive authority by obama and this will hurt the nation in the long run.
Never in the history of the US has a sitting president forced the CEO of a major corporation to be fired. But obama fired Rick Wagoner, took over GM and gave the company to the same unions that broke the back of the company.
Posted by jack barr on 09/09/2009 @ 07:45AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Wow, you're right. God knows Karl Rove was answerable to Congress during the Bush-Cheney administration. Look how well that worked out!
Posted by Emily Gertz on 09/09/2009 @ 09:15AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Yes jack barr,
The czar problem needs to be sloved or else we all know obama won't be able to get in to office 2012. and some of these unions are green jobs for one or should i say almost all of the jobs. It would be one thing if we could really be able to talk to these czars but its like dealing with bush's office. i feel as if i OWN a black cat.
to Karl Rove, if you are reading this, stop talking to fox news. i do not like your "political analyst". independents hate it.
Posted by Kevin Madden on 09/09/2009 @ 06:40PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Jack, I looked at your revealing video and what I found was someone 'revealing' their own irrational fears (and how they would respond in that position btw, since Sunstein hasn't extrapolated issues anywhere near the way this guy has) ... and who happened to have an extensive slideshow. I think it's time to move on from trying to look better by making the other guy look worse.
Posted by Oceania OZ on 09/11/2009 @ 07:29AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
"it's time to move on from trying to look better by making the other guy look worse."
You should make your voice heard when the two idiotic parties begin running TV commercials about what a bad person their candidate's competition is instead of pointing out the greatness of their own candidate. This is all part of politics since the negative campaigning began. There are no good candidates according to these commercials. Only some are not as bad as others and we should vote for the lesser of two evils.
Posted by jack barr on 09/11/2009 @ 10:44PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
If all the choices you're given is a choice between two evils, why don't you exercise your democratic right not to vote at all? That would send a pretty clear message that the time for negative campaigning was OVER! Here, it's compulsory to vote, but we made such a media outcry about campaign tactics, the policies got more real. That, however, doesn't stop the tactics reigning supreme in Parliament (under privilege), shocking behaviour.
IMO you guys made the right choice, Obama is a breath of fresh air, and whoever he chooses to advise him is his democratic choice.
Posted by Oceania OZ on 09/16/2009 @ 05:01PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Furthermore, when Australia's Prime Minister, Kevin Rudd, was elected (sing- "Give Nerds a Chance"), he chose his entire Cabinet from scratch. That doesn't happen too often - and it was what we elected him for.
Posted by Oceania OZ on 09/16/2009 @ 06:17PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
After viewing the youtube video above, I sent a letter of commendation and support to Cass Sunstein.
The reason is because amongst other things, he simply believes in treating animals with kindness, consideration and respect. I just can't disagree with that.
If we eat meat, we should raise the animals in a humane, kind and enjoyable atmosphere, and when it's time for slaughter, that it be done with quick dispatch without suffering.
Animals are fully capable of feeling pain, love, joy, pleasure and sadness. People forget that PAIN and PLEASURE are FUNDAMENTAL for the survival of ANY species. Pleasure and pain are the raison d'etre.
But I do understand how frightening it can be to think there are those "wackos" who want to take away all "pleasurable" rights from humans.
A much more even toned and reasonable attitude would hopefully prevail. I love animals with all my heart... but in this world, they are killed and devoured...
I just ask that we all do it with kindness and dispatch with swiftness...
as for politics, it seems we all can agreeably agree to disagree. And, fight rationally for what we believe in.
It seems that name calling and the 7 tactics of propaganda are common place now. All good weapons, i suppose.
And, if we ALL believed the same thing, there would be no push nor pull, no energy and force. No opportunity for growth and change.
Stagnancy is created by a world with zero differences of opinion.
It seems that Van Jones is a good hearted man.
Posted by Cdin Org on 09/07/2009 @ 01:24PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
to: Emily Gertz
i have a ?. were do you get your information from. To me it seems like a lot of it comes from msnbc. am i right? do you know that all news organizations are bias. this article as i see is very pro Dem. I'm an independent. each one as there own optionsEmily Gertz. a lot of news organizations are very Dem. the only Rep one i see is fox. you really need watch each one to find the main truth to the story. not all Rep. hate green jobs and the reason for that is that they know oil will run out. 2. it was not all Conservatives who were against Van Jones, there was a senior Democrat against the czars. he talks about The President's blatant disregard for The Constitution. 3. he signed a petition that said the government did 9/11 and he said that he didn't read it that much. even though i think it was a lie, i don't think you should hire someone to the white house when they don't read every word on the papers that they are given. thats a bit lazy. 4. Van jones said the things that were said were a lie right, then why did he make 2 apologys about the things he had said before he resigned. and you can make lies when there is videos of what he said. 5. the reason that we are be sharks is that Obama blatant disregard for The Constitution about these kinds of people. Van jones should have gone through congress when he got hired.
Posted by Kevin Madden on 09/07/2009 @ 06:47PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Kevin, I appreciate your earnest interest in how the government runs. But I can't really begin to address these run-on laundry lists you're posting.
All I'll say is that this charge that President Obama is exhibiting "blatant disregard" for the Constitution as a whole is not particularly factual. Obama is maintaining some Bush-era policies that are pretty questionable from a Constitutional perspective -- like the expanded use of warrantless wiretapping. That's disappointing and ought to be challenged. But I'm not seeing an across the board dismissal of the Constitution.
If you are, please post some links to mainstream news sources or primary documents that demonstrate it?
As for where I get my information, I do watch Countdown With Keith Olbermann sometimes. He can be annoying with the ranting, but often there's an amusing gem, such as his performance based on Glenn Beck's over-the-top paranoia, last week.
Other than that, I get most of my information **leads** for this blog from a big mix of print, radio, and online media.
I watch the national cable news, when I watch it, mostly from an analytical point of view: to observe how issues are being spun down to the lowest common denominator of simplistic reporting.
When I'm on assignment for a story, I deal as much as possible with first-person sources and original source materials.
Posted by Emily Gertz on 09/08/2009 @ 07:47AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
i feel that both bush and obama did was both wrong. as for Glenn beck, i think he is a bit panicky to a lot of things and there are times when i like him and i don't but maybe its because i had worked at a mental hospital for a while and there are some meds i think i would give him but then again its just me. i think his thing with obama is a bit over board. Obama for the most part is a alright. but the czars need to go through congress says both sides of congress so background checks can be done. i not raciest if thats what you think. i don't base things on van jones through Glenn beck, i based it on the videos first and then the news. i don't belive his lies and smere thing. we have video mr. jones, it kind of scared me of what you said sir. now most Republican are not "a-holes". note that i said "most" just like democrats and independents. and thank you for telling me the information nicely, unlike some other people who can be just plain rude. and i'm sorry about the babysitter thing, i had a wasp problem in my house and it took forever to get rid of them and that did not make me happy at all.
p.s if there is any spelling mistakes on this then please note that my spelling and grammar is just god awful like my handwriting. anyone who know me knows that. and my commutation skills are bad because i have Asperger's which is a milder variant of Autistic Disorder. and i'm not dumb, i have a 3.75 gpa.
Posted by Kevin Madden on 09/08/2009 @ 01:53PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
You cant answer to 5 points? Pathetic
Posted by Jake Belcher on 09/11/2009 @ 09:46PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Well then, go for it, Mr. Belcher!
Posted by Emily Gertz on 09/13/2009 @ 08:16AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Van Jones wasn't radical enough! He should have resigned for breaking rank with reverend Wright and Rosie O'Donnell on the 9/11 truth commission. Steel doesn't melt, I googled it!
Posted by Turk Fowler on 09/08/2009 @ 11:45AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Good riddance to Van Jones. I sincerely hope Cass Sunstein is next.
Posted by Thomas Berg on 09/08/2009 @ 07:15PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Really? Please explain your issues with Cass Sunstein. Pointers to factual information are welcome, as always, over pointers to biased information sources.
For the uninitiated, Cass Sunstein is President Obama's nominee to head OIRA, the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs.
OIRA monitors and manages federal regulations, towards two ends: 1) Ensuring that when a regulation's mandates overlaps the purviews of multiple federal agencies, that they are not working at cross purposes; 2) Doing independent cost-benefit analyses of federal regulations, so that regulations provide the most benefit at the lowest possible cost.
Cass Sunstein himself is a Harvard Law professor.
His nomination to head OIRA was hailed across the political spectrum as a welcome one. Nonetheless, Senate Republicans are using administrative rules to block Sunstein's confirmation to the post, and the reactionary right is whipping up opposition to his appointment with the usual mixture of half-truths and outright falsehoods.
Posted by Emily Gertz on 09/09/2009 @ 07:17AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
you may see that because congress ask to see obama's czars so they will testify before congress.
Posted by Kevin Madden on 09/11/2009 @ 04:15AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Here's a video movie of Van Jones. You can watch in full and decide for yourselves. : )
http://bravenation.com/carl_pope_van_jones.php
I never heard of him before this controversy, but I like him so far. I think he has a lot of potential to help with environmental issues, that he's intelligent, that his heart is in the right place.
I'm very concerned about the environment - it's OUR world and I'm seeing much devastation and desolation. Even the guy (highschool) at the video store didn't want to use bags - he cares.
Other kids care, too.
It's highschool kids today who will really feel the brunt of future environmental devastation caused by today's actions.
Will they ever know fresh, clean pure fish? Or Rain water that's pure and sweet? Or Food that's home grown and absolutely delicious? And Surfing and sailing in an ocean without plastic?
Will they trust and believe in honest government? Will they respect their elders, who lead with honor, dignity, honesty, integrity and genuine humility, kindness and warmth? Without greed?
For people over 35, maybe they don't care as much. But for folks like me, we care VERY MUCH.
Kids I know don't even WANT to think about having children or grandchildren...
they're not sure if there's going to be a worthy world, without debt, devastation and corruption, for them. And that's sad. Better to take drugs and check out, than "engage."
Other kids I know really don't care, they just don't want to think about it. Have fun, for who knows what tomorrow will bring?
But underneath, we all hear and see what's going on. It's rather insidious... all the news and actions of those in power.
I only hope that we learn to work together, help each other, rather than tear each other apart because we're so afraid of one another.
Posted by Cdin Org on 09/08/2009 @ 11:25PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
I saw this video, and I tried unsuccessfully to post it here. I am glad you did.
Posted by Barbara McNamara on 09/12/2009 @ 07:01PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
I enjoyed the video. The only thing I was a litte concerned about was Mr. Pope's confession that, part of what makes it so meaningful for him, is stopping "evil people." I see a LOT of that even on this site.
Who is "evil" can be a very subjective opinion in many cases. And we may consider the actions or decisions of some people may be viewed by some as "evil", but they themselves are not evil.
The labeling of people who (or even organizations which) hold different positions as "evil" serves no constructive purpose and does not promote the "common sense" referenced by Van Jones. We have seen that plenty in this debate about healthcare as well as the environment. Bush was not a Nazi and neither is Obama.
"Judge not lest you be judged." Judge actions, but don't condemn people who merely have a different opinion. I say this to people from all perspectives.
Posted by James Dunham on 09/12/2009 @ 09:00PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
"At the end of the day, it's not Left vs Right, it's right vs wrong" - Van Jones
Sounds good to me. Might sound a bit creepy to polititians though.
Posted by Oceania OZ on 09/09/2009 @ 04:53PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Sorry, I mean't politicians - must have confused them with the titans of industry.
Posted by Oceania OZ on 09/09/2009 @ 08:31PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Is a csar the same as a polititan, by the way?
Posted by Oceania OZ on 09/09/2009 @ 08:41PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Czars are not politicians, they are high level appointees the white house
Posted by Kevin Madden on 09/11/2009 @ 04:13AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
"Sen. Kit Bond, R-Mo.said :... well I'm calling for a congressional inquiry into weather Bond has a asshole or it's shit that comes from his--- I get it, Bond's asshole is above his tie.
Posted by J Rome Miller on 09/10/2009 @ 05:02PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Agreed that bias is in inherit in just about every form of media--its very difficult for anyone, even those with completely honorable intentions, to spin a story based on their own notions. I think that the vast majority of Americans are not extremists on either end nor do they really care about the two parties anymore. For those who approve of Cass Sunstein's appointment--- have you actually read any of his works? Irregardless of what the commentators on MSNBC and Fox state, if you go the original source of material, as I believe Emily stated that she frequently does, I would suspect that a 'reasonable' person would, at best, find his thought patterns disturbing and, at worst, with all due respect for his accomplishments in academia; a bit of a nut job.
Posted by david goldstein on 09/16/2009 @ 08:23PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Does that make him a czar or a nerd?
Posted by Oceania OZ on 09/17/2009 @ 07:24AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Sorry, that was a rhetorical question. Maybe a nut job is an entirely new and third faction of your government, I don't know. Labels are a separating tool I don't have much time for when it comes to this issue. I'll leave you with a link, and you'll need to click on to the video. It's a small segment about a new book which came out recently in America that examines why we can't agree on the scientific data. I hope that will change. Van Jones, don't give up on the Green Jobs.
Public must engage with scientific fact: book
A new book called Unscientific America has put forward the theory that we are facing a dangerous divide between science and culture.
Posted by Oceania OZ on 09/17/2009 @ 08:18AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
I forgot the second part of the segment -
Author discusses science-culture divide
One of the authors of Unscientific America, Chris Mooney, joins Lateline from Boston to discuss the book.
Posted by Oceania OZ on 09/17/2009 @ 08:39AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
HE HAD TO GO? BUT OUR LAWMAKERS MANY BOUGHT AND PAID FOR CONTINUE TO IGNORE WHO THEY WERE ELECTED TO REPRESENT AND ARE STILL THERE...
We have a problem...
CFJ
Posted by Cherokee Fred Jesus on 09/21/2009 @ 05:42PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
yeah, we are really missing out as a country now that we don't have a self-admitting COMMUNIST advising the president. all the obama worshippers need to begin thinking for themselves instead of falling in love with someone because the Obamassiah says that they should. of cour
Posted by ben brubaker on 09/21/2009 @ 09:16PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
yeah, the country as a whole is missing out. NOT!!! the last thing we need a self-admitted COMMUNIST advising the president. here is some food for thought for the loud mouth liberals: why don't you start thinking for yourself and forming your own opinions about things instead of falling in love with them because the obamassiah says to. now, let's see how many times i can be called closed-minded or racist for not jumping on the empty-headed bandwagon of obamabots
Posted by ben brubaker on 09/21/2009 @ 09:23PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
First of all, Van Jones RESIGNED. He wasn't FIRED. He made racist remarks claiming that 'Whites sprayed minorities in the field with toxins'. I'm white, my people are white...that was a broad generalization. It's not about liberal or conservative. It's about justice for ALL. Racist views cannot be tolerated...not in this country. I don't want a man who is looking to 'green the ghetto' as priority and push his supremacist views (which he still to this day has not denied), appointing the big jobs. I seriously think the remarks of Van Jones were taken so lightly. If Cheney said something about African Americans...OMG. Now it seems to be an acception. Also, despite the racist remarks, the President can involve his friends and make them his 'cohorts' but, they must have a screening done. I don't think Van Jones was willing to do this considering. Pick your staff...but, if they aren't for the cause of justice for the people (all people), then you should resign. If not, who are you benefiting really? Not our country. To those who keep demeaning our president with childish name calling- STOP. Your lack of respect for a leader who was voted in by a DEMOCRACY, makes our country look pathetic. He is our President. You don't have to like him, his policies, or his views. Respect his position though. It's not easy. Argue against what he does not who he is. I'm not an Obama supporter but, it's childish to refer to our countries' highest office with terminology that lacks candor. Grow up. Be a voice but, don't be a child.
Posted by Krissi Vasquez on 09/25/2009 @ 07:53PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Sigh.
I Agree with you. I think he just might have spoken the truth. You can't do that in Washington DC!
Right???
Posted by Jeff Adams on 10/13/2009 @ 11:36PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.