Conservatives and the Internet have turned up the the heat on White House adviser Van Jones.
First a video tore across the web, in which Jones, who is Council on Environmental Quality adviser for green jobs, used a profanity to describe Republicans.
Then a 2004 petition surfaced, with signers calling for an investigation into whether high-level government officials had advance knowledge of the 911 terrorist attacks and yet allowed them to occur. One of the signatures was that of Van Jones.
Van Jones
Politico reports that Jones has released a statement through the White House press office:
If I have offended anyone with statements I made in the past, I apologize. As for the petition that was circulated today, I do not agree with this statement and it certainly does not reflect my views now or ever.
My work at the Council on Environmental Quality is entirely focused on one goal: building clean energy incentives which create 21st century jobs that improve energy efficiency and use renewable resources.
Jones was described as a visionary when his White House appointment was announced in March. He is the founder of Green For All, a national nonprofit that promotes a clean-energy economy. He is also co-founder of two social justice organizations - the Ella Baker Center for Human Rights and Color of Change.
The current dustup began when Color of Change called for an advertising boycott of conservative talk show host Glenn Beck, because of his description of President Obama as a racist. Beck, in turn, attacked Jones as a Communist who didn’t belong in government.
Click here to sign up for the Muckety Newsletter
22 Comments
#1. Zack 09.04.2009
I have read the Constitution many times. Can someone point out the part that says Communism economic policies are not allowed?
I thought McCarthyism was dead.
#2. volunteer 09.04.2009
Jones is a self proclaim communist, not just accused of being one by Beck
Laurie Bennett, do some research and maybe you find info to justify the questioning of Jone’s background
#3. volunteer 09.04.2009
Jones also has made public remarks that would label him a racist if the media were not Obama followers
#4. Zack 09.04.2009
He is also a self proclaimed former communist and present capitalist. When I was 6 I said I was a superhero. Should I still be held to that? Glenn Beck once called himself a dirt bag…. If Van Jones is a Communist, then Beck is a dirt bag
#5. Dale 09.04.2009
Well, Zack..
For starters, whether a communist, fascist, anarchist or even a federalist came out and said the arabs who flew a jetliner into the World Trade Center (TWICE!!) and tried to crash into the Pentagon were sponsored by our own government - I would consider this person an ignorant wacko. Case closed.
As for the constitution.. it DOES allow for such things as free trade. Look it up.
#6. The J 09.04.2009
No rules against being a communist. I don’t think anyone has said that it is an unconstitutional appointment (except for maybe some real fringe elements, no accounting for what craziness they may say).
But the question remains, do you want a communist influencing economic policies and direction of government control over a new energy sector.
I have to say, no, not really. It was a bad appointment.
#7. Ted Bell 09.04.2009
This was a fight Van Jones went looking for
THis is a fight Van Jones lost badly.
Glen Beck 1 Van Jones 0
#8. Zack 09.04.2009
Dale-
I looked. Didn’t see free trade. Why don’t you look it up and tell me. I believe the Truth movement believes that there was governmental turning-a-blind-eye, not necessarily that the government was directly behind it. Sure there are fringe factions that believe that, but the real Truth movement was pushing to have a deeper investigation to see where the government dropped the ball.
And while we are calling fringe wackos, lets turn the Glenn Beck program off.
#9. mike 09.04.2009
Zack, nothing in the Constitution disallows communism. But communist principles certainly can be viewed to clash with what the Constitution does and does not permit vis-a-vis government. I’m speaking particularly of “applied communism” as practiced in the late great 20th century socialist states. Particularly the tendency of it to interfere with individual rights.
I have found Jones to have expressed some pretty disturbing views…recently. Google Is Your Friend on this one. DYODD (Do Your Own Due Diligence). Jones has specifically avowed not “just communism”, but also marxist/socialist revolutionary principles. He drew his line pretty gosh-darned far to the left. Food for thought. Again, DYODD. There is no need to trust Beck, or Van Jones himself. GYIF.
Regards,
Mike
#10. Dwayne O. 09.04.2009
No, there are no rules specifically denying Communists the right to hold a public office. But there are no rules against a Klansman or a Nazi holding public office either. Please, folks. The Communists in Russia and China killed five or six times as many people as the Nazis. When someone says he’s a Communist, or that he’s been a commie in the past but shows no remorse or regret about it, that ought to set off all kinds of alarm bells in your head. If Bush had had this many current or former Klansmen and Nazis working for him, you’d see the problem right away. But because he’s a commie, you want to pretend there’s nothing wrong.
#11. Zack 09.04.2009
My point is that as long as the Constitution hasn’t been violated, then there is nothing illegal about someone being a Communist in office.
And to Mike-
I suggest that if you do a lot more due diligence, you will find that while Van Jones WAS a self-avowed Communist, he is now a self-disavowed Communist and self-avowed Capitalist. The info is pretty easy to find out there.
#12. findthetiger129 09.04.2009
Good points Dwayne O. To add to that, many of the controverial statements that Van Jones has made are recent, as are several things that some of his other czars have done. Cass Sunstien makes it clear that he wants to rewire the first amendment, while Linda Douglas wanted law abiding citizens to send their neighbors emails to the White House for scrutiny. Ronald Reagan’s catch phrase was always Trust but Verify, and with the verifications I’m getting, I’m not too keen to trust right at the moment.
#13. Zack 09.04.2009
Dwayne-
the problem you have and the people who agree with you is that you are making a link based on assumption. If you want to base your fears on assumptions, you have to look at the other assumptions that also exist. Stating that he holds communist beliefs will lead to Russian and Chinese style Communism which equals the deaths of millions of Americans can be refuted by the fact that 1) we have elections in this country. no one is going to allow a person who does that to remain in office. 2) killing of citizens is a direct violation of the Law that, despite what the Bush administration would have you believe, the President is not above. 3) in light of #2, we have a system of checks and balances in our government to stop that kind of power grab.
Actually, Congress wields the most power of any branch of government if they chose to use it. The courts have the 2nd most power with their ability to stop the Congress for unconstitutional laws being passed. The president really has the least power. However, that said, the power one wields is only as high as is given to them by others. So it is up to us to elect the congress that can stand up to a power grab by someone who believes in Dictatorial Rule. If that was happening here, the alarm would be much greater.
#14. mike 09.04.2009
Hi, Zack,
You mean like the article above this discussion? I’ve actually been looking. The above story shows that he apologizes for any offense his views may have generated…not a disavowal of those views, and that is a pretty substantial distinction in my mind.
Please post a link to where he disavows himself in the press. It would help me and probably others very much. I’m not kidding, I’m very open to being corrected. Suggesting that I simply “do more diligence” is not correction it is a blow-off. I guarantee that I’m definitely paying attention.
#15. mike 09.04.2009
For the record, I’m pretty open to revising my understanding of an evolving situation, but I’m also highly skeptical of tigers changing their stripes, conversions under duress, etc.
It is important for everybody to pay attention…and yes, make informed assumptions. A person or a nation that does not make prognostications based on best current information (also known as informed assumptions) is going to find that bad things really can happen. I’d rather be proven wrong regarding an assumption (and look a little foolish, feel a little sheepish) than be proven right ex post facto after finding myself in an untenable position. That’s a fact.
#16. Zack 09.04.2009
His apology in the article above is for the truth movement thing, not communism, etc. And seriously… the guy is working to create jobs in the upcoming green economy. Entrepreneurship is not communist.
#17. mike 09.04.2009
Hi, Zack,
I pretty much understand that. Like I said, I’m maintaining a healthy skepticism. You can help out with that.
#18. mike 09.04.2009
I’ve got to go to work, folks, I’ll check back in a little later!
#19. Zack 09.04.2009
I don’t disagree with skepticism. I think this skepticism is a little unfounded. Its the same as claiming Bush was a Nazi. For the record. I am not a supporter of this administration. I was less so of the previous one. I am skeptical for things that are and aren’t happening. People voted for this guy for progressive reasons and he is not turning out to be a progressive (which is why I didn’t vote for him). Has he broken the law? Well, the wars continue and if there is 1 human rights violation that occurs under his watch, then Yes. Did Bush break the law? Warrantless wiretaps and starting an illegal war and the human rights violations = Yes. He is not the only guilty party. Anyone in Congress who authorized the wiretapping are guilty. The Patriot Act is a violation of privacy. Etc.
Now.. Obama’s Health Care proposal is a piece of garbage. But is he out to have a Communist take over? Hell no! This administration is pretty conservative as far as liberalism goes. my skepticism is to call him a Blue Dog. He never promised progressivism, but his rhetoric suggested it. What should the people who fear Obama truly expect? Status Quo. And that is scary to me.
#20. Dwayne O. 09.04.2009
Zack, I take it you wouldn’t have a problem if Bush had appointed a Klansman or a Nazi to a similar position in his administration? You would not have felt the least bit alarmed or uncomfortable?
#21. mike 09.05.2009
Hi, Zack,
I think you don’t get to tell me what to be skeptical about. Bush II made me very nervous. This guy freaks me out. So do you. I get nervous and/or freaked out anytime people in power have notions that will impact my personal freedoms. I don’t have a problem (per se) with socialists, I have a huge problem when other people use that as an excuse to spend my money (to paraphrase Thatcher) and try and guide me to “right thinking”.
Shorter: I respect your right to be a communist. I don’t believe you have a right to make me one, too, and fie on anyone who tries.
#22. Ray 09.06.2009
Here is an excerpt from a speech from VAN JONES:
And our Native American sisters and brothers who were pushed and bullied and mistreated and shoved into all the land we didn’t want, where it was all hot and windy. Well, guess what? Renewable energy? Guess what, solar industry? Guess what wind industry? They now own and control 80 percent of the renewable energy resources. No more broken treaties. No more broken treaties. Give them the wealth! Give them the wealth! Give them the dignity. Give them the respect that they deserve. No justice on stolen land. We owe them a debt.
What does this have to do with creating green jobs?
Does this sound like he is just trying to make green energy jobs or pushing a much bigger agenda?
Leave a Comment