Friday, September 11, 2009


The Van Jones Matter

By Charles Krauthammer


Friday, September 11, 2009

So Van Jones, the defenestrated White House green-jobs czar, once called Republicans "assholes." Big deal. I've said worse about Democrats. I've said worse about Republicans. I've said worse about members of my family (you know who you are).

How prissy have we become? Are we allowed no salt in our linguistic diets?

Having once written a column praising Vice President Cheney's pithy deployment of the F-word -- on the floor of the Senate, no less -- I rise in defense of Jones. True, Jones's particular choice of epithet had none of the one-syllable concision, the onomatopoeic suggestiveness, the explosive charm of Cheney's. But you don't fire a guy for style.

Another charge was that Jones was a self-proclaimed communist. I can't get too excited about this either. In today's America, to be a communist is a pose, not a conviction. After the Soviet collapse, Marxism is a relic, a pathetic anachronism reduced to its last redoubts: North Korea, Cuba and the English departments of the more expensive American universities.

In any case, every administration is allowed a couple of wing nuts among its 8,000 appointees. As long as they're not in charge of foreign policy or the Fed, who cares?

Other critics are scandalized that Jones once accused "white environmentalists" of "essentially steering poison into the people of colored communities."

In fact, from a global perspective, Jones is right. Environmentalists -- overwhelmingly white and middle/upper class -- have blocked drilling offshore and in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. From where do you think the world gets the missing oil? From the poor, exploited, poisoned people of the Niger Delta, the Amazon Basin and other infinitely less-regulated and infinitely dirtier regions of the Third World.

Affluent enviros are all for wind farms, until one is proposed that might mar the serenity of a sail from the crew-necked precincts near Nantucket Sound. Then it's clean energy for thee, not for me.

Jones's genius as an ideological entrepreneur was to mine white liberal anxiety -- they are quite aware of their own NIMBY hypocrisy -- by selling them the "green jobs" shtick to reconcile class/racial guilt with environmental enthusiasm, thus making them feel better about themselves.

That's why Jones rose so far. That's why he was such a "progressive" star. That's why, as top Obama adviser Valerie Jarrett put it, "we've been watching him" and were so eager to recruit him to the White House.

In the White House no more. Why? He's gone for one reason and one reason only. You can't sign a petition demanding not one but four investigations of the charge that the Bush administration deliberately allowed Sept. 11, 2001 -- i.e., collaborated in the worst massacre ever perpetrated on American soil -- and be permitted in polite society, let alone have a high-level job in the White House.

Unlike the other stuff (see above), this is no trivial matter. It's beyond radicalism, beyond partisanship. It takes us into the realm of political psychosis, a malignant paranoia that, unlike the Marxist posturing, is not amusing. It's dangerous. In America, movements and parties are required to police their extremes. Bill Buckley did that with Birchers. Liberals need to do that with "truthers."

You can no more have a truther in the White House than you can have a Holocaust denier -- a person who creates a hallucinatory alternative reality in the service of a fathomless malice.

But reality doesn't daunt Jones's defenders. One Obama administration source told ABC that Jones hadn't read the 2004 petition carefully enough, an excuse echoed by Howard Dean.

Carefully enough? It demanded the investigation of charges "that people within the current [Bush] administration may indeed have deliberately allowed 9/11 to happen, perhaps as a pretext for war."

Where is the confusing fine print? Where is the syntactical complexity? Where is the perplexing ambiguity? An eighth-grader could tell you exactly what it means. A Yale Law School graduate could not?

No need to worry about Jones, however. Great career move. He's gone from marginal loon to liberal martyr. His speaking fees have just doubled. It's only a matter of time before he gets his own show on MSNBC.

But on the eighth anniversary of 9/11 -- a day when there were no truthers among us, just Americans struck dumb by the savagery of what had been perpetrated on their innocent fellow citizens -- a decent respect for the memory of that day requires that truthers, who derangedly desecrate it, be asked politely to leave. By everyone.


The Bigger They Czar, the Harder They Fall

Friday, 11 September 09

Van Jones, White House adviser on Environmental Quality, or according to the prevailing trend of labeling bureaucrats, the "green jobs czar," resigned over the Labor Day holiday. For those who had never heard of Jones before last weekend, his job in the administration was to act as an adviser to the president on making America's commercial and industrial economy more "environmentally friendly." Jones has a public background as an activist and writer for environmental causes and he is a darling among Hollywood and Washington liberal elites. Oh, and he was also a "community organizer." But there was more to Jones's background than was made public when he took the White House job. For example, Jones has two prior arrests on his record for participating in riots, he has numerous admitted associations with communists and other radicals and he was a supporter of the 9/11 "truthers."

Fox News's Glenn Beck broke the story that led to the czar's deposing -- Jones's name appeared on a petition stating that the Bush administration deliberately brought about the 9/11 terrorist attacks to have an excuse to go to war. Jones would only say that he did not review the language of the petition carefully. How complicated must a petition be for a Yale man like Jones not to understand?

The mainstream media, again acting as President Obama's public relations firm, spent little ink or airtime on the story. (In fact, The New York Times reported for duty only after Jones had submitted his resignation.) Beck and others kept up the pressure, though, and interesting tidbits from Jones's past continued surfacing, including information about his arrests in the Rodney King and Seattle World Trade Organization riots and a video of Jones making speeches in which he tossed out epithets about Republicans which we can't reprint.

Jones made some feeble apologies in hopes of sweeping the growing furor under the rug, but eventually the White House realized that they couldn't defend Jones's radicalism and ObamaCare at the same time. Consequently, while the country was off celebrating the holiday weekend, Jones tendered his resignation at midnight on Saturday, claiming all the while that he was the victim of right-wing character assassination. So much for apologies. While this is a skirmish victory in our efforts to restore Constitutional Rule of Law, rest assured that he'll likely be back, albeit in a less visible position.

How is it that someone like Jones could rise to such a level of responsibility in the White House? Unless one is on a tightly grouped public tour, citizens can't even enter the building without a Secret Service background check. Job applicants are required to fill out a 60-page questionnaire that past applicants have described as a most comprehensive review. Someone with Jones's background never would have been cleared by the Secret Service. The only way Jones could have been approved for the job, as American Spectator columnist Jeffrey Lord points out, is if someone high up in the administration overruled the Secret Service -- someone like the lead rabble-rouser himself.

The White House hopes that this business will end with Jones's resignation. But there are at least 30 (some count over 60) additional so-called czars in the White House who also could use a little public scrutiny. There already exist cabinet positions and executive offices for all the tasks that these new apparatchiks manage, but Obama brought them on board as "advisers" to circumvent the checks and balances of presidential appointments. He knew that radical activists like Jones, et al would not pass muster with the Senate, and certainly not with the American public. So, he created a new office to find a place for Jones in his administration.

Unfortunately, Jones isn't the only radical in Obama's crew. Regulation Czar Cass Sunstein advocates changing the organ donor rules to a system whereby people have to opt out of donating their organs rather than opting in. Sunstein believes that the government should manipulate choices to "make life easier for people and by gently nudging them in directions that will make their lives better." And then there's Obama's Science Czar, John Holdren, who once floated ideas like forced abortions and compulsory sterilization to help control human population levels. How many other people like Sunstein and Holdren are there in the White House? As they say, "Inquiring minds want to know."



He is not eligible to be
President of the United States
because he is not a Natural Born Citizen
as required by Article Two, Section One, Clause Five of the United States Constitution.

This is a fact REGARDLESS of
where he was born (Mombassa, Hawaii, Chicago, Mecca or Mars).

He is not eligible
because he was not born of
as required by the Constitution.

Barack Hussein Obama Jr. is not eligible to be President of the United States because – according to public admissions made by him – his “birth status was governed” by the United Kingdom. Obama further admits he was a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies at birth.
Since Barack Hussein Obama Jr. was, if born in the state of Hawaii, a dual citizen, who – according to his own State Department – owed allegiance to the Queen of England and United Kingdom at the time of his birth – he cannot therefore be a “natural born” citizen of the US according to Article 2, Section 1, Clause 5 of the US Constitution.
His father, who did not live in the United States for more than a couple of years, was a subject/ciitizen
of Kenya/Great Britain at the time of Barack’s birth and afterwards, AND further, as Barack himself admitted on his website during the 2008 campaign, Barack was therefore born SUBJECT TO THE GOVERNANCE OF GREAT BRITAIN.

Here is a direct quote from Obama's "Fight the Smears/Fact Check" 2008 website:

‘When Barack Obama Jr. was born on Aug. 4,1961, in Honolulu, Kenya was a British colony, still part of the United Kingdom’s dwindling empire. As a Kenyan native, Barack Obama Sr. was a British subject whose citizenship status was governed by The British Nationality Act of 1948. That same act governed the status of Obama Sr.‘s children…’ “

The FACT that he was not born of TWO US CITIZEN PARENTS is all that matters. The question of his birth certificate is a distraction (a distraction fostered by Obama’s supporters?) that ought not to occupy our time and resources. BUT if you are really convinced of the value of the COLB (certificate of live birth) that Obama posted on his website, see this:

Also, it is possible that he is not a United States
citizen at all through his mother if he was born in Kenya, as three witnesses have testified. The reason is because his mother could not pass her US citizenship on to her son because she did not live continuously in the United States for five full years after her fourteenth birthday as required by the US immigration law in effect during that period of time.

Check it out:
Also, an excellent introductory primer on Obama Presiidential Eligibility is to be found at:

His usurpation can only be corrected (1) by Congress through his Impeachment and Removal [something which will never happen in a Congress controlled by Pelosi/Reid], or (2) it can be
corrected by his resignation, which could happen if the public presssure on him to resign becomes great enough, or (3) by his removal by the United States Supreme Court affirming a Quo Warranto decision of the United States Federal District Court for the District of Columbia [which process Attorney General Eric Holder would never allow to even begin] or (4) by an amendment to the Constitution,
which will never happen because that again would require the agreement of a Congress controlled by Pelosi/Reid.


“During the 2008 election, then Senator Obama published a statement at his website which said that his birth status was ‘governed’ by the British Nationality Act of 1948. Can you please tell me, and the American people, how a person governed - at birth - by British law, can be a natural born citizen of the United States and thus constitutionally eligible to be President of the United States?”

- Leo Rugiens

No comments:

Post a Comment