Ebola Czar's Name Removed from List of Trustees of Progressive Think Tank

As Glenn Reynolds wrote: "TRANSPARENCY."

From The Washington Free Beacon article by Elizabeth Harrington (via Instapundit):

Third Way, a progressive think tank with ties to the Democracy Alliance, has removed newly appointed Ebola czar Ron Klain from its website, following a Washington Free Beacon report. 

The Free Beacon reported Friday on Klain’s status as a trustee for Third Way, and his past experience lobbying on behalf of a drug company that was accused of denying life-saving drugs to dying cancer patients.   

The choice of Klain to head the administration’s emergency response to Ebola was criticized as a political move. Klain is a political operative with no medical experience and a former advisor to former Vice President Al Gore, Vice President Joe Biden, and President Barack Obama.  

[...]  

“He gained national notice as General Counsel for the Gore Recount Committee in 2000, in recognition of which he was selected as one of National Law Journal’s ‘Lawyers of the Year,’ and portrayed by Academy Award winner Kevin Spacey in HBO’s film ‘RECOUNT,’” a biography of Klain had read on the group’s website. 

Well, we all knew that Obama's "Ebola Czar" was really going to be Obama's "Cover Your Ass with PR Flack Czar." But now the Administration doesn't want him associated with Third Way? Do they really think that doing that will make Klein look less like a partisan PR man? Seriously?

Heh. Or is that Third Way doesn't want to be associated with any of Obama's czars?

I suppose it could go either way right now...

Climate Czar Browner's Glaring Conflict of Interest

Okay, I was going to lay off blogging through the weekend, but I couldn't let this one pass by without mentioning it.

Over at BigGovernment.com Christopher C. Horner has an interesting little heads up on Climate "Czar" Carol Browner. It seems that "[s]he was on the board of one of the leading carbon offset trading companies, APX.

"That makes for one really big conflict of interest in her role guiding the administration’s efforts to regulate carbon dioxide and force emitters to buy CO2 ration-coupons.

"So, add this to her work for the Albright Group which is 'secretive about its clients' (SourceWatch), violating a federal judge’s order to preserve documents by wiping computers clean while at EPA (sound at all relevant these days?), and her board membership for the Socialist International’s 'climate' project.

"Other than those I can’t think of too many reasons Obama wouldn’t want her subjected to disclosure requirements and scrutiny."

Cute stuff.

FCC Czar Advocates "Truly Good White People" Stepping Down "So Someone Else Can have Power"

Another czar, another fringe-dweller...

Check out this NewsBusters.org piece by Seton Motley. Mark Lloyd is the FCC's Chief Diversity Officer (the Diversity Czar), and he had some interesting comments in his recent past.

Here's a quick list:

1) He admires the Venezuelan Marxist leader Hugo Chavez's control of media.

A quote from Lloyd himself (video available at link) June 10, 2008 National Conference for Media Reform (NCMR) in Minneapolis, Minnesota: "In Venezuela, with Chavez, is really an incredible revolution - a democratic revolution. To begin to put in place things that are going to have an impact on the people of Venezuela.

"The property owners and the folks who then controlled the media in Venezuela rebelled - worked, frankly, with folks here in the U.S. government - worked to oust him. But he came back with another revolution, and then Chavez began to take very seriously the media in his country.

"And we've had complaints about this ever since"

Of course Chavez has taken the media seriously by imposing legal restrictions and revoking the licenses (200 licenses today 9/23/09) of radio and television stations in an effort to squeeze out political opponents and criticism.

Admirable.

2) Lloyd believes that too many white people are in positions of power in the media and need to step down.

A quote from Lloyd (video available here) at the 2005 Conference on Media Reform: Racial Justice: "During the Clinton Administration, largely because of Congress who was then very concerned about affirmative action and believed that - although affirmative action largely benefited white women - that affirmative action was largely viewed as something that was benefiting blacks. Not necessarily any of the other racial groups (his laughter) but blacks. And that blacks had gotten enough and it was time to do something about this. These affirmative action programs needed to be stopped. We have not made much improvement since we've begun to pull back (sic) from those things in the mid 1990s.

"The conversation about how we communicate with each other despite being aware of the clear impressions that I know that I make in rooms that I walk into, when people hear my voice, is a challenge. How much do I express the... I think really pretty obvious complaints of black Americans in rooms full of whites.

"This... there's nothing more difficult than this. Because we have really, truly good white people in important positions. And the fact of the matter is that there are a limited number of those positions. And unless we are conscious of the need to have more people of color, gays, other people in those positions we will not change the problem. We're in a position where you have to say who is going to step down so someone else can have power.

"There are few things I think more frightening in the American mind than dark skinned black men. Here I am [emphasis mine]."

I'm sort of curious as to who exactly whom this "we" refers to. Apparently a group that Lloyd believes possesses the power to force people out of their jobs for not being colorful or homosexual enough.

So to recap, the FCC's Chief Diversity Officer who, in his own words, flaunts his race-consciousness, openly admires Hugo Chavez's heavy-handed control of the media, and believes that "[w]e're in a position where you have to say who is going to step down so someone else can have power."

Nice.

Ah yes... Isn't it wonderful to live in this "post-racial" world? It seems bizarre to me that anyone can claim this as Obama seems to busily fill his czar positions with some of the most race-conscious people he can find. Is this a surprise coming from someone who listened to Rev. Wright for twenty or so years? But, I guess I'm a racist for bringing any of this up anyway...

Van Jones Declared US Brought 9/11 upon Itself

After Van Jones was ushered out of the White House in the dead of night (oh, I'm sorry... he voluntarily resigned), I thought that I would post no more on Jones for a while-- maybe even forever more. I was wrong.

Check out this post by Tom Blumer at NewsBusters.org. It turns out Jones was blaming the US for bringing the attacks on itself the day after 9/11. A summary of a rally held on 9/12/01 posted at indybay.org has several interesting quotes from Jones.

From the summary by gkt: "A recurring theme of the speakers was the brutal violence committed by or supported by the United States government on a daily basis. 'The bombs the government drops in Iraq are the bombs that blew up in New York City,' said Van Jones, director of the Ella Baker Center for Human Rights, who also warned against forthcoming violence by the Bush Administration. 'The US cannot bomb its way out of this one. Safety at home requires justice abroad.'"

An interesting assertion. Apparently safety at home requires conforming to the wishes of terrorists abroad.

Later Jones is quoted again amid gkt's pontificating. "Those present were determined to make their voices heard in an increasingly hostile, war-mongering climate scripted by the government and recited by corporate media. They also vowed to fight within their own communities against racism and hostility towards Arab-Americans. Everyone sensed that this was an important time in history, and that the stuggle against injustice requires international solidarity. 'Everyone should be as wise as these inner-city youth here today,' Van Jones concluded. 'We all have more in common with the working people of the earth than we do with George Bush or Colin Powell.'"

Nice Marxist statement at the end there. Of course Jones changed his tune, actually just jumped onto another popular band wagon, when he helped organize a truther march a mere four months later in January 2002. During that public event, in a complete 180 of his previous sentiment, Jones and company suggested that 9/11 was orchestrated by Bush and the CIA rather than being a foreign blow for international justice.

As Blumer at NewsBusters points out, this was originally reported by Scott Johnson at Powerline Sept. 5 2009. Within six hours Jones was gone.

Blumer suggests that the abruptness of Jones' resignation may have had something to do with this report. The Obama Administration wanted him out before this new information had a chance to circulate.

Maybe-- but I'm not sure. Jones was nothing but political dead weight, and this one more example of his opportunist radicalism was hardly the straw that broke the camel's back. Jones was finished once he was exposed to any serious scrutiny.

The real and significant issue here, is not the that Jones is a radical. Jones, deprived of White House patronage, is once again merely a blustering "community organizer." Once again the real story, as Blumer himself notes, is that Jones and his radical views were both well known by the Obama administration. Blumer echoes the same quote from Valerie Jarrett (Obama's "BFF" and "the ultimate insider") that I used in my own posts about Jones. Jarret said to a crowd of dKos bloggers "Oooh. Van Jones, alright! So, Van Jones. We were so delighted to be able to recruit him into the White House. We were watching him, uh, really, he’s not that old, for as long as he’s been active out in Oakland. And all the creative ideas he has. And so now, we have captured that. And we have all that energy in the White House[emphasis mine]."

If one takes into account Obama's international apologist/half-hearted appeasement tour, his failed open hand policy to Iran, and his blatant antipathy of Israel, it would seem his own sentiments are not dissimilar from Jones'.

UPDATE: The WSJ has a pretty interesting op/ed regarding Van Jones and his background within the Left's establishment (h/t Anne Leary at Backyard Conservative). The whole incident is a pretty good indication that mainstream America ignores the Left and its own peril.

...and Van Jones has Resigned

Green Jobs czar Van Jones has announced his resignation. Story from Will Lester of the AP here. During his resignation Jones declared "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."

Jones had the gall to claim that critics were "using lies and distortions to distract and divide"? This coming from a man who signed a 9/11 truther petition in 2004, now claims that he had no idea what he was signing and that "it certainly does not reflect my views, now or ever"-- despite the fact that he had helped organize a 9/11 truther march in January of 2002? "Lies and distortions to distract and divide," indeed. This leaves out his long career of race baiting and name calling (divisive anyone?). It's not that I'm surprised that Jones would say any of this, it's that I'm surprised that he thinks anyone would listen to him. Ah, well...

While Jones' resignation is not surprising, what is particularly interesting in that Jones' resignation comes despite the fact that the MSM (outside of Fox News and certain print papers) gave the story little play. Obama's duck and cover tactics while the MSM extols him, didn't work at all this time around. Maybe, hopefully, a sign of things to come...?

It should be remembered (a I argued in my last post) that Jones did not fly in under the Obama Administration's radar. They had full knowledge of his radical, Left-fringe beliefs. They had, according to Valerie Jarrett, been "watching him, uh, really, he’s not that old, for as long as he’s been active out in Oakland." Jones radicalism wasn't a fluke, and his resignation does not indicate a change in course of the Obama Administration's own hard-Left agendas.

Van Jones: "Truther" from 2002 and the Obama Admin. is "Delighted" to have "Recruited Him"

We all know about the Van Jones (Obama's "Green Jobs Czar") story-- the communist background, inflammatory statements (more here), his practice of hurling insults at Republicans, and the signature to the "9/11 Truth.org" petition.

Jones' response was a perfunctory apology in which he said "In recent days some in the news media have reported on past statements I made before I joined the administration – some of which were made years ago. 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."

So at this point we are left with the inescapable conclusion that Jones is either a liar (if he did, in fact, sign the 9/11 truther petition out of a belief that the federal government caused or permitted the attacks to happen) or a fool (if we are to believe that he signed a petition while being unaware of its central message).

Either way, Jones seems wholly unqualified to advise anyone on anything of a legal or governmental matter-- let alone a president. Opportunistic liars are untrustworthy and fools are... well fools.

Yet now there is further evidence of Jones' ties to the truthers. Gateway Pundit has this little gem from Rense.com way back in 2002. A "San Francisco March to Demand Inquiry of 9/11" lists Van Jones as a member of the organizing committee.

In a document dated 1-11-2002, a march to Sen. Feinstein's SF office was declared and "[t]he delegation will demand that these questions (and others) be raised and answered publicly-"

An edited list of their copious questions that they demand answers to:

"What is the relationship between Bin Laden, his family and the Bush family and the Carlyle Group?"

"Why were no fighter planes dispatched to intercept the four hijacked planes on September 11h , in violation of standard procedures?"

"Who actually was in control of the 'hijacked planes'?"

"Did the CIA have foreknowledge of the attack, who tried to profit with put options on American, United, Merrill Lynch stock just before the attack?"

"Why were the FBI told to not investigate the Bin Laden family links in the US?"

"Why are we bombing Afghanistan, when none of the alleged bombers actually came from there, could there be another reason for our presence in that region, like oil?" Oil in Afghanistan? Huh...

"Is the war against Afghanistan illegal?"

"What are Bush's, Cheney's and Rice's connections to the oil industry?"

"Why is the evidence being destroyed when an investigation of the World Trade Center collapse is needed?"

"What relationship did various U.S. agencies and their contractors have with the Taliban, either directly or through Pakistani or Saudi agencies or contractors?"

Van Jones is seventh on the list of members of the "Organizing Committee" for this march. This document indicates Jones was involved with the truther movement at the movement's beginnings.

Given that he was organizing truther marches in early 2002, I think it is safe to assume that Jones' signature on the 9/11 truth petition did reflect his true views. And that Jones is lying when he states, during an inauthentic apology, that the 9/11 truther petition he signed did not reflect his own beliefs and that he simply didn't read it carefully. So he is a liar. Whether he is a fool or not I leave to your own musing.

Currently, Republicans are calling for Jones to step down. Whether this actually happens or not is a coin toss. I would say it's a no-brainer, but Obama's "hope" (as in I hope they don't notice any of this) and "change" (as in I'll play this down and pray that they'll eventually change their minds) political strategy has proven depressingly effective-- especially with a press corp still largely smitten with Obama.

The significance of all this goes beyond the fringe-beliefs of one of Obama's advisers (let's ignore science czar John Holdren's fringe beliefs for now). Van Jones is not someone who flew in under the Obama Administration's radar. I'm sure there will be a distancing from him, whether they encourage his resignation or not, and the administration's spokespeople will suggest that this is not the Jones they know a la Rev. Jeremiah Wright.

Yet, as Charles Krauthammer points out (h/t Anne Leary at Backyard Conservative) this patently false. From an editorial today in The Washington Post not about Van Jones Krauthammer notes "The conventional wisdom is that Obama made a tactical mistake by farming out his agenda to Congress and allowing himself to be pulled left by the doctrinaire liberals of the Democratic congressional leadership. But the idea of Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi pulling Obama left is quite ridiculous. Where do you think he came from, this friend of Chávista ex-terrorist William Ayers, of PLO apologist Rashid Khalidi, of racialist inciter Jeremiah Wright?"

As Michelle Malkin points out, Jones has been publicly lauded by Valerie Jarrett at a dKos blogger convention ("Obama's BFF" and "The Ultimate Insider" according to The New York Times Magazine's idolizing expose):

"JARRETT:. You guys know Van Jones? [Applause. Moderator injects: "This is his house apparently."]

"JARRETT: Oooh. Van Jones, alright! So, Van Jones. We were so delighted to be able to recruit him into the White House. We were watching him, uh, really, he’s not that old, for as long as he’s been active out in Oakland. And all the creative ideas he has. And so now, we have captured that. And we have all that energy in the White House [emphasis mine]."

Make no mistake, Jones was selected by the Obama Administration with full knowledge of his radical, divisive and fringe beliefs. I would argue he was selected, not in spite of his radical views, but because of them. After all, what area of expertise does he actually bring to the table? Is he a scientist who can demonstrate the need for "green jobs" (a term that no one, including Jones himself, has a definition for)? No. Is Jones an industry leader with a proven record of creating jobs, green or otherwise? No. He does, however, have a demonstrable history of organizing SF truther marches, likening supporters of murdered police officer Daniel Faulkner to the KKK, (h/t Michelle Making again), and other hard-Left and/or race baiting causes.

The Obama Administration have shackled themselves at the wrist to fringe-dwelling Van Jones. Although there is no doubt they will saw off Jones' arm rather than sink with him, if it comes to that, the confirmation of Obama's unreasonable, hard-Left position is inescapable.

I'm willing to bet money that Van Jones is simply the first of many ugly hard-Left exposes that will dog White House, irrespective of the issues of socialized medicine, Cap & Trade, and Obama's open hostility to countries such as Israel and Honduras. How Obama handles this current issue, and how much it hurts his credibility will give great insight into what the next 3 1/2 years will be like in America.