Jones being forced out will not mollify the racists, crazies, tea baggers, Republican congresspeople and other assorted conservative freakshows – it will only embolden them. When lynch mobs in the Old South lynched someone, when a witchhunting band caught a target in Salem, when HUAC “proved” the supposed communism of its victims, that didn’t calm them down – it only intensified their bloodlust because it made them believe they could be even more successful in the future. So if the White House’s political “gurus” believe booting Jones was the safe and prudent way to mitigate right-wing hatred, then they are as short-sighted and stupid as they’ve proven themselves to be in mismanaging the summer’s health care debate.
…
The Jones announcement will inevitably create a chilling effect on the aspirations of other movement progressives. Van is a fantastic person who has done fantastic work. He’s kept his advocacy real and didn’t compromise his principles. And so when he was appointed to a high-level White House job, it seemed to validate that you could, in fact, keep it real and also advance in American politics and government.
David Sirot, Political journalist, best-selling author and syndicated newspaper columnist
Did this prominent author and journalist bother to Google search the name ‘Van Jones’ before writing this? He contributes Van Jones’ resignation, which he believes (without stating any evidence) was not in fact a resignation but a move by White House officials, in response to ‘truther’ accusations?
Sadly, White House officials should have been the ones to put an end to Jones’ position. Forget his ideological threat to the constitution; given his radical background, he was a physical threat to the president. And they should have removed him publicly—not behind close doors, which Sirota somehow suggests without compromising or questioning his faith in Obama. After all, this is the administration of ‘transparency’, am I correct?
Jones’ resignation came on Saturday night, past midnight (obviously to keep it low key), the day the video of him stating that ‘you never saw a columbine committed by black kids’ broke on Fox News. And let’s not forget to mention the myriad of other offenses Jones committed, which does have some relevancy. But apparently not enough relevancy to be mentioned by the MSM.
These people will compromise everything just to throw a little dirt on Republicans or anyone who opposes President Obama. These are the true colors of liberalism.
If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!
Here is a prime example of a liberal. We are left with two choices of opinion as regards his remarks on “tea baggers”. “Teabagging” is a slang term for a generally homosexual erotic practice.
If liberals are so concerned about “gays” and “gay” issues why do they insist on using gaybaiting tactics against the conservatives? It just shows their contempt for people who they pretend to care about.
If David Sirota is simply confused and does not know the history of the Boston tea party then he is plain ignorant.
This ignorance is further demonstrated by the reference to HUAC “victims”. The HUAC was set up to get communists out of the US government and other influential positions. The fact that the commission was vindicated by many decoded Soviet documents demonstrates that the liberals of that time were no smarter than the ones we have now.
There are your choices. Liberals are either hypocritical or ignorant. Stupid just goes without saying.
In the words of French Premier Georges Clemenceau (1841-1929) – “Not to be a socialist at twenty is proof of
want of heart; to be one at thirty is proof of want of head.”
The liberal party – perpetual adolescents.