Obama Green Czar a 9-11 Truther ***UPDATE*** Jones Was Tricked into Signing 9-11 Truther Petition

vanjones1Many people, including myself, have a problem with the whole White House Czar thing.  Unelected and unconfirmed with limited oversight by any government agency, other than the White House, seems to be an extreme power grab.  Not to mention many of these czar’s seem to be, in my humble opinion, payback positions for past loyalty.  Now, this is not new concept in the political world, but still disturbing to this blogger.

The Gatway Pundit, always on top of the most relevant issues, highlighted the link between the new Green Czar, Van Jones, as a 9-11 Truther.  Those of you who don’t know what a 9-11 Truther is, these people feel that the Bush Administration caused the 9-11 attacks to perpetuate a war in Iraq.  These people are the extreme left-wing and I do not believe they represent main stream liberals, but I wonder why there is limited coverage on these screwballs while the “birthers” are highlighted on page one.  Just asking the question.

911 Truth Statement

Respected Leaders and Families Launch 9/11 Truth Statement Demanding Deeper Investigation into the Events of 9/11

NEW YORK CITY, NY (Oct. 26, 2004) – An alliance of 100 prominent Americans and 40 family members of those killed on 9/11 today announced the release of the 911 Truth Statement, a call for immediate inquiry into evidence that suggests high-level government officials may have deliberately allowed the September 11th attacks to occur.The Statement supports an August 31st Zogbypoll that found nearly 50% of New Yorkers believe the government had foreknowledge and “consciously failed to act,” with 66% wanting a new 9/11 investigation.

Focusing on twelve questions, the Statement highlights areas of incriminating evidence that were either inadequately explored or ignored by the Kean Commission, ranging from insider trading and hijacker funding to foreign government fore warnings and inactive defenses around the Pentagon. The Statement asks for four actions: an immediate investigation by New York Attorney General Eliot Spitzer, Congressional hearings, media analysis, and the formation of a truly independent citizens-based inquiry.

The Statement’s list of signatories includes notables spanning the political spectrum, from Presidential candidates Ralph Nader, Michael Badnarik, and David Cobb to Catherine Austin Fitts, a member of the first Bush administration, as well as Washington veterans like Pentagon   Daniel Ellsberg and retired CIA analyst Ray McGovern. Other signers range from peace activists like Code Pink president Jodie Evans and Global Exchange’s Kevin Danaher to former US Ambassador and Chief of Mission to Iraq, Edward L. Peck; from environmentalists like Randy Hayes and John Robbins to business leaders such as Paul Hawken and Karl Schwartz, CEO of Patmos Nanotechnologies; from populist journalist Ronnie Dugger to renowned investigative reporter Kelly Patricia O’Meara.

The Statement also includes 43 noted authors, including New York Times #1 bestseller John Gray, as well as 18 eminent professors, historians, and theologians. Other notables include five-term Georgia Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney, singers Michelle Shocked and Michael Franti, and actors Ed Asner and Mimi Kennedy.

 

Also included on said list was none other than Van Jones, White House Green Czar.  Interesting.  I wonder what the response from the media would be if President Bush would have put forth some right-wing radical that pushed for the murder of abortion doctors?  I’ll guarantee Keith Olbermann would have made him the “Worst Person in the World.”

 

***UPDATE***

Over the weekend new Green Czar, Van Jones, resigned his position.  I’m sure it was “encouraged” by the White House due to his sketchy past with Communism, left-wing radicals and 9-11 truthers.  This morning on FoxNews Sunday, Howard Dean indicated that Mr. Jones was tricked into signing the 9-11 Truther petition.

OK, right Dr. Dean.  And for his next trick, Mr. Jones will have monkeys fly out of his butt.   

Of course, this is just my opinion.

Rob’s Rant

Advertisements

16 Responses

  1. I am with you BRO. Just as nutty is your blog in support of death-panels. birds of a feather.

  2. death-panels? I don’t remember pushing those in this forum. Please elaborate further and bless me with your wisdom o great one…

  3. You blog nonsense, and sit mightily and call others “o great one.” Such elitism.

    Either you want an honest discussion or you don’t. I think you can’t handle feedback or an honest discussion. It affronts the foundation of your beliefs.

    Cut the elitist sarcasm.

    • A question was asked in regards your comment. You refused to answer the question but decided to venture into some “elitist” nonsense.

      Since you decided to not comment on my question, here it is again without the line that offended you:

      death-panels? I don’t remember pushing those in this forum. Please elaborate further

      Just to frame the whole discussion, here is your comment that started the string:

      I am with you BRO. Just as nutty is your blog in support of death-panels. birds of a feather.

      Actually I was just going with the whole vibe of the conversation.

      If you can’t take my sarcasm then stop commenting on this blog. I’m glad to occasionally answer your comments and questions, but I really don’t have to if I’m involved in other activities (sorting socks, eating, sleeping…). As explained at least a 100 times on this blog, I don’t live my life through this blog and others like you obviously do. I’m glad you have an all consuming hobby, but this is not all consuming to me. I don’t think about it all the time and I don’t answer all comments on all posts. This is my forum to air MY opinions. Either live with that or don’t comment. Pretty simple, really.

  4. There is a world of difference between responding in a conversation and engaging in sarcasm, elitism, and insults. Your responses have had a great deal of the latter three.

    Your last response is also full of elitism. No expects you to drop your sock sorting habit to reply to this post (I know you can shell it out, but can you take it?).

    Your sarcasm is a product of your irritation with counter opinions. I think more of your life is tied up in this blog than you may want to admit or realize. You post sarcasm instead of a reasoned and well thought out defense. It speak volumes about you.

    In the last 7 days (Aug 28 to yesterday) you’ve posted 8 articles and 14 responses, for a total of 22 postings. I’ve replied 8 times.

    And who is spending all of his “all consuming time” on this blog? Look in the mirror.

  5. There is a world of difference between responding in a conversation and engaging in sarcasm, elitism, and insults. Your responses have had a great deal of the latter three.

    Sarcasm yes, elitism and insults, no. That’s your tactic Mike, not mine. If you take it as elitism and insults (oh, I forgot sarcasm) then that is your problem.

    Your last response is also full of elitism. No expects you to drop your sock sorting habit to reply to this post (I know you can shell it out, but can you take it?).

    Yes, my sock sorting habit takes a lot of time. One of my many hobbies. Got to make sure the black socks are separated from the white tube socks. Very difficult stuff! (oh sorry, was that too insulting, sarcastic or elitist?)
    We can both shell it out but I would contend that you are the one that can’t take it. I’ve noticed several of your comments that could be construed by a thin skinned person as extremely condecending and insulting. I, on the other hand, don’t really care if a random commenter to my site takes this approach as long as the language is kept clean. Otherwise, I just laugh at some of your comments. Again, this site is not for you, it’s for me.

    Your sarcasm is a product of your irritation with counter opinions.

    Wrong. I have no problem with counter opinions. I don’t agree with most of your opinions, but I allow you and others to comment. You’ll get my honest response. I could shut off the comment feature but I don’t. I think I’ve explained this before.

    I think more of your life is tied up in this blog than you may want to admit or realize.

    It’s my website. I spend as much time as I feel like. Actually, more time is spent going back and forth with you than posting.

    You post sarcasm instead of a reasoned and well thought out defense. It speak volumes about you.

    My opinion points are given in the initial posts. If this speaks volumes about me, then so be it. I’m not here to impress anyone.

    In the last 7 days (Aug 28 to yesterday) you’ve posted 8 articles and 14 responses, for a total of 22 postings. I’ve replied 8 times.

    And that proves your point? I know this is not the only site you comment on as I have seen information show up in several different forums that is the same. We discussed this a couple months back. When I see someone going back to postings from several weeks ago, I begin to wonder on the sanity of said person. The only people who will actually see your comments are you and me. What’s the point here?

    And who is spending all of his “all consuming time” on this blog? Look in the mirror.

    Again, this is my website. I spend the time I want and usually cut off the comments when I’m bored of the subject. What is the URL of your web site again? I look forward to commenting on Mike’s Rant.

    Also, I do look marvelous in the mirror.

  6. Rob, it’s a conversation. If you want to take it to elitism and sarcasm, I’ll call you on it. It’s that simple.

    Everyone knows that cogent, well thought out responses is what readers expect from all posters. Anything else is bunk.

    Your responses to me are full of sarcasm, putting down, etc.. Those responses have already defined your abilities to converse and respond.

    Don’t like the response? Don’t.

  7. ??? You’re the one that brought up elitism, sarcasm and insults. Nothing I post is elitist or insulting. If you take it that way that is your burden. I would guess that you are one of the only people that would have taken it that way.

    This is part of the problem with the electronic written word we have today. In the past when two people were discussion or disagreeing on an issue it would be on the phone or face to face. No facial expressions or voice inflection to key off of in the conversation.

    My responses are (usually) to the point and answer asked questions. You may not like my answer, but that is not my problem.

  8. Elitism is you know better and don’t have to answer questions or back it up with reason. Plenty of examples oin your posts. The counter to that is my approach: I bring up questions, reason, and thoughtful evidence.

    Sarcasm is another for of being insulting. Your replies are often in the woods, bringing up sock sorting as some sort of excuse.

    None of this is my problem, or your problem. I’ll call your elitist or insulting comments when I see them, as I have in this thread.

    You may want to blame electronic communication, but the plain fact is that my comments are hardly taken out of context and they are not gratuitously sarcastic. Take note if you want to participate in an on-line conversation.

  9. Whatever you think Mike. You seem to keep coming back for more, so what does that say about you. As I have stated, if you don’t like the discussion, don’t comment.

    You started this string with some nonsenical statement:

    I am with you BRO. Just as nutty is your blog in support of death-panels. birds of a feather.

    That statement has nothing to do with the post and you still have not answered my original question about “death-panels.”

  10. “Whatever you think” is a continuation of your attitude of being insulting. There is conversation which converges, and there is being dismissive to the point of being insulting.

    I content that Van Jones’ belief in 911 conspiracies is no different than the right’s views on birthers and death panels.

    You have posted about your dislike of the democrats plan for Health Care, all of it. The conservative response has been death panels, which has long since been discredited.

    You have been silence on death panels or on the conservative’s response and failure to bring up a coherent and logical plan.

  11. We’ll have to agree to disagree about the tone of our posts. “Whatever you think” is my way of saying, “Mike, I really don’t want to spend another second of my time with this line of bilge because there is no end to the debate.” Descriptive enough for you?

    I don’t comment on each and every thing that comes down the pike. Don’t expect me to spend time on every issue you want me to comment on. You can do that on your website…what was the URL again?

    The fact is that there have been plans presented by the GOP back in June to counter the current health care bill.

    http://www.gop.gov/solutions/healthcare

    I realize this is not 1,000 pages and not a “real” bill, but they have presented ideas. The point is really moot since the Repubilcans in the house have very little say and no leverage.

    Glad to see you are not a Truther, though.

  12. There wouldn’t have been a debate in teh first place if you had used reason and well thought out responses instead of sarcasm, elitism and insult.

    Alluding to socks didn’t help your case either.

    What URL of mine do you keep asking for?

  13. ???

    I posted reasoned ideas in the post. You took it that direction in the first place. I’ll post your initial comment again (2nd time) just to remind you:

    I am with you BRO. Just as nutty is your blog in support of death-panels. birds of a feather.

    Hmmm. I see plenty of sarcasm here. I responded with this:

    death-panels? I don’t remember pushing those in this forum. Please elaborate further and bless me with your wisdom o great one…

    Sarcam with sarcasm. And here’s the next post from you:

    You blog nonsense, and sit mightily and call others “o great one.” Such elitism.

    Either you want an honest discussion or you don’t. I think you can’t handle feedback or an honest discussion. It affronts the foundation of your beliefs.

    Cut the elitist sarcasm.

    If you were trying to get my dander up, try again. Like I said above, you are the one who can’t take criticism. Sorry you can’t see that, but that’s the truth. I don’t expect you do see it, but that’s the way it is.

    What URL of mine do you keep asking for?

    I’m curious if you spend all day commenting on sites or actually have your own site to express your views to a larger audience. I know the answer is no, just thought I would ask until I got an answer.

    Signed,

    An elitist insulting sarcastic patriot

  14. Van Jones’ ideas about the truther movement are as nutty as death panel ideas. There is no sarcasm. It is an opinion. Both are loony.

    We could have had a discussion about why you thought truther was nuttier, or death panels was nuttier. Instead your response was “o great one.”

    Do you intend to hash through the entire history all over again?

    You have my position: cut the elitistism and the insults.

  15. I don’t know If I said it already but …Hey good stuff…keep up the good work! 🙂 I read a lot of blogs on a daily basis and for the most part, people lack substance but, I just wanted to make a quick comment to say I’m glad I found your blog. Thanks,)

    A definite great read..Tony Brown

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: