Beck, Jones, and race
September 04, 2009 4:14 pm ET by John V. Santore
Over the past two weeks, Glenn Beck has waged a relentless assault on Van Jones, President Obama's green jobs czar. Beck's attacks and vitriol have become especially pronounced since Color of Change, the African-American issues organization Jones co-founded in 2005 (he left in 2007 to pursue other projects), began a highly successful boycott campaign that has resulted in 57 advertisers dropping Beck's program in just a matter of weeks.
But the content of Beck's case against Jones belies something deeper. For example, Beck has emphasized that Jones sported a Black Panther patch on his book bag when he arrived at Yale Law School, and has reduced some of his past civil rights work to nothing more than campaigns designed to free Mumia Abu-Jamal and his (exaggerated) participation in the Los Angeles riots after the Rodney King verdict. (Just watch his August 24 biography of Jones to see proof of that.) While Jones' past is undoubtedly steeped in African-American issues, he was brought into the Obama administration to focus on green jobs -- pure and simple. And yet, for Beck, the focus is always directly or indirectly on Jones' race.
This is entirely consistent with Beck's mindset. Beck is obsessed with race and seems deeply uncomfortable with minority Americans in general, especially those in positions of power. In February, he pushed the idea that Mexican immigrants want to "reclaim" California and Texas. In May, he called Sonia Sotomayor a "racist" on at least three separate occasions, adding that she is "divisive" and "not that bright." He also once dismissively referred to her as "Hispanic chick lady" in an effort to belittle her credentials and portray her as a pure affirmative action pick. (In case you were wondering, affirmative action also qualifies as racism in Beck's book.)
Revealingly, Beck is convinced that ACORN, the activist organization that focuses on minority issues, is seeking to overturn American society as we know it.
Regarding Obama, he has had immense difficulty seeing past the president's skin. He said Obama was elected because of race instead of his policies. He has portrayed the Democratic health care reform effort as "the beginning of reparations." And he has said that Obama plans to "settle old racial scores through new social justice." So it should have come as no surprise when Beck, who believes it is actually Obama, not himself, who "has real issues with race," said the president had "exposed himself as a guy" with "a deep-seated hatred for white people." The next day, he said, "I think the president is a racist." The Color of Change boycott started soon afterward.
It seems clear that to Glenn Beck, individuals like Barack Obama and Van Jones are African-American before they are anything else. And for him, that appears to be a major cause for concern.
Even more right-wing hypocrisy...
Mao Ze Jones will be forced out, as he should be. He's both a race-baiter and a nutjob, and has no business being in a position of power. Just youtube the dimwit, and you'll get an idea
The kicker of coure is when the old dude apologized for having his face right where Cheney was shooting.
Van Jones must be thrown under the bus like everyone Obama takes heat on. Hope there is room left.
If he doesn't he is done in 2012.
I haven't seen you call for any action on Beck who shows a much clearer and more public example.
How did you feel about Chenney's FU to the Senate?
You are so one sided its a wonder you don't continually walk in circles.
Is that, perhaps, because 99% of Repubs are white?
What the h*ll is your point?
A win for the entire Republican Race do doubt!
I won't even ask where "GONEEEEEEEE" came from.
How can the President of the United States appoint advisers that are associated with the Communist party, Acorn and Unions that have destroyed this Country?
Because he can or because he likes the attention? Tell me a person who believes in putting sterilization drugs in our drinking water should be advising the President of the United States is a good idea.
Have you looked into Van Jones? Do you support him and his ideology? Do yo think it is good for our nation to have a self proclaimed communist working so close to our Presidient?
which rule is it agin in the Alinsky handbood that calls for you to detract from the real issue?
But I guess when Booman and Kos painted blackface on Lieberman, that was ok?
Both show poor judgment and class IMO...
This allows people, like Beck, to say: "Look what they said in 1968. They were complaining about the being oppressed by whitey."
Just because someone said something "radical" 40 years ago does not mean they are looking to "overthrow" the government.
But; that is how we work now. If you don't like someones stand or politics; find something in their past that you can blow out of proportion and use it to promote fear and hatred.
Of course, if your just fishing around for evidence that someone is eeeeeeeeeeeeevvviiiiiiiiiilllll, that'll probably do.
This really makes you wonder why the president chose Jones as his "Green job Czar". Did he really not know who he was(again)
& was he actually chosed because of the positions he holds. if the latter is the answer just what direction is tis country heading?
Whatever you want to call it; "progressivesm","socialism",communism","statism","marxism" they are all the same. Why have so many words to describe it? Why be deceptive if it is such a great way of governing & everyone will love it & be happy? Why try back door angles to slowing implement it? If it is such a great way, then it should be able to stand on it's own merits!
http://glennbeckrapedandmurderedayounggirlin1990.com/
They even used the Beck robot voices in a video !
HA!
I was just messing with you a little, Oscar. I don't lump you in with the lost cause wingnuts here, and you obviously don't take your marching orders from Rush or Hannity (on most days)
You seem to think for yourself, and you have a sense of humor. Which always makes me wonder if you're really a con. :)
I'm not a straight party voter, never have been. Pragmatic more than an idealolog (sp?). Am Conservative on many issues, middle of the road on others.
Ah well, back to work, after all it is Labor Day and there are labors that must needs be done.
Spose any democrat/liberal/progressive, and yes, RINO, should be prepared to be roasted by parts of our beloved media. Given that they can find outrage in speaking to gradeschool kids, the question is more like how can I possibly please them? Adapt a bent over posture always ready for that well deserved(?) kick to the goolies?
The spokesmen for 20% of the population show their power once again over the rest of us.
I caught that too!
ColorofChange ended up sucking hind teat on this one and that leave the front for the Glenn haters. Media matters is too left wing so I am signing off before one of George's goons bites off a finger or two.
I fear what is to come. As I keep iterating, this thought process was about to be replaced with a quasi-Kennedy Moonshot moment, as if health care and exploration into green tech provide the boost to the economy, working class, and bottom line that is possible would've kept being his main focus, it could've transformed the quality of life of America as a whole, and this struggle would've allowed a needed introspection into who we are as people and then a nation and our true responsibility to each other. I feel that would've bankrupted the vile venom from the far right and it's denizens and they would've had to come at least more towards the center, as noted conservative Michael Smerconish, and made Rush's new far far bloated contract the vulture that kills that type of radio. Now it's back to good ole race-baiting, red scaring, gender nullification BS again. Thanks Barack.
Find someone else for 2012 please, and this is coming from a verifiable Black guy and Obama supporter, but I had always Al Gore as my first choice. I wish the progressives wowed with a couple great speeches would've listened.
I don't understand why Democrats can't get this through their fluttering hearts and quivering backbones: The Glenn Becks of this world want us dead. I don't mean voted out of office or politically discredited; I mean literally dead. Giving them what they want just makes them think they can make it happen.
Tough questions for a tough time.
The Danger was in the statement made by Jones that we are putting poison in minority areas.
The Danger was his claim that 911 was an inside job.
The Danger was his support for radical believes.
The refusal by those on left here to admit that Jones is a radical is a threat to us all.
Did you have any problems with felons in the Bush White House ?
Problems with Iran Contra particpants in the Bush White House
Problems with those that funded death squads in Latin America in the Bush White House
Problems with Bush's claims of "executive privledge" ?
Problems with Bush violating federal law ?
Problems with "national security letters" ?
Problems with suspension of habeas corpus ?
Problems with spying on americans, phone, data and email ?
Problems with Cheney claiming he was on part of either the executive or legislative branch ?
Problems when Cheney told Leahy to go F himself ?
Problems when republicans issued 6 subpeonas while having a republican president but issued over 1052 when having a democratic president ?
See, the list goes on and on and yet wingnuts want to suggest something nefarious about Obama and Van Jones
Hi POinty !
Do you have anything to back that up? All I've been able to find is that he signed a petition asking for investigations as to whether the attacks were allowed to happen. Thanks in advance.(haha, just kidding, I'll expect the usual from you--nothing).
But more importantly...
Congratulations, your heroes did enough bedwetting and crying that you were able to keep another politically incorrect person out of a position with the Obama administration.
If you can keep up the hysteria and paranoia long enough, you and your fellow wingnuts may be able to dumb things down to the point where we have another Bush administration.
I wish I'd known how easy it was. During the eight years of the Bush debacle, Liberals could have rounded up a bunch of drunks to go to town halls and screech incoherently, and accomplished political change.
Oh, wait. Liberals generally believe in democracy, and have some dignity. Never mind.
So, where were you while Obama was showing his "measured" response to Basiji killing Neda in Iran by licking ice cream?
This, by the way, is absolutely hilarious. Does Beck fit your definition of "radical" as well? Of course he doesn't. He's white and right!
I'll admit I'm behind the curve on this. But if he signed a 9/11 truther petition, that's a problem. The excuse of "I didn't carefully review it" or whatever wouldn't cut it if we were talking about a Bush appointee signing on to some idiotic conspiracy, and it shouldn't cut it here. And "Republicans are @$$h0le$" isn't acceptable either, while the apology was the same sort of phony apology we criticize Republicans for making. "If anyone was offended..." No, obviously people were offended, and rightfully so. That rhetoric is not acceptable from someone in an Administration role, especially when we need to have change in our political atmosphere.
The two concepts of Beck's racism and Jones' controversial nature are not mutually exclusive. This article is fallacious for that reason. Just pointing at Beck and calling him a racist, fairly or not, does not address the issue of Jones. This is exactly what I have been talking about. Race should not be used as a shield against criticism. If Jones should stay because there was some innocent mistake over the 9/11 truther petition, then that argument should be made. Otherwise, the criticism is going to be out there whether the target is black or white.
At the very least this is a political disaster. Is Obama supposed to keep someone in the middle of a firestorm around because Beck doesn't like the guy? Oh, that'll teach Beck, alright. Not to equate anyone, but if Bush had brought in George Allen to do a job, no matter how good he may be at that job, the outrage would have been overwhelming. If they're that controversial, and their actions are difficult to explain away, then they have to go whether some extremist also thinks they have to go or not.
You accuse Beck of having no evidence, yet you offer no evidence against Beck. The left simply can not handle criticism with out throwing around a charge of racism. It was annoying at first, but now it is just funny. When the dems lose seats in 2010, will that be because of racism? Obama is seeing his numbers drop. Is that due to racism? In your narrow world view, you either support Obama 100 %, and by extension and radical that supports him as well, or you are a racist.
Accept the fact that the left went after Beck, and this time, Beck won.
Gullible folks like yourself think Beck's onto something but his schtick is rather recycled McCarthyism.
Obama's approval rating have been dropping for a number of reasons, this biggest of which is his failed attempts to play to the middle-right.
I don't know what you're talking about here but Beck is - in fact - a racist. Beck admitted to being racist when he said he does not have black friends because he's scared.
Pointing and crying "Racist!" at America's first black President and then his wimpy retreat on the claim sealed the deal on him being total bigot in my humble opinion. I know you think he's a great American but I think he's a fraud.
Yes, this. What-if simply cannot bring a definiteve answer, but I've started asking myself how things are better or even different than if Hillary were president: The zealous pursuit of minimally incremental change, the panicky tossing of dedicated public servants overboard, the "compromises" that amount to getting .5% of what we'd hoped for, the endless appeasing of the crazies and the dirtbags, it's just what I'd expected of a new Clinton administration. Well, some people warned us they weren't that far apart at all; I guess I owe them an apology.
But I would have hoped that Obama would appreciate that a dream deferred is indeed a dream denied. I believe a lot of people are sick of "Yes we can, to the extent that the blue dogs and gun wavers will go along with it."
Let me help you get more precise and on topic:
Glenn Beck can not handle criticism after throwing around a charge of racism.
...because he's an unstable and gutless racist hiding behind a growing carnival of incoherent conspiracy theories.
Jones' earlier reference to Republicans at large as "A-holes", as much as I agree with it, wasn't appropriate, even in the location and context that he used it. I don't think it should have been a decider, any more that Grampy McCain going along with the "How do we beat the b!+ch comment at his rally.
Maybe there are statements regarding 9/11 I haven't seen from Jones, but all I see, even at right wing sites, is he signed a petition pushing for investigations about the security leading up to it.
And I do agree that racism shouldn't be used as a shield, as prevalent as racism has been, and obviously is, in so much of the hatred directed at Obama and his administration. What I mean is, it's there, anybody who hasn't been hypnotized knows it's there, but discussions are too easily sidetracked by those who are champing at the bit to play The Race Card-Card.
That is,the more cautious racists take the elephant into an adjoining room most of the time, or cover it with a sheet, and it's more productive not to mention it at those times.
You at least normally make an attempt to be rational. Did Jones' statements that were were sending poison into minority issues not bother you even a little? The whole truther thing, the fake apology?
The simple fact is that Jones became the low hanging fruit, and his own statements and his past as a pretty radical activist made him easy picking.
The truther thing? For the record , I don't believe, and never have, that 9/11 was an inside job. I can't say that I wouldn't have signed a petition, given the chance, to investigate whether proper precautions were taken.
Same with the "fake apology". You're asking me to comment on your opinions, how about some facts?
Since barb gave you the truther quote already, here is the link for his fake apology...the If I offended anyone.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/weblogs/back-story/2009/sep/03/green-jobs-czar-signed-truther-statement-in-2004/
The Danger was [Jones'] claim that 911 was an inside job. (Pointofview)
Do you have anything to back that up?
Your link is to an item about the Truther petition, nothing about an apology. You're not doing very well here.
I should know you well enough by now.
You linked to a page with an article. In the middle of this were four links for related stories. At the end of one of these is Jones' apology, with no commentary or criticism pointing out any fake-ness in it..
I can't believe I didn't understand what you had so clearly laid out.
OK, that was sarcasm, not fakery. Let me help you out here, and show you how somebody not disabled by years of wingnut brain sloth would have gone about this;
....................................
From the Washington Times (bottom of page)
Van Jones:
"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.
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."
(Here is where you would have put some stuff to convince people that the apology was fake.)
...............................
See how that's done?
I think you're just saying that you don't believe Jones' apology was sincere, and that makes him a threat to America, or a radical. Let's not pursue that any further.
Let's go back to the claim you made that I've asked you twice to back up, and that you've dodged twice;
The Danger was [Jones'] claim that 911 was an inside job. (Pointofview)
Do you have anything to back that up?
This is the third time I've asked. You might just want to admit you were lying and offer a genuine apology, unless you have something.
Or you can keep insulting other people and blaming them for your shortcomings. Either way's fine by me.
What I notice about this statement is that while Jones could have spent a couple of seconds explaining his regret or how he was unclear on the wording of the petition that he signed, he instead talks about his work. The message I get from that is basically "it doesn't matter what I said about those things anyway, since it has nothing to do with my job today." This should be especially clear when you take into account the comment about how the statements in question were made before he joined the Administration, some of them "years ago".
I tend to play Devil's Advocate sometimes, especially to mess with the cons who will insist that conservatives never apologize for anything, not outright lies, slander, blatantly racist statements made yesterday, decrying "political correctness" and stifling of free speech.
I just find it entertaining when these same people start getting the vapors over lesser offenses by liberals, especially when they go back 30 or 40 years, or embellish these offenses. They have no problem demanding apologies for fictional statements, or insisting people be put out of a job for having certain opinions.
I'm no great fan of Jones, and if he's going to cause meltdowns among con screechmonkeys, or if he's unfit for the position, he should go. I'd just like to keep it reality-based. Notice POV hasn't supported his statement that Jones claimed 9/11 was an inside job?
You're being very fair, Brab. That's great, I know you're holding yourself to a higher standard. I just like to see if I can tease the wingnuts out of the gutter sometimes, and if I have to move slightly closer to the gutter to do that, I will. :0)
Operation Northwoods."
Nice operation.....from 1962 lol. Thanks for a great laugh. And besides, it never took place. You are a tool.
The planning was ok, as long as they didn't execute?
If the attacks had taken place, do you think they should have been investigated?
Jones is just the latest casualty of right wing political correctness, and the effects of dumbing down our national politics for the zombies who think Glenn Beck reports news.
In order for the complaining to go anywhere, there actually has to be some substance behind the charge.
Anyway I agree with Brabantio's comments above that this guy made some serious errors in judgment.
But it wasn't just Beck. Even Obama's own party turned on him. Remember: Americans are not stupid. We will not allow radicals advising the President.
So - "relentless assault" means playing video clips of past interviews of Van Jones, citing statements made by Van Jones in the past (not taken out of context), showing the associations and organizations Van Jones has been directly associated with or founded, and showing petitions signed by Van Jones?
Wow. Scary and relentless "assault".
The band is playing somewhere, and somewhere hearts are light,
And somewhere men are laughing, and somewhere children shout;
But there is no joy in mmfaville - mighty Color of Change has struck out.
I just think the only thing more adorable than you jittery old ladies doing victory dances when your tantrums have an effect is when you act confused as to why you're not taken seriously moments later.
Here's the context of the poisoning statement :
Van Jones statement that whites are essentially poisoning immigrant labor and minorities. .
Pesticides applied to crops does in fact have adverse health consequences on migrant labor.
Pesticides applied to crops does in fact have adverse health consequences on migrant labor
As Americans have effectively "insourced" farm labor to immigrant workers these toxins have a disparate impact on immigrants and minorities. In addition, as environmental groups regulate pollution out of wealthy suburban areas, the pollution tends to simply be moved to poorer, minority dominated areas.
What Beck neglects to mentions is that Van Jones is actually criticizing LIBERAL environmentalist who effectively move pollution from white areas to minority areas with their regulations.
How is Van Jones acting on behalf of the radical left while also condemning ?
Lots of people believe that the gov't had information prior to 9/11 but didn't act on it, either due to incompetence or lack of taking terrorism seriously when they took office.
Here are a few snippets
Report Says FAA Got 52 Warnings Before 9/11
Associated Press
Friday, February 11, 2005; Page A02
The Federal Aviation Administration received repeated warnings in the months before Sept. 11, 2001, that al Qaeda hoped to attack airlines, according to a previously undisclosed report by the commission that investigated the terrorist attacks.
The report detailed 52 such warnings to FAA leaders between April 1 and Sept. 10, 2001, about the terrorist organization and its leader, Osama bin Laden.
The book's opening anecdote tells of an unnamed CIA briefer who flew to Bush's Texas ranch during the scary summer of 2001, amid a flurry of reports of a pending al-Qaeda attack, to call the president's attention personally to the now-famous Aug. 6, 2001, memo titled "Bin Ladin Determined to Strike in US." Bush reportedly heard the briefer out and replied: "All right. You've covered your a$$, now."
C.I.A. Was Tracking Hijacker Months Earlier Than It Had Said
C.I.A. Was Tracking Hijacker Months Earlier Than It Had Said
Bush before September 11: the awful truth
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O6gOmIalJVw
It's then echoed via right wing radio and convinces a portion of the population that dems/Obama + socialists, etc.
Incendiary rhetoric is Fox News stock in trade.
The only saving grace is that FoxNews has one tenth the audience of the major networks.
No doubt, but that's their job, to destroy things for most Americans. I'm much more bothered that Obama continues to employ the right wing Christian radicals of Blackwater than I am with a potential advisor who signed a petition and called republicans A-holes.
But you won't see any of the right wing fainting spells here over right wing radicals who have been stealing our money and hurting our country for years.
For some reason, they're not as scary as Van Jones to the wingnuts.
We may never know where their fear resinates, it's all so mysterious. As an aside, I hear Pointy once got on an elevator that Van Jones, Erik Prince and Al Clark were all on and Pointy nervously started talking hockey with Erik and Al.
Secondly :
During the Bush/Cheney years, the White House created new czars for almost every conceivable policy challenge.
In the span of about six years, Bush oversaw the creation of a "food safety czar," a "cybersecurity czar," a "regulatory czar," an "AIDS czar," a "manufacturing czar," an "intelligence czar," a "bird-flu czar," and a "Katrina czar." It was such a common strategy for Bush that it quickly became the butt of jokes.
Newsweek satirist Andy Borowitz suggested in 2007 that the White House needed a "lying czar" to "oversee all distortions and misrepresentations."
And it's just the first of many.