Comments:Van Jones environmental jobs adviser to US President Barack Obama resigns

Back to article

This page is for commentary on the news. If you wish to point out a problem in the article (e.g. factual error, etc), please use its regular collaboration page instead. Comments on this page do not need to adhere to the Neutral Point of View policy. You should sign your comments by adding ~~~~ to the end of your message. Please remain on topic. Though there are very few rules governing what can be said here, civil discussion and polite sparring make our comments pages a fun and friendly place. Please think of this when posting.

Quick hints for new commentators:

• Use colons to indent a response to someone else's remarks
• Always sign your comments by putting --~~~~ at the end
• You can edit a section by using the edit link to the right of the section heading

Click here to add a new comment · Add onto existing comments

It was not by any stretch of the imagination a smear campaign; people simply brought Jones' own words and deeds out into the light to be seen by all. Like the cockroach he is, Jones scurried back into the darkness. Thank goodness!

In the same sentence that you say it was not a smear campaign, you call him a cockroach.

Hypocrit....77.250.25.165 (talk) 10:59, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

It's sad to see how much bile the right as spilled on this man; the red-baiting, in particular, is truly disgusting in its McCarthy-esque paranoia. In terms of ability, Jones was and is highly qualified for government--which may be why Beck et al chose to smear him rather than to actually challenge his competence. More conservative attrition, it would seem. Wolfcm (talk) 13:29, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

The WH seems to be throwing Jones under the bus at this point. Is Obama in such desperate political straits

that he's unable to defend one of his most respected officials? There's not much defense against stupidity

and paranoia. --149.84.20.63 (talk) 14:06, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

There's not much defense against stupidity and paranoia.

There's NO defense against being a socialist wacko. What kind of awful vetting process did this guy sneak through? 206.74.5.136 (talk) 01:34, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

The Czars have no vetting process Obama is bypassing Congress by setting them up.--75.74.61.245 (talk) 02:55, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Van Jones -- "smear campaign"??

If there was indeed a “smear campaign” as Mr. Jones states, it was created by his own hand as referenced by several quotes from the East Bay Express News. The particular article titled “The New Face of Environmentalism” was published on November 2, 2005. In that article, there is a section that has several quotes from Mr. Jones after the verdicts of the assailants in the Rodney King case were announced. The section of this article that I refer to follows:

“Jones had planned to move to Washington, DC, and had already landed a job and an apartment there. But in jail, he said, "I met all these young radical people of color -- I mean really radical, communists and anarchists. And it was, like, 'This is what I need to be a part of.'" Although he already had a plane ticket, he decided to stay in San Francisco. "I spent the next ten years of my life working with a lot of those people I met in jail, trying to be a revolutionary." In the months that followed, he let go of any lingering thoughts that he might fit in with the status quo. "I was a rowdy nationalist on April 28th, and then the verdicts came down on April 29th," he said. "By August, I was a communist."”

What strikes me most about this is that since I was a child in the 50’s, the position of our government has been to prevent the spread of Communism. The wars in both Viet Nam and Korea were fought with that in mind. Thousands of American lives were lost as a result of these wars.

The thing that is most upsetting to me is that an individual with a background such as his could have been appointed by the President to such a high ranking position. This gives me no choice but to seriously question the selection process of “special advisors” otherwise commonly referred to as czars. Is this process even constitutional?

--Johnwall (talk) 20:32, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

One less communist.--KDP3 (talk) 20:47, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

[One less communist]

Excuse me, but have we now devolved into 21st century McCarthyism? Get ready, KDP3, the Red Army is coming... --Wolfcm (talk) 14:16, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Trust me my family is from Cuba be happy this 9/11 truther is gone.--75.74.61.245 (talk) 17:42, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

I learned about this on a Chinese website 2 days after it happened. For someone who doesn't watch the propaganda tube, most places on the the net, this news was here, then gone. It is blatant leftist extremists like this are cherished by some major websites. Where the story was told, no mention of "communist" or "Rodney King riots" to his "extreme ends" comment where touched on at all. This supposedly was caused by his signing a 9-11 truther petition, which he denies. So I guess that means the mean neocons "railroaded" him out of his nice czar position for no reason but......racism...of course.68.204.163.232 (talk)

I read that he stopped being a communist some time ago and he merely sign the 9/11 petition with the idea that it was for a call for another investigation, not knowing it was from the kinds of conspiracy wackos we all love.(Source: politifact.com)—66.110.226.117 (talk) 18:50, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

How can the truth be a smear campaign? Sadly, the truth hurts. And if an idiot like Glenn Beck is to blame, then if he is so stupid how did the administration not know all of the things Glenn Beck found out about Van Jones? Seems to me that the ones in power knew the truth and embraced it until it was discovered by a stupid talk-radio commentator. What is going on? Transparency? Give us a break.-76.7.120.172 (talk) 04:03, 9 September 2009 (UTC)