Glenn Beck’s Crazy Lies About Van Jones Gets Refuted

daveydbanner

Share/Save/Bookmark//

Say what you will about Van Jones, one thing you can’t say is that he’s all the crazy things that Glenn Beck has accused him of..What’s taking place is fear mongering at its worse and is ultimately connected to a larger agenda which hasn’t fully revealed himself. My guess is if you publicly scandalize Van Jones  and de-legitimize him in the eyes of the general public, then you can easily malign all those grassroots movements and organizations that he’s associated with, including the Green Jobs My good friend Eva Paterson sheds some light on things with her article below… Also keep in mind that while Van is probably one of the better known names, he’s not alone in being attacked.  The Fox News team has also gone after Mark Lloyd who is working with the FCC. This brother has been around for along time and is sharp on the issues…Who’s next and does it really matter if  they are attacked?

-Davey D-

Glenn Beck’s Crazy Lies About Van Jones

By Eva Paterson, Equal Justice Society. Posted August 31, 2009.

http://www.alternet.org/story/142310/glenn_beck%27s_crazy_lies_about_van_jones/?page=entire

Eva paterson

Eva paterson

Glenn Beck spent last week smearing Van Jones with misinformation and outright lies. Here’s setting the record straight.

After smearing White House special advisor Van Jones for days on his show, Glenn Beck said on August 27, 2009: “I want to point out the silence; no one has challenged these facts — they just attack me personally.”

Well, the White House is wise to stay above the fray but someone has to set the record straight. And as the person who first hired Van Jones, initially as a legal intern and later as a legal fellow, I am in a unique position to know the truth.

And the truth is: Beck is fabricating his facts.

For instance: several times on his show, Beck has said or implied that Van went to prison for taking part in the Rodney King riots.

No Criminal Convictions

Van has never served time in any prison. He has never been convicted of any crime. And just to be clear: Van was not even in Los Angeles during those tumultuous days.

I know because he was working for me — in San Francisco — when the four Los Angeles police officers were acquitted in the beating of Rodney King. I was the Executive Director of the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights of the San Francisco Bay Area when Van was an intern.

The verdicts came down on April 29, 1992. I remember Van (who was then a legal intern working with me from Yale Law School) coming into my office in San Francisco. Many of us, including Van, sat there together, listening to the news and weeping. We were all in a state of shock. That night, TV showed the tragic images of LA burning.

The next day, when an initially peaceful march in downtown San Francisco devolved into chaos, Van left the area in tears. He was not involved in any destructive activity. He even penned an essay despairing of the violence and the state of the country.

So how can Beck make such unsubstantiated claims?

The True Story (From Someone Who Was There)

Van Jones

Van Jones

This is what really happened. On May 8, 1992, the week AFTER the Rodney King disturbances, I sent a staff attorney and Van out to be legal monitors at a peaceful march in San Francisco. The local police, perhaps understandably nervous, stopped the march and arrested hundreds of people — including all the legal monitors.

The matter was quickly sorted out; Van and my staff attorney were released within a few hours. All charges against them were dropped. Van was part of a successful class action lawsuit later; the City of San Francisco ultimately compensated him financially for his unjust arrest (a rare outcome).

So the unwarranted arrest at a peaceful march — for which the charges were dropped and for which Van was financially compensated — is the sole basis for the smear that he is some kind of dangerous criminal.

Van has spoken often about that difficult period 17 years ago — and its impact on him, as a young law student. But to imply that he was somehow a rioter who went to prison is absurd. Beck also bizarrely claims that Van was arrested in the Seattle WTO protests. That is just a flat-out falsehood.

You don’t have to take my word for it. Arrests and convictions are all a matter of public record. Beck is at best relying on Internet rumors or even inventing claims to boost his ratings.

Beck is no more accurate with present facts than he is with past ones.

Not a Mysterious ‘Czar”

Beck has said repeatedly that Van is some kind of a mysterious “czar,” accountable to no one but the President. A simple Internet search shows that this claim is false. A March 10, 2009, press release announced that Van was hired by the Chair of the White House Council on Environmental Quality – to work on her staff as a “special advisor.”

In other words, Van is within the normal White House chain of command, reporting to an office confirmed by the United States Senate, just like most White House staffers. Media outlets sometimes use the “czar” shorthand. But the facts show that Van has no mysterious role or extra-constitutional powers.

Beck has implied on two occasions that Van Jones and other Obama appointees were not vetted by the FBI. False. I was interviewed in my own office by an FBI agent, dutifully vetting Van. Yet another fabrication on the part of Mr. Beck.

Beck also claims that Van has somehow gained control over $500 million in Green Jobs Act funding and can hand out millions of dollars at his whim. Again, that is patently ridiculous.

No Authority to Hand out Billions

The law is clear that the Department of Labor has authority over the program, with normal rules governing the funds. Anybody who thinks that a lone government official can pass out money, arbitrarily and without oversight, knows nothing about our legal system. A blizzard of lawsuits would stop any such scheme in its tracks, if one were ever put in place.

Perhaps more importantly: final authority at the Department of Labor lies with the Secretary of Labor. Anyone who thinks that a Senate-confirmed, Cabinet-level Secretary would cede control of a $500 million program to some mid-level White House staffer knows nothing about our political system. It is ridiculous.

Promoting Business-Based Solutions

But I have to take on the worst one: Beck repeatedly and mistakenly asserts that Van is presently a communist.

Once again, this charge is easily refuted – most obviously by the pro-business, market-based ideas Van has promoted for years, including in his best-selling book, The Green Collar Economy. Van’s book is a veritable song of praise to capitalism, especially the socially responsible and eco-friendly kind.

Yes, for a while, Van and his student-aged friends ran around spouting 1960s rhetoric and romanticizing revolutionary icons. But that was years ago. Way back then, I counseled him to rethink his tactics and to work for change in wiser ways.

In time, he jettisoned his youthful notions and moved on to seek more effective and attainable solutions.

Fortunately for all of us, it looks like he has found some. Over the past several years, Van has emerged as the perhaps the nation’s chief proponent of using business-based solutions to create jobs and clean up the environment. In his book and his speeches, he highlights the key role of entrepreneurship in solving our nation’s problems.

The ‘Green’ Jack Kemp?

Van believes in government clearing the way for private-sector innovation. In a YouTube clip, he said recently that progressives and conservatives should work together to find common ground and create a clean energy economy.

Van said: “We are not promoting welfare. We are promoting work. … We are not expanding entitlements. We are expanding enterprise and investment. … We are not trying to redistribute existing wealth. We are trying to reinvent an existing sector, so that we can create NEW wealth – by unleashing innovation and entrepreneurship. This should be common ground.”

He has been preaching that gospel, in various forms, for years and years. Van Jones is the nation’s “Green” Jack Kemp — using business-based solutions to attack poverty.

I found it interesting that Bill O’Reilly in his interview repeatedly asked Glenn Beck whether Van Jones’ youthful views had changed over time. Beck never answers those inquiries and instead keeps insisting that Van has championed these ideas recently. Again, that is simply not true.

Quotes Taken Out of Context

Upon investigation, it turns out that Beck is quoting (out of context) an article that in fact makes the OPPOSITE point.

The 2005 profile that Beck is flogging actually makes it crystal clear — even in the headline — that Jones has “renounced” his earlier views, matured and moved on. Van’s transformation is the entire point of the piece, and it is impossible that Beck does not know this.

Fortunately, O’Reilly seemed to sense the truth. I remember seeing O’Reilly interview Van Jones some time ago and was struck by how much respect O’Reilly showed for Jones. Perhaps O’Reilly’s knowing queries were prompted by that encounter.

When Van worked for me, he did exhibit that “know it all” quality that so many of us – myself included — have when we are young. Over the years, I have enjoyed watching him grow and blossom into a loving father and husband — and a creative, effective leader.

Van Jones: A True Patriot

Mr. Beck’s unfounded attacks are misleading and false. All of us who know Van are so very proud of him and the work he is doing to improve the lives of ALL Americans. He has touched and improved thousands of lives in the course of his career. Now he is in a position to help millions.

He will do well because Van is a true patriot, who loves his country. He has dedicated his life to trying to make it better — especially trying to uplift the poor, the left-out and the left-behind.

In his book, Van draws a distinction between “cheap patriotism” and “deep patriotism.” I highly recommend that chapter to Mr. Beck.

I do hope Van is keeping his head up, walking tall and continuing to fight for green businesses and green jobs. Our country needs more of them – and more people like Van.

Return to Davey D’s Hip Hop Corner

Comments

  1. jewellthief says:

    its always an easy task to refute lies and innuendo w/ simple truth that can easily be investigated w/ the proper time spent. Props to Ms. Patterson’s article.

  2. jericho saliz says:

    refute, impute, dispute, ca-ca shoot! how will u defend the words out of the man’s own mouth? by callin the one who replays them a liar; are u for real? beck didnt hav to say a word cuz yor boy said it all himself in those recordings/videos. just the facts, maam!

  3. I was gratified to hear that within a day or so of Beck’s airing of this “exposé” 36 advertisers had bailed on his show. Any news of how that is going after a week?

  4. Please, someone tell me how this article refutes the assertions that Glenn Beck has made? Beck did not say Jones spent time in prison, but rather said he spent time in jail during the King riots. To quote Beck’s program “a major turning point came in 1993 when he was arrested during the Rodney King riots. In jail he quote ‘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’”

    It’s amazing that rather than quote original sources, those who seek to debunk and allegedly shed light on the truth simply seek to refute a claim with a baseless claim.

    Personally, I don’t know Van Jones, but his attempt to use a government position to further a political agenda bothers me. I also dislike the fact that many of Obama’s Czars and advisors are radical because it leads me to believe that the President himself was not truthful when he dismissed claims that he himself was radical.

    PS: Unlike the article that attempts to refute Beck, here is the source for the quotes… http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KTXOzAAqnho

  5. e-scribblah says:

    i don’t really see the problem here, other than with Beck and his right-wing agenda. Van Jones is not a black nationalist. his organization is called Green for All, not “Black People Are Coming to Take Over Your Decadent Capitalist Society, So Run, White Motherfuckers”. many people have been arrested and spent brief stints in jail, including Gandhi, Mother Teresa and Dr. Martin Luther King–so what? smearing someone with allegations of communism is taking a page out of McCarthyism and belongs back in the 1950s…haven’t we made any progress since then? It’s clear here that we need a more equal society, economically and environmentally. the rich have looted this country, yet bristle at sharing the wealth they have stolen. what’s wrong with universal healthcare or environmentally-conscious programs for everyone? the choice shouldnt come down to Communism or Facism.

    Pablo, your assertions are troubling. you write, “Personally, I don’t know Van Jones, but his attempt to use a government position to further a political agenda bothers me.” so you have a problem with people in government positions with political agendas? doesn’t that make you an anarchist, then?

    and what about the political agenda of the last administration: artificially boost oil and energy companies’ profits at the expense of the people; use terrorist fears to start a costly war which lined defense contractors’ pockets, created a situation with mercenaries unaccountable to US law, killed millions of innocents–and didn’t stem high gas prices?

    what, exactly, is the problem with Green jobs? do you think climate change is a myth, like WMDs? shouldnt we be conserving energy, installing solar power alternatives, reducing carbon footprints, and making sure inner city communities have access to grocery stores and aren’t adversely affected by chemical polluters?

    what’s the problem here?

    capitalism doesn’t have to mean greedy, arrogant wastefulness.

  6. jericho saliz says:

    capitalism is not mean greedy arrogant or wasteful– peolple are; that’s why we must check every govt official whether we like what they say or not… no one is immune and history proves again and again that power currupts, no matter what ism is used. the truth remains: revolutionaries become tyrants. last thing about capitalism… it’s what obama used to get his “hope” message across and get elected and i damn sure “hope” he doesnt try to kill that dream for me and my descendants because we all are born with “equal rights” but not born “equal”; capitalism allows me to do better than you if i choose to without govt coming to take my sh** to give to those who dont believe they can better themselves. no one makes you great but yourself. when u stop blaming others for your shortcomings and decide to arise to your challenges, you wont worry about who has what. also i dont give a rat’s azz about conserving energy because it is endless: it morphs from one form into another, like, imma get a steak after typing this to re-up mine! stop tryna scare people already!

  7. e-scribblah says:

    “capitalism is not mean greedy arrogant or wasteful– peolple are; that’s why we must check every govt official whether we like what they say or not…”

    ok, so you’re just now starting with Van Jones? where were you when Cheney, Wolfowitz, Rove, etc., were piling on the special sauce to their McGreedy meals?

    and i’ve got news for you: capitalism IS a greedy system as currently practiced. Jones is actually trying to change the system and make it more environmentally-equitable, and you have a problem with that? are you unaware you are contradicting yourself, or are you in favor of greed and corruption?

    “capitalism allows me to do better than you if i choose to without govt coming to take my sh** to give to those who dont believe they can better themselves.”

    huh? this makes no sense.

    actually, capitalism allows vampires like Bernie Madoff to go unchecked for years and years.

    “also i dont give a rat’s azz about conserving energy because it is endless: it morphs from one form into another.”

    if we had endless resources, then gas, electricity, water, etc., would be free.

    i personally dont care what you give a rat’s ass about. but only an idiot or a completely ignorant fool would deny that climate change is already happening. if that idiot is you, well, then, there it is.

    tell you what–go and have that steak and come back when you are capable of coherent, rational thought.

  8. jericho saliz says:

    did u eva take a basic science class? yor statements are not worth the energy from my steak. tell u wut tho: all i see is the same greed u rant about. the transfer of money from big oil and big coal to big solar and big wuteva otha “green” co. eitha way, sumbody gonna get it. dont get me wrong tho– i like big cars, big houses, big butts, and big steak, endlessly!
    ps… get jones, obama, cheney and whoeva else’s balls out ur mouth cuz they will disappoint u

  9. e-scribblah: There is a difference between doing the job that you were hired to perform and using your position within the government as a political platform.

    Mr. Jones is not an elected public official and thus he should not be dictating policy in this manner. A quick look at some of Mr. Jones’s speeches tells me that he plans to use the position as a stepping stone not for environmental purposes as he was hired to do, but rather as a stepping stone for a larger political agenda that simply uses the green movement as a vehicle for social change and wealth redistribution.

    I find the sum total of your replies here interesting because while you call my post troubling” you assert that “we need a more equal society, economically and environmentally. the rich have looted this country, yet bristle at sharing the wealth they have stolen. ” All codewords for Marxism.

    This is exactly the point Beck is making with Jones. He is using environmental policy to further a collectivist agenda.

    I find it laughable that you would bring up Cheney, Wolfowitz, Rove etc. If YOU had a problem with Cheney, Wolfowitz, Rove etc. then in order to not be a hypocrite and be consistent shoudn’t you also decry those within the current administration? Does substituting a (D) for an (R) change anything? Does the fact that a criminal such a Madoff was able to operate for years mean that we should throw the baby out with the bathwater? Can any system be abused? Of course it can. Changing to socialism, marxism or communism simply changes who will be able to game the system. Criminals will still be criminals.

    Finally, I don’t have a problem with Mr. Jones being arrested and jailed, many activists have been. I simply object to the statement that somehow Beck lied when it is clear that he didn’t.

  10. e-scribblah says:

    “There is a difference between doing the job that you were hired to perform and using your position within the government as a political platform.”

    yeah right. despite your rhetoric, the fact of the matter is nearly every single person with a government job has a political platform. that’s what government is. don’t be naive. Does the FCC chairman look out for what’s best for you personally?

    “Mr. Jones is not an elected public official and thus he should not be dictating policy in this manner.”

    Except that’s the job he was hired to do.

    ” A quick look at some of Mr. Jones’s speeches tells me that he plans to use the position as a stepping stone not for environmental purposes as he was hired to do, but rather as a stepping stone for a larger political agenda that simply uses the green movement as a vehicle for social change and wealth redistribution.”

    Now i see what your real issue is. i dont disagree with this assessment, but when you consider the environmental abuses and their record profits of the energy companies and the co-option of the EPA to corporate entities (which was NOT doing the job it was supposed to do when it was created back in the 1970s) under the Bush administration, not to mention its a fact that inner city communities suffer from the most heinous and egregious environmental abuses by these same corporations (i.e. high asthma and cancer rates, etc.), then i fail to see why this would be a bad thing.

    Should Chevron, Halliburton, Enron, et all continue to be allowed to enrich themselves of the misery of poor communities? unless you are a stockholder in one of these corps or a paid lobbyist, THEIR CORRUPTION DOESNT BENEFIT YOU.

    “you assert that “we need a more equal society, economically and environmentally. the rich have looted this country, yet bristle at sharing the wealth they have stolen. ” All codewords for Marxism.”

    yeah, if your only source of information is Fox news. the real joke’s on you because you’re falling for the same ol’ trick used in the McCarthy era, the Cold War, the Reaganomics period, and most recently, post 9/11 Amerikkka.

    Except what we’re talking about is not Marxism at all, but Democracy in the truest sense of the word = government by the people, for the people. Instead of a select few.

    “I find it laughable that you would bring up Cheney, Wolfowitz, Rove etc. If YOU had a problem with Cheney, Wolfowitz, Rove etc. then in order to not be a hypocrite and be consistent shoudn’t you also decry those within the current administration?”

    decry them for what? your lack of coherency here obfuscates your point, if indeed you have one.

    Obama was elected on a mandate of social change and redistribution of wealth. He didnt steal the election, like the previous President. His administration is attempting to do the job they were elected to do.

    “Does the fact that a criminal such a Madoff was able to operate for years mean that we should throw the baby out with the bathwater?”

    what are you saying here? Madoff did not act alone. the SEC was warned, yet did nothing. obviously, the current economic crisis indicates the system is broken. Continuing the same policies which got us into this mess in the first place is not a solution.

    “Changing to socialism, marxism or communism simply changes who will be able to game the system. Criminals will still be criminals.”

    again, i’m not advocating for any of these -isms. i’m advocating for democracy as laid down by the Constitution of the United states. you know, equal rights and justice for all. That includes environmental justice, social justice, and media justice. Do you have a problem with that?

    “Finally, I don’t have a problem with Mr. Jones being arrested and jailed, many activists have been. I simply object to the statement that somehow Beck lied when it is clear that he didn’t.”

    i think Beck’s analysis is misleading at best. He’s certainly doing all he can to twist the facts and get all you knee-jerk conservatives panties in a bunch. Judging from your hysterical fears, it’s working.

    Look at it this way: remember when the Prince of England dressed up as a Nazi? He recanted, saying it was just a joke, albeit one in poor taste. But if we say, well, he is a Nazi forever because he once portrayed himself as one, isn’t that the same thing?

    Where is the law or rule that says people can’t be allowed to evolve their thought process, as Jones has done. He’s not arguing or advocating for Marxism or socialism, he wants a more environmentally- and socially-egalitarian society. Again, what’s wrong with that?

    Would you rather live under the shackles of the Evangelicals, the American version of the Taliban?

    In three years, you can always cast your vote for Sarah Palin if that’s more your idea of what a government leader should be. In the meantime, why don’t you give Obama and Jones a chance?

  11. e-scribblah says:

    @jericho:

    “all i see is the same greed u rant about. the transfer of money from big oil and big coal to big solar and big wuteva otha “green” co. eitha way,”

    “Big Solar”?!?!?

    what are you talking about?

    we’re not talking about a “transfer of money,” we’re talking about decreasing the dependence of fossil fuels by switching over to sustainable energy sources. most likely, it will be the same companies involved, but there will be regulations in place to make sure they are more ecologically-responsible.

    do you even understand this issue, and what’s at stake here? you might want to read up on this:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peak_oil

    honestly, it’s hard to believe such ignorance still exists. are you related to Joe the Plumber, by any chance?

  12. e-scribblah, Wow.. do you bounce around a lot… Your arguments are all over the map!

    There is a huge difference between having personal political beliefs and using your position within the government to implement your political objectives. I wonder how you would react if several of our military officers would do something similar? That is, use their positions within the government to implement a political policy.

    WRT the FCC chairman, he is obligated to follow the Constitution and the law both of which do in fact look out for the average citizen by limiting what government can do with regard to the free market..

    Mr. Jones was not publicly hired to figure out ways to embed a policy of wealth redistribution into the government. The stated purpose of his hiring was to “advance the administration’s climate and energy initiatives, with a special focus on improving vulnerable communities”. While one aspect of that may indeed be to figure out methods to involve poorer communites, it is not a mandate for wealth redistribution.

    See: http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/09/03/10/Van-Jones-to-CEQ/

    I also completely disagree with you on your assessment of the EPA. I don;t know how old you are, but I lived during the 60′s and 70′s and I have seen both the positive and negative effects of the EPA over the past decades.

    While you bemoan the asthma rates in some major cities, the fact is that the major contributor to the pollution within many of our inner cities is not large industry but rather automobiles. You point to corporations as the culprit, but the true culprit is each individual. In addition, pollen, pet dander and a variety of other “triggers” can cause asthma and many of them are exacerbated by so many people living so close together.

    As to whether more central government control is a bad thing, I think it is -as evidenced by the implementation of the back door wealth redistribution policies of this administration and the general corruption within our government. The government that works best and is most efficient, is the government that is closest to the people.

    As to whether companies like Chevron, Halliburton should be allowed to continue to enrich themselves, as a shareholder in many large corporations and as someone who uses the products and goods from many such corporations, I say yes. If they provide goods or services that people want and need, they should be allowed to thrive. As to whether the government should be “playing favorites” with specific corporations or unions, I say no.

    IMHO All that has been done with the election is switching favor from Halliburton etc. to GE and GM. A turd by any other name still smells as bad!

    As far as your defense of Marxism by calling it Democracy, it is laughable. You state : “i’m advocating for democracy as laid down by the Constitution of the United states. you know, equal rights and justice for all. That includes environmental justice, social justice, and media justice. Do you have a problem with that?”

    Where exactly do you see environmental, social and media justice in the Constitution? The first amendment gives you the freedom of speech but not the right to force others to listen! So, yes, I do have a problem with the broad manner you interpret the Constitution in order to further your agenda.

    By the way, we aren’t a democracy, we are a Republic. There IS a difference. You should learn it since apparently you either didn’t learn it in school or you were absent when it was taught.

    Finally, with regard to your analogy about Prince Harry dressing up as a Nazi, Harry apologized and stated that it was a joke and was wrong. has Van Jones or Obama ever really distanced themselves from their ideology or have they acted consistently with the ideology? I believe that the record is clear that BOTH have been consistent with their ideology.

    I am amused by your attempt to marginalize me by bringing up evangelicals and Sarah Palin and your comparison with the Taliban. A little dishonest hyperbole never hurt an argument eh?

    Finally, why should I give Obama and Jones a chance to fleece me and destroy this country any more than I would have Bush/Cheney?? They have stated what they want to do. I object and will fight against what they want to do. THAT my friend, is my RIGHT!

  13. e-scribblah,
    perhaps YOU should read the article you posted from wikipedia about peak oil. If you read past the first few paragraphs you will notice that there are many dissenters WRT peak oil.

    While you’re at it, look up non compos mentis. I believe that it applies quite well to you. Sure, it’s just a theory of mine, but thus far there is no dissent on this particular theory!

  14. e-scribblah says:

    “WRT the FCC chairman, he is obligated to follow the Constitution and the law both of which do in fact look out for the average citizen by limiting what government can do with regard to the free market..”

    then how do you explain all the rulings since 1996 which dont in fact favor the average citizen but favor media conglomorates? do you even know ANYTHING about the FCC’s position on Net Neutrality? do you have any understanding of Washington politics? or are you just making up things as you go?

    “Mr. Jones was not publicly hired to figure out ways to embed a policy of wealth redistribution into the government.”

    mmm-hmm. and Dick Cheney wasn’t supposed to embed a policy of lining oil companies pockets while creating his own private paramilitary squad. and scooter Libby wasnt supposed to out a CIA agent… and…. this is semantics right here, unless you’re pointing to specific policies Jones has outlined. i know what Jones was hired to do, but i dont think you can have environmental justice without empowering local communities economically.

    “I also completely disagree with you on your assessment of the EPA. I don;t know how old you are, but I lived during the 60’s and 70’s and I have seen both the positive and negative effects of the EPA over the past decades.’

    such as? you’re make a specious argument unless you’re talking about specifics. it’s a fact that under Bush, the EPA curtailed many of the regulatory practices it was created to enforce, to favor the worst corporate polluters, redefine wetlands, allow for offshore drilling, etc. all of this because oil and gas companies didnt want to explore alternative energy sources.

    “While you bemoan the asthma rates in some major cities, the fact is that the major contributor to the pollution within many of our inner cities is not large industry but rather automobiles.”

    specifically, i am talking about Richmond (Chevron) and the Bayview-Hunters Point area of SF (Naval Shipyard, PG & E). again, you make a specious, non-specific argument which actually proves MY point. Chevron, as a gas producer, has lobbied Congress against alternative fuels and higher fuel economy for cars for decades.

    “As to whether companies like Chevron, Halliburton should be allowed to continue to enrich themselves, as a shareholder in many large corporations and as someone who uses the products and goods from many such corporations, I say yes.”

    we’re talking about record profits during a recession. these companies are enriching themselves illegally at the expense of the citizen with the approval of Republican administrations. if you’re only obligation is to your bank balance and not to your community, you are a soulless individual who will one day find out you can’t take it with you.

    “As far as your defense of Marxism by calling it Democracy, it is laughable. ”

    YOU are laughable. I’m not advocating for Marxism.

    “Where exactly do you see environmental, social and media justice in the Constitution? ”

    uh, the part where it says “and justice for all”

    or are you discerning between justice you agree with and other types of justice? in for a penny, in for a pound.

    “I am amused by your attempt to marginalize me by bringing up evangelicals and Sarah Palin and your comparison with the Taliban.”

    you have marginalized yourself with your weak, factually-lacking argument, which aligns you with greedy corporations over people. Obama never said he wanted to destroy the country. But it’s a fact that Bush’s domestic policy was an unmitigated failure, when you look at Katrina, erosion of civil rights post 9/11, the ineffectual No Child Left Behind program, all the way up to the Wall Street collapse.

    you can conveniently continue to ignore this as apparently you have been doing for a while, or you can wake the fuck up!!!

    in any event, shouldnt you be on Hannity’s site, not Davey-D’s?

  15. Glenn Beck?! Folks still listen him? SMH!

    e-scribblah…

    You make some valid points. Sometimes, however, it gets to where you end up talking to brick walls when arguing with these so-called conservatives. These folks are still stuck on the notion of paper wealth and are somehow concerned it will be taken away by the “Soviet Dem’s”. The funny part is, some of this stuff won’t cost anything…just pork cuts in a lot of these programs (that may cut into their so-called paper profits).

    They keep forgetting this place needs infrastructure, energy, and economic upgrades and I guess to them this is “socialism”. What good is that paper currency folks are hoarding when the place looks to be falling apart?

    “Give Up The Goods (Just Step)”-MobbDeep

  16. jericho saliz says:

    capitalism allows u to profit offa yor ideas (books, cd’s, oil refineries, websites, etc.) w/o limits and share those profits w whomever you’d like (if u so choose); one doesnt hav to look upon anotha’s w greed and envy. my immigrant dad fritz the upholsterer did not come here to blister his hands providin for his family only to hav 40% taken away to provide for othaz who dont understand the concept “rich get richer but poor get poorer”; anotha way of sayin “the fool will soon part w his money”. teachin one to provide for himself is good, but money to fools is a disservice to any society. i dont hate any of u so i wont resort to name-callin; but if u r a fool u may reply w hate.

  17. @e-scribblah

    Which rulings *specifically* since 1996 are you referring to? I have an idea, but I don’t want to put words in your mouth and I’d like you to adhere to the same standard of evidence that you expect from me.

    Aside from your snide remarks, I see little substance in your responses to me other than wild allegations about corporations lining their pockets and the typical rants about Cheney, Libby and Halliburton.

    The bottom line is that if something is illegal or unethical, it doesn’t matter if they have a (D) or an (R) by their name, It is STILL illegal.

    The single topic where you have given me any specifics to work with “Richmond (Chevron) and the Bayview-Hunters Point area of SF (Naval Shipyard, PG & E).” Could you please show me a study performed by an unbiased medical authority that conclusively links any of the sites to increased rates of asthma in the surrounding community? I don’t want speculation or hyperbole, just facts. Can you do that???

    As far as your statements with regard to the Constitution:

    “uh, the part where it says “and justice for all” ”

    You really **should** get a copy of the Constitution. I challenge you to find the phrase “justice for all” within it. Can’t do it can you??? The phrase you are referring to is contained within the Pledge of Allegence, not the Constitution.

    The sad part is that there are many out there like you, ignorant and unwilling to admit it or change and educate yourselves. You don’t think critically about the things you think you know and aren’t willing to challenge a viewpoint that agrees with your own.

    Your last few paragraphs tell me all I need to know about you. Somehow if there is a (D) behind the name of the President the intrusions into liberty and the economy go by unnoticed and unchallenged…

    @CDF said “The funny part is, some of this stuff won’t cost anything”

    Yeah… that is kinda funny isn’t it??? That money comes out of thin air to pay for all those programs doesn’t it? How exactly does that work??? Oh.. so you are cutting other programs to pay for them? So they actually DO have a cost associated with them?

    You’re both right. Sometimes it does get to be like talking to a brick wall. Unfortunately, the brick walls in question never seem to recognize themselves.

  18. e-scribblah says:

    @jericho:

    dude, can we get real for a minute?

    i dont recall Chevron voluntarily sharing its profits with anyone. as a matter of fact, it took a ballot initiative to get them to cough up $25m–a fraction of the $23.8 BILLION in profits they reported in 2008 (http://www.consumerwatchdog.org/energy/articles/?storyId=24588) –to Richmond residents, which will pay for infrastructure, green jobs, afterschool programs, and other needed city services. It’s really the least they could do, considering the health risks their refinery has imposed on local residents. that’s not socialism per se, just a reversal of previous sweetheart deals by paid-for politicians which allowed chevron to escape paying their fair share.

    yet Chevron is appealing this decision, and they are also announcing they will refuse to pay $27m for cleaning up an environmental mess they are on the hook for in Ecuador (http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2009/09/01/financial/f131339D29.DTL).

    some other examples of the corporate environmental-greed complex: the Exxon Valdez oil spill, Enron’s fleecing of California’s energy, and Palin’s pipeline to nowhere (http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1846731,00.html).

    No one–not Van Jones, not anyone– is saying energy companies should be government-run entities and not allowed to make SOME profit. But we need to be smarter about how we use resources if we are going toleave a healthy planet for the next generation. we need to reduce energy dependence on rapidly-depleting fossil fuels and explore solar and wind-powered alternatives. And we do need to address not only environmental pollution, but environmental racism.

    Why should we let corporate polluters slide? Why shouldnt we reduce our dependence on oil and gas? Isnt it in our best interest to create green jobs, especially in areas most affected by toxic pollution?

    These attacks on Jones are really attacks on Obama’s mandate for social change and environmental agenda.

    jericho, no one is trying to fleece your immigrant dad out of his life savings. but it’s clear from what you have written that you dont really understand the nature of capitalism, which allows the few to profit off of the labor (and ideas) of the many.

    that’s not really the issue,however. the issue is that smearing Jones with McCarthyesque tactics is a blatant attempt to derail an environmental policy which would only improve the lives of the average American.

  19. so let me get this straight. After Obama growing up round the 90′s watching communism fail miserabley he thought you know what thats what the USA NEEDS. Watching China abandon communist economic policies but wait obama must be saying oh we need communism. So when .21 percent of our the private sector is nationalized. Thats socialism?When a free market capitalist GWBUSH nationalizes the banking industry its an emergency. When Obama has to nationalize the car industry to stave off deflation and the risk of a stagnative economy for years to come, Ahhh SOCIALIST!!! What can obama possibly reap from this? Its all temporary relax people! The government is there to supply demand in a severe recession. Supply side economics will only push this country into depression. It is a valid and effective theory that will work under different circumstances. US has a market enterprise system always will. The right has no rationale its pathetic and sad. What can you expect from a party where religious lunatics call the shots. Jones has most likely rejected communism (to jones and others communism means a chance to stop the unfettered capitalism not actually implement it). btw those who look at the radicals he has. Well his arguably closest advisor tim geithner is an avowed capitalist so is george soros the big ‘orchestrator of a left wing socialist takeover’. 3 and a half years to go guys dont let the paranoia consume you. Peace out loons

  20. How can anyone actually sit and watch that crap Beck calls a TV show. Are you serious? Even a conservative republican (inglis from SC) said turn it off. This guy trades off fear hardcore and never has any hard proof to back up anything he says. Its always look ive found the pieces but i cant quite put my finger on it. Trying to be nice to handicap and special needs children here, but people who watch this show are retards who are incapable of any independent thought. He claims hes not a conspiracy theorist which cracks me up. His meme that he is putting to his lemmings day in and day out is that Obama hates white people and is going to redistribute their wealth as reparations for slavery. Why hasnt Glenn Beck started quoting his book the Green Collar Economy and started living up to FOX’S FAIR AND BALANCED statement. What the fuck is America becoming when ‘Obama is a marxist’ is an actual argument?. Jefferson would be rolling in his grave. Another question. Would you agree that President Obama is doing a great job???

  21. @Pablo-”So they actually DO have a cost associated with them?”

    Yeah, I should have reworded it. I suppose the “costs” are having to deal with the results of neglected projects such as health care, infrastructure, and general economics. It’s all about allocation of funds and priorities.

    Living the capitalistic dream may have its merits to a select few, but as I said at the end of my post, “What good is that paper currency folks are hoarding when the place looks to be falling apart?” Sometimes spending and “socialism” IS a good thing!

  22. The thing is that Beck shows long video clips of Jones saying his views – from this year. Beck’s not making anything up that Jones hasn’t already said himself.

  23. @ryansmash

    “When a free market capitalist GWBUSH nationalizes the banking industry its an emergency. When Obama has to nationalize the car industry to stave off deflation and the risk of a stagnative economy for years to come, Ahhh SOCIALIST!!! ”

    It was wrong for Bush to do it, and it is wrong for Obama to do it. The only difference that I can tell is that Obama wishes to institutionalize the policies of government intervention during the first year of his first term and GWB waited until the first year of his second term (perscription drug plan) to do the same.

    BTW: GWB was not a free market capitalist, though he did pay lip service to it.

  24. @CDF
    “Living the capitalistic dream may have its merits to a select few, but as I said at the end of my post, “What good is that paper currency folks are hoarding when the place looks to be falling apart?” Sometimes spending and “socialism” IS a good thing!”

    The problem with your premise is that you imply that should our currency fail, that there will be no consequence. There are numerous examples thoughout history that prove your assumption incorrect.

  25. @e-scribblah said…

    “No one–not Van Jones, not anyone– is saying energy companies should be government-run entities and not allowed to make SOME profit.”

    Thus far, AFAIK the first part of your statement is true, however the second part is false. The President has gone on the record to state that his cap and trade initiatives would have the result of bankrupting those energy companies with coal fired power plants.

    Source: http://tinyurl.com/mvuplq

    Of course, perhaps Van Jones with his magic beans and unicorns can make up the difference in the energy lost to the plant closures to heat your homes and generate power for the electrical grid.

    Furthermore, it is not the responsibility of the government to determine how much profit a company can or cannot make any more than it is their responsibility to tell YOU how much you can or cannot make!

  26. pablo, if the US GOVERNMENT HAD NOT INTERVENED THE ECONOMY WOULD HAVE BEGUN TO IMPLODE! Paulson realized this. As a liberal i will say Bush wasnt the worst president ever but even he knew this. it pure right wing ideology that still dogs conservatives about this issue. The wealth that we could have been looking at losing over the next 10, 15 maybe 20 years amounts to over a hundred trillion bux. Yes our bailouts are expensive but to be a capitalist system you need capital! I dont understand what you mean by institutionalize bailouts. He not bush is who pays lip service to the extreme leftists who desire as much government intervention as possible. The US treasury is acting as a bondholder for GM N Chrysler. It will be temporary because there is nothing much to gain from running GM noticed you didnt respond to that. I guess Glenn Becks new conspiracy will be that Obama is socializing car companies so that he can give cars to black people and the poor. Save the USA FROM BECOMING A COMMUNIST STATE! Seriously some people should look up the word liberal. If the GOP embraced even a tenth of it your party could systematically defeat the Democrats, i mean own them. Pablo cap and trade was a concept from a group of conservative economists even your lady jesus sarah palin was for it, before she was against it, look it up. You either accept the view of 90 percent of climate scientists worldwide or lets listen to the party where 63 percent say Noah’s ark is a historical fact. Either way the system we have now is unsustainable which is what van jones was saying in a video that glenn beck showed. Jones was refering to our energy systems not economic. Of course that never occurs to Glennyboy. coal plants must work out some sort of transition because this is the future like it or not.

  27. Robert Jr. James McClendon says:

    The bottom line is that they made the “brother” step down. I don’t know what the brother did or didn’t do, but one thing for certain is that if you are “Black” and you ever stood up for Black people in your life on “anything” – you can not be in politics. Now if you have a white mother, you were raised by both white grand parents, and you got a jewish backer and a jewish advisor, you may have a shot, but as a “Black man” in politics for “Black people” it ain’t happening in America. America was racist before Barack was put in as its president and will always be. We just have to keep educating ourselves and work with the white people who want the same things we want, a better life for our children, and leave it to God, because any Black man that believes in “God” and would stand up for his “own people” – wouldn’t be in politics, ask Jesus. Barack, please step down, we have enough puppets in hip-hop and comedy, we don’t need that coming out of the White House. Don’t let them do to you what they doing to these hip-hop “rock stars”. Be like Snoop Doggy Dog on tour with all them white bands. :) Don’t get caught out there like.

  28. Van Jones is an embarrasement for anyone of color who strives to succeed. With all his ignorant comments (that I have seen him say on YOUTUBE), it casts a negative context on all of us who are colored and have an education. He doesn’t come across as intelligent. He has a big chip on his shoulder – combined with the modicum of power that he was given, went to his head. Embarrassing. Its not a color issue, it is a behavior one.

  29. He may be an embarrasemnet to “you” people of color, but as a “Black man” he got an aweful lot of awards from white folks. It’s never a behavior issue when it comes to Black people. Maybe for people of color, but “never” when it comes to Black people, DonnyG.

  30. Artist1…We can do better…much better. In the business and political worlds, behavior is often the primary determinant on how a person is judged – not awards.

  31. You are right, DonnyG. But if you think Barack Obama and any of these so-called “intellectual negroes” that are afraid to speak out against the injustice towards their race, are “better”, I go some land to sell you. “We can do better…” – sure Barack Obama was “not’ our choice if “we” are really apart of the same “we”. I don’t know the Van Jones guy, butI I do know how so-called intellectual negroes run when white folk say – “Run nigg&*)”. I see how “they” do. Willie Lynch.

  32. Artist…we agree

  33. @ryansmash

    ” if the US GOVERNMENT HAD NOT INTERVENED THE ECONOMY WOULD HAVE BEGUN TO IMPLODE! ”

    Really? Do you know that to be fact or are you just relying upon what you were told by the politicians at that time?

    To be fair, there is no way of knowing for sure, but the benefit that hindsight has given us tells us that perhaps things weren’t quite what they seemed.

    Take a look at what happened with much of the monies from the funds and the number of companies that conveniently became banks in order to feed at the trough of the taxpayers. Then take a look at the number of bank mergers that were financed by the TARP and contrast that with the number of banks still failing. Then take a look at the number of news stories about the greed, graft and corruption associated with TARP. TARP simply became a slush fund for politically connected companies and persons.

    There are laws regarding bankruptcy that have served us quite well for 200 or so years. Unfortunately, one of the casualties of the TARP was the bankrupcy laws of the US asthey were selectively thrown out during this “crisis”. TARP also concentrated power in the Treasury Secretary and has created a vehicle for abuse of our monentary system.

    The point is that the mere absence of a current collapse isn’t proof that TARP or monentizing our debt has worked.

    “cap and trade was a concept from a group of conservative economists even your lady jesus sarah palin was for it, before she was against it, look it up. ”

    Good ideas and bad can come from many places. Neither side of the aisle has the exclusive on good (or bad) ideas.

    Many on Wall Street are salavating over the prospect of commissions from the trading of carbon credits in the same way that they used to salavate over the trading of mortgage backed securities . There are ways to make incredible amounts of money off of cap and trade with no materiel asset backing anything being traded! Sounds like something that many wall street types would like, and also sounds like something that is increedibly dangerous to investors.

    As far as whether Sarah Palin supports it or not, it is irrelevant. I think for myself and do not require the endorsement of any celebrity or politician to validate my view. As such, your argument is absolutely silly, but it does give me some insight into your thought process (or lack of it).

  34. @Pablo

    You have no facts or evidence that suggests he was using his position as a political platform. He had a job and he did it but was smeared and forced to resign. Who cares if he has a different belief than you. Many people do. His job called for help to build the green industry. The people obviously have the power to get him to resign correct? Well good job you guys did but you did based off of “what-ifs.” He committed no wrong doing during his 8 months. Can you provide me evidence?

  35. @Pablo

    Do you understand macroeconomics? Do you understand the reason for government spending? When there is a shrink in GDP there has to be an injection of monies to push GDP back to potential or else you will be in recession and possibly further down. GDP is composed of 4 things: investment + consumption by consumers + government spending + net exports. So in this recession investment and consumption have dropped. Guess what needs to be done? Yes government spending to make up for the loss. Do not worry about a deficit. The United States economy is so powerful that a deficit does not matter much as long as you aim for surplus in the future once economy is better. Clinton had it right.

  36. @kevan
    “You have no facts or evidence that suggests he was using his position as a political platform.”

    I have no facts or evidence other than the man’s words themselves. Certainly this can only be seen as intent as Jones did not hold the position long enough to effect any change in policy, but I take Jones at his word. I am surprised that you do not!

    “This movement is deeper than a solar panel. Deeper than a solar panel. Don’t stop there! Don’t stop there! No we gonna change the whole system! We gonna change the whole thing. We’re not gonna put a new battery in a broken system. We want a new system. We want a new system.We gonna change the whole thing. That’s your generations job. That’s your generations job. That’s why you were born. That’s why you were born.don’t let anybody tell you anything different. This is deeper than a solar panel. A lot deeper. ”

    Source: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IVNtoAiOh1k

    “Lets make sure that those communities that were locked out of the last centurys pollution-based economy are gonna be locked in to this new clean and green economy”

    Source: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2SmF3B3734E

    I could go on, but at some point you have to take Jone’s rhetoric at face value or stick your head in the sand.

    As far as whether he did anything illegal, as far as I know with regard to his position, the answer is no. But neither did former Secretary of Defense Don Rumsfeld and the left called for his ouster and got it.

    As far as what has been said about Jones being “smears”, I have heard and seen little that has not been backed up by audio or other direct evidence. Jones is and has been his own worst enemy. When he was relatively unknown he could make incendiary statements, but now his statements have come back to haunt him. Sorry, you can’t run from your own history!

    As far as understanding macroeconomics, your naive, argument is laughable because the surplus that you are ‘aiming for” will not exist in the next 10 years according to Obama’s own budgets! Obama has put us on a course to “break the bank” while also hampering the business sector which limits the ability to raise revenue and service our debt!

    PS If you don’t think that a 97% debt to GDP is cause for concern, imagine the trouble you would have if your credit cards were all maxxed out at 97% of your pay. How would you eat AND pay even the minimum amounts on the cards???

    I’m not going to argue with you with respect to the much parroted “fact” that Clinton left us with a budget surplus, but realize that this “surplus” did not reduce the federal debt as you can see for yourself at the treasury web site if you care to look at facts rather than listen to rhetoric: http://www.treasurydirect.gov/NP/BPDLogin?application=np

  37. Kevan, that “text book” answer sounds smart on paper, but do you know who this one percent of wealthy people in America that they are really talking about is. Trust me, they ain’t truly European (“The United States economy is so powerful…). Sounds smart, but who’s teaching these macroeconomics classes? Clinton had it right, he just wouldn’t do it “their” way, that’s why they had to push him out and made sure his wife didn’t become President. There is no such thing as “green jobs” our Black people. Sounds good on paper, but they are scamming the people.

  38. i’m still awaiting the evidence that a socialist/marxist left wing takeover is coming with the approval of the worlds biggest capitalists warren buffet, bill gates and george soros? For all you people in the Glenn Beck cult. Glenn Beck 9/9/09.’the uber left is in bed with big buisness’. A MARXIST IN BED W BUISNESS? Didn’t marxists hate the buisness class? You morons are led by an even bigger moron. Seek help. So Obama is just spending trillions to prop up our capitalist economy so he can give the impression that hes saving it all the while hes secretly plotting it’s downfall! Seriously the big kids are trying to get america back to fiscal responsibility and dealing with actual problems facing the country. Jeez i thought Obama was a lil bit harsh with the clinging to guns n religion remark but the more you hear from the right that statement rings truth. Admitting the truth is the first step…

  39. @ryansmash

    Let me see if I understand you correctly. Your core assertions are:

    1. A takeover cannot happen without the approval of Buffet, Gates and Soros (basically, the extremely wealthy)

    2. A Marxist/Socialist would not be in bed with big business

    3. Obama spent trillions to prop up a capitalist economy and that is evidence that he is not plotting the downfall of that capitalist economy.

    4. Obama & Co. are trying to get America back to fiscal responsibility.

    Is that correct? have I stated your positions clearly? I just want to make sure before I take the time to prove you wrong…

  40. UHHH…MS PATERSON….GO DRINK SOME MORE OBAMA-VAN JONES-EMANUEL-VALERIE-FARAKHAN-AYERS, ETC., ETC.(HOW MANY KOOKS DO YOU NEED) KOOLAID……….YOU LEFTIST, BIG GOVERNMENT LUVIN’, SOCIALIST, BIGOTS ARE SO STUPID….AND YOU THINK ONCE THE TYRANNY IS COMPLETE AND THEIR POWER FINALLY REALIZED…..THEY WON’T COME AFTER YOU…..HISTORY PROVES TIME AND TIME AGAIN USEFULL IDIOTS ARE GOBBLED UP LIKE THE REST. GOD HAVE MERCY ON YOUR STUPID, IGNORANT SOUL.

  41. AND KEVAN……….YOUR ARE NOT EVEN USEFUL…..JUST AN IDIOT……………WHERE DID YOU STUDY ECONOMICS???? THE SKOOL OF GUVMENT FIXIS’ EVTHANG….WHERE THE FUCK DOES GUVMENT GET MONEY YOU JACK ASS…

Trackbacks

  1. [...] are many examples of Beck’s lies,  hyperbole, and lying to achieve Machiavellian political [...]

Leave a Reply