Smart: The Nation on Van Jones:
What finally felled Jones was a right-wing blogger turning up his name on a 911truth.org petition from 2004. Jones has repudiated his signature and said the petition’s wording didn’t then and doesn’t now represent his views. In a more sane political environment, that would have been the end of it. It was stupid and wrong to sign the petition, but let’s put this in perspective, shall we? By far the most deadly conspiracy theory of recent times was the insidious contention that Saddam Hussein gave material aid and support to the 9/11 hijackers. And yet Stephen Hayes, the main propagandist for this baseless and deadly view, is currently employed by CNN.
I think Jeffrey Goldberg is guilty of the same error. And a bunch of other folks. What hurt us more?This demonstrates Krugman’s law, that to be taken seriously in Washington you have to have supported the Iraq war. Though that might be changing.
Its sad when individuals comments are taken out of context, with the intent to misrepresent their views.
From my perspective on the non-neocon right (which is not that of Fox News), Jones’ fondness for revolutionary Communist and race-baiting rhetoric was what really made him a target.
Incidently, the only reason I definitely do NOT believe the Bush Administration knew about 9/11 is that Rove would have ensured that Bush was positioned to make a appropriately Churchillian address with an appropriate backdrop, rather than being caught flat-footed reading “My Pet Goat” before disappearing as Cheney took charge.
RE: Rove would have ensured that Bush was positioned to make a appropriately Churchillian address
MY COMMENT: Excellent point! Bush certainly would have been better ‘stage managed’ if they had known precisely when the attack was to occur.
“ncidently, the only reason I definitely do NOT believe the Bush Administration knew about 9/11 is that Rove would have ensured that Bush was positioned to make a appropriately Churchillian address with an appropriate backdrop, rather than being caught flat-footed reading “My Pet Goat” before disappearing as Cheney took charge.”
I think there are many other reasons not to believe 9/11 truther claims, but that’s kind of a funny one, and in a way somewhat convincing. Surely Bush would have been written into the script in a more heroic way. I’ll have to remember this next time I’m silly enough to get into an argument with one of the Truthers. I suppose they’d argue that Bush was out of the loop–well, come to think of it that’s not a bad response.
RE: “tumbrils”
MY COMMENT: ‘”There you go again!” (this time ‘again’ is spoken as əˈgeɪn, not əˈgen) First ‘purdah’ and now ‘tumbrils’. Or was it vice versa? Earth to Phil(l), we’re not all Harvard grads! For further elucidation, see comment # 20 at – link to mondoweiss.net
Main Entry: tum·brel
Variant(s): or tum·bril \ˈtəm-brəl\
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English tomrel, from Old French (tomberel, from tomber to tumble, perhaps of Germanic origin; akin to Old High German tūmōn to reel — more at tumble
Date: 14th century
1 : a farm tipcart
2 : a vehicle carrying condemned persons (as political prisoners during the French Revolution) to a place of execution
Hey, I like the headline! I had to look up “tumbril,” but it’s a great word and I’m always glad to learn cool new words.
I’m all for using weird words. And for using french too, for other reasons! I liked the way my eyebrows raised at Phil’s attempts at using french…
are you referring to Krugman’s Serious Person Syndrome?
“Serious Person Syndrome, aka it’s better to have been conventionally wrong than unconventionally right.”
link to krugman.blogs.nytimes.com
i do think it should be called “krugman’s law.”