On the politics of personal destruction:
Now, right-wing politicians and pundits are looking for other White House czars with controversial pasts. "Van Jones is the tip of the Iceburg. As VJ has said: "personnel is policy"" conservative pundit Glenn Beck twittered on Friday. Attacking Obama’s advisers, conservatives believe, will raise questions about the judgment of their popular boss.
Here’s some of other the czars on the conservative hit list:
John Holdren, science czar
Conservatives took shots at Holdren, formerly a professor at Harvard University’s Kennedy School of Government, earlier this year for a 1977 environmental science textbook he co-authored that surveyed policy options to curb overpopulation.
In a chapter on "population policies," the authors mentioned involuntary fertility control methods like mandatory abortions, mandating family size and adding sterilants to drinking water or staple foods.
The authors said that they were merely describing the measures, not endorsing them. But conservatives jumped on the textbook, saying that Holdren supported "forced abortions" and "mass sterilization."
In his February confirmation hearing, Holdren said that he no longer thinks it’s "productive" to "focus on the optimum population for the United States."
The Senate seemed to buy his testimony, confirming him as director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy in March. LINK
Also on ths ‘list’ in the article Cass Sunstein, regulatory czar, Mark Lloyd.
You think the media that reported on Van Jones resignation and the events that led to it, will start fact checking Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity and Bill O’Reilly’s claims about these men?



3 Comments







Fact checking? Our media? Don’t make me laugh! But they sure are hoping there’s lots more blood in the water. That makes their lives so easy.
Our media is positively phobic to facts.
I was very annoyed by the comments responding to Arianna’s puff piece about Van Jones in HuffPost. She doesn’t allow any posts by 9/11 truthers so the debate there is completely one sided and inaccurate.
I find that a shocking misuse of media power, but it is her site, she can spin ‘truth’ whatever way she wants. She obviously does not want the truth.
Can’t let the truth get in the way of advertising dollars etc.