If you want to say batshit-crazy stuff and still be treated as a respectable participant in the national debate, you'd better be a Republican

Mark Klienman provided those words after hearing of Van Jones resignation--and it seems at this point in time in history, he could not be more correct.

For the past two months we have heard nothing, absolutely nothing, but intentionally flawed, disingenuous, dishonest, ridiculous arguments and claims about the President and his agenda. And that's putting it mildly. These out-of-this-world ideas, as stated by this blog, and many other news organizations, have not only been circled by pundits and constituents, but by actual elected political figures on the right who have seemingly escaped any political danger that their radical statements normally would constitute. Yet, the luxury of a political immunity, or whatever you want to call it, is really not the case for Van Jones, the White House's Special Advisor for Green Jobs (which is really nothing more than publicly obscure position in the administration).

So the question becomes two-fold: 1) how does the Special Advisor for Green Jobs make it out of obscurity and into the public spotlight? 2) And what could he possibly do and/or say that would force him to resign.
The first answer might not be shocking. Glenn Beck. I anticipate much of you reading this just sighed in disappointment. Yes, Glenn Beck hand picked this man out obscurity in effort to further his "Red Scare" agenda. Beck did his research and found out that a little over 15 years ago Jones became involved with Standing Together to Organize a Revolutionary Movement (S.T.O.R.M) after graduating law school. S.T.O.R.M is radical left wing group that, in short supported urban Marxist politics. So Beck hammered away for weeks at Van Jones with the usual Socialist Banner. If your asking yourself, how the hell did Beck get wind about Jones? The answer is simple. You may recall hearing stories of advertisers such as GEICO pulling their ads from his show. Well, Jone's former organization, Color Of Change, were the ones advocating advertisers boycott Beck's program.

After Beck "exposed" Jone's political past, Jones became underfire for essentially three things. First, of course was his past. The second was for a particularly uninhibited statement he made at the Berkeley Green Energy Conference regarding why Dems have such a hard time being effective with a majority in congress, when republicans were dominant when they were in control. His response was,

The answer to that is: They're assholes. That's a technical political science term. And Barack Obama's not an asshole. I will say this, I can be an asshole. And some of us who are not Barack Hussein Obama are gonna have to start getting a little bit uppity

While the statement may be true or not, it probably wasn't the most politically correct one. However, what really hit home his affiliation with the "truthers". "Truthers" are people who believed Bush had prior knowledge of the 9/11 attacks before they happened. Jones basically singed the 9/11 truth statement which, in short, calls for the public's attention to unanswered questions that may suggest that 9/11 was deliberately allowed as pretext to war. However, after lethal criticism, Jones released a statement saying that he didn't fully read the petition and the statement does not reflect his opinion of the war. In fact he issued numerous apologies and explanations in the past week and a half in attempt to squash any radical notion about himself. That was before he resigned.

Eventually, Jones had too much and resigned saying,

"On the eve of historic fights for health care and clean energy, opponents of reform have mounted a vicious smear campaign against me. They are using lies and distortions to distract and divide. I have been inundated with calls - from across the political spectrum -- urging me to 'stay and fight.' But I came here to fight for others, not for myself. I cannot in good conscience ask my colleagues to expend precious time and energy defending or explaining my past. We need all hands on deck, fighting for the future."

I really am not sure who I am more disappointed in. On one hand, I am upset at Van Jones for resigning and the Obama Administration having no objections to Jone's resignation. So your getting a little pressure from the right over, really, stupid crap. While you may have been a distraction then, your even more of a distraction now, and your making yourself, and the Obama administration look weak. People start to wonder if there may have been truth behind the claims, or if Obama really cant handle the heat--which is almost worse because it undoubtedly calls for more nonsense from the right. I thought you said you could be an Asshole like the republicans and take control...were you trying to prove you didnt mean what you said to get you out of trouble?

The Obama Administration not objecting to Jones resigning does not help either. Again it implies that the people had the right to question the motives of Jones as part of the Obama administration, just as Robert Gibbs did when he declined to defend Jones in a press conference.

On the other hand, however, I am upset at conservatives who called for his resignation for their hypocrisy and, really, their silly irrelevant notions.

Honestly, if we take a look at what is pissing so many conservatives off, it really is irrelevant to his job as Special Advisor to Green Jobs. He has past ties, over 15 years ago, to the radical left. Big deal. One, that was four presidential terms ago, and has absolutely nothing to with his job on the Environmental Council.

So he spoke candidly about Republicans, calling them assholes. To be honest, what he said wasn't too far from the truth, especially when you look at how much the use of a filibuster has increased since Dems took congress. Not only was it fairly truthful, but it really isn't worse than senators and elected conservative officials allowing, or even promoting connections between Obama totalitarian dictators.

And then he signed a petition that implied Bush deliberately allowed 9/11 to happen so he could use it as a pretext to the war. First off, he denied the fact he held the views reflected in the statement. Secondly, how can conservatives through an uproar over a radical claim like that, when conservative senators have brought up, endorsed, and promoted claims relating to "death panels", "birthers", and "socialist indoctrination". Are "truthers" crazier than any of these claims?

Either that, or Republicans have some sort of immunity over far fetched, batshit notions.