Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Just the Facts, Ma'am: A Compendium of Liberal Fiction -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Sully- who wrote (73678)	9/6/2009 3:14:01 AM
From: Sully-	2 Recommendations Respond to of 90947

The Van Jones (non) feeding frenzy By: Byron York Chief Political Correspondent beltway-confidential 09/04/09 11:30 AM EDT From a Nexis search a few moments ago: Total words about the Van Jones controversy in the New York Times: 0. Total words about the Van Jones controversy in the Washington Post: 0. Total words about the Van Jones controversy on NBC Nightly News: 0. Total words about the Van Jones controversy on ABC World News: 0. Total words about the Van Jones controversy on CBS Evening News: 0. If you were to receive all your news from any one of these outlets, or even all of them together, and you heard about some sort of controversy involving President Obama's Special Adviser for Green Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation, your response would be, "Huh?" If you heard that that adviser, Van Jones, had apologized for a number of remarks and positions in the recent past, your response would be, "What?" And if you were in the Obama White House monitoring the Jones situation, you would be hoping that the news organizations listed above continue to hold the line -- otherwise, Jones, who is quite well thought of in Obama circles, would be history. 9/5/09 UPDATE: The New York Times, ABC and NBC hold the line After the Jones controversy reached a boiling point on Friday, the Washington Post published a story, "White House Says Little on Embattled Jones," on page A-3 of its Saturday edition. But the New York Times remained silent on the story. Likewise, on Friday night the "CBS Evening News" reported the Jones matter, but ABC's "World News" and "NBC Nightly News" again failed to report the story. washingtonexaminer.com

To: Sully- who wrote (73678)	9/6/2009 3:23:50 AM
From: Sully-	Respond to of 90947

Sen. Kit Bond calls for investigation of Green Jobs Czar Van Jones By: Chris Stirewalt Political Editor beltway-confidential 09/04/09 3:36 PM EDT The senior senator from Missouri has sent a letter to the head of the Senate green jobs subcommittee, Vermont's Sen. Bernie Sanders, calling for an investigation into Green Jobs Czar Van Jones' connection to the "truther" movement. One of the reasons Senators have been complaining about the proliferation of czars in the Obama White House is that they can be given broad portfolios without any Senate approval. Picking such a fringe character for such a big job may end up creating momentum for more Senate oversight. You can join John McCormack's contest to guess Jones' departure date from the Obama White House at The Weekly Standard. Here's the letter: <<< September 4, 2009 The Honorable Bernard Sanders Chairman Green Jobs and the New Economy Subcommittee Committee on Environment and Public Works U.S. Senate Washington, DC 20510 Dear Bernie: Recent news reports call into question the fitness of Van Jones, the Special Advisor for Green Jobs at the White House Council on Environmental Quality, to perform the duties entrusted to him. I request that the Senate Green Jobs and the New Economy Subcommittee conduct an oversight hearing of Mr. Jones’ behavior and comments to reassure the American people that their government is safe from his divisive, incendiary and ultimately counterproductive sentiments. Today, news outlets are reporting that Van Jones signed a petition from the so-called “Truther” movement which suggests that the Bush administration “may indeed have deliberately allowed 9/11 to happen, perhaps as a pretext to war.” I can imagine few sentiments more repulsive to our brave fighting soldiers and the victims of the 9/11 terror tragedy than to think the U.S. government deliberately allowed the events of 9/11 to occur. Of course Mr. Jones in hindsight is embarrassed by the public disclosure of his participation in the petition drive and now asserts he did not read the fine print of the petition. Even if true, how can the American people trust a senior White House official that is so cavalier in his association with such radical and repugnant sentiments? Unfortunately, this episode is just the latest in a pattern of Mr. Jones’ incendiary remarks that only divide Americans and make positive change for the future more difficult. Earlier this year in a speech in Berkeley, California on energy, Mr. Jones referred to Republicans in crude scatological words unfit for print. Last year, Mr. Jones in a radio interview stated his goals as a “complete revolution” to “transform the whole society” away from capitalism. These recent comments remove the credibility of his assertions that his past radical statements and actions such as the creation of the group Standing Together to Organize a Revolutionary Movement (STORM) rooted in Marxism and Leninism merely reflect youthful sentiments in the distant past. Despite Mr. Jones’ continuing erratic and outrageous behavior, he occupies a senior “czar” position in the White House. He obtained this position without U.S. Senate advice and consent and without oversight of his activities. And yet, Mr. Jones is responsible for directing administration policy and spending on tens of billions of dollars in taxpayer funding regarding environmental policy and green jobs programs. Many hold out the prospect of green jobs as one of the few practical benefits of pending cap and trade legislation in the face of groups such as the National Black Chamber of Commerce which predict that such legislation will destroy over 2.5 million net jobs, even after the creation of potential new green jobs. While I am skeptical of the ability of green jobs programs to provide meaningful numbers of new jobs without heavy continuing taxpayer subsidies or mandates that destroy millions of traditional jobs, I hope you agree that we cannot risk whatever new green jobs are in our nation’s future to unsound and unpredictable leadership. Refusal to conduct an oversight hearing by the Subcommittee would heighten concern over whether this administration is committed to mainstream, inclusive, positive leadership and policies. While we may differ in our policy prescriptions to protect the environment and spur job creation, I hope you will agree that the Senate and our Subcommittee have a responsibility to ensure that administration stewards of taxpayer funds and government policy are capable of the jobs entrusted to them. I look forward to your consideration and response to this request. Thank you in advance for your attention to this matter. Sincerely, Christopher S. Bond U.S. Senator >>> washingtonexaminer.com

To: Sully- who wrote (73678)	9/6/2009 3:41:23 AM
From: Sully-	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 90947

President Obama Grasps the Odiousness of Trutherism, Doesn't He? By: Jim Geraghty The Campaign Spot The theories of 9/11 "Truthers" implicitly, and often not so implicitly, accuse some of our best -- soldiers, those at the Central Intelligence Agency, etc. -- of partaking in mass murder. After all, Bush and Cheney alone can't remote-control planes or plant explosives or whatever the theory du jour is. Executing the cover-up would require the cooperation and acquiescence of thousands upon thousands within the White House, within the Cabinet, within the military, within the intelligence community, within the law-enforcement community, and beyond. There are a lot of Americans in the above groups, and they have a lot of friends, family, and neighbors. Accusing them to their faces of mass-murdering their fellow citizens may bring a rebuttal across the bridge of your nose. (But let's be consistent -- no finger-biting.) The hiring of Jones was a scandal, the failure to flag this issue in the vetting process is unforgivable, and the fact that we're not watching cable-news coverage of Obama personally throwing Jones's desk knick-knacks out the third-story window of the Old Executive Office Building while the Secret Service removes him from government property is disappointing. Obama understands how catastrophic it is to have a Truther in his administration, right? He knows that responsibility for 9/11 isn't one of those issues where we can "agree to disagree," right? I've tried to cut Obama slack here and there. Respect the office, even if you don't agree with the man, stand when he enters the room, try to remember he's a husband and a father too, etc. But if there's any sense that Obama doesn't think Jones's past statements, views, and support of Trutherism are a big deal, and an automatic reason for dismissal, it will trigger a political firestorm that will make the differing views over the Iraq War look like the "tastes great-less filling" argument. campaignspot.nationalreview.com

To: Sully- who wrote (73678)	9/6/2009 3:46:44 AM
From: Sully-	Respond to of 90947

Oh, by the Way, We Were Right in 2008 By: Jim Geraghty The Campaign Spot Last year, many at NRO and other conservative news organizations, including myself, wrote quite a bit about William Ayers, and Jeremiah Wright, and Michael Pfleger, and Tony Rezko, etc. And more than a few Obama supporters, and more than a few mainstream media voices, thought that the criticism was wildly overhyped and Obama's ties to those types were irrelevant, because as president, Barack Obama would never put anyone in his administration with such controversial, paranoid, extreme, and anti-American views. In light of Van Jones, all of those folks who said we made too much out of Ayers and Wright and the rest are invited to dine on a heaping platter of crow; it goes well with the egg on their faces. campaignspot.nationalreview.com

To: Sully- who wrote (73678)	9/6/2009 3:54:38 AM
From: Sully-	Respond to of 90947

Van Goes Under The Bus By Ed Driscoll on The Future and its Enemies According to Chuck Todd of MSNBC just now on Twitter, “Van Jones has resigned. Release just went out after midnight eastern.” Breaking News on Twitter adds, “CNN: White House green jobs czar Van Jones resigns, blames lies and ‘vicious smear campaign’ against him.” AP adds, “Obama aide Van Jones resigns as environmental adviser amid controversy over past statements.” As Matt Drudge would say, “DEVELOPING…” pajamasmedia.com

To: Sully- who wrote (73678)	9/6/2009 4:12:41 AM
From: Sully-	Respond to of 90947

Amid Controversy Over Obama's Green Jobs Adviser, GOP Renews Criticism of White House Czars FOXNews.com Saturday, September 05, 2009 A new video has surfaced showing President Obama's green jobs adviser suggesting that only white students commit mass school killings like Columbine as Republicans renew criticisms of the large number of so-called "czars" in the White House. Van Jones, the founder of Green for All, which focuses on creating environmentally friendly jobs in poor areas, has come under withering attacks in recent days following revelations that he called Republicans "assholes" and that he once signed a petition supporting the "9/11 truther" movement, which claims that the the Bush administration allowed the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks to happen. In the latest video to surface, Jones is seen in December 2005 making controversial statements on the racial differences in school violence. "You've never seen a Columbine done by a black child. Never," he said. "They always say, 'We can't believe it happened here. We can't believe it was these suburban white kids.' It's only them. Now a black kid might shoot another black kid. He's not going to shoot up the whole school." Click here to watch the video. Ralph Peters, a military analyst for FOX News, called Jones a "screaming nut case" who should have never gotten his administration job. "He needs to give Van Jones an ambassadorship to a remote Pacific island and just get him out of there," Peters said. "But it's symptomatic of the extreme leftward lurch of this administration," he added. "It's this farthest left administration we've ever had in American history. Obama makes FDR look like Barry Goldwater." Senator Kit Bond R-Mo., demanded that the Senate Green Jobs and New Economy Subcommittee conduct hearings to probe Jones's behavior and "reassure the American people that their government is safe from his divisive, incendiary and ultimately counterproductive sentiments." It is the latest call for more oversight of such advisers, who are appointed by the president but don't require congressional approval, as Cabinet members do. Past administrations have used czars, but critics say Obama is taking the practice to an unprecedented level. Jones, the so-called "green jobs czar," has apologized for the first two controversies, saying his remarks on Republicans didn't reflect the view of the Obama administration and that he didn't carefully review the language of a petition that he signed calling for a "deeper inquiry" into the possibility that the Bush administration was involved in the terror attacks. But that hasn't satisfied some critics who are calling for Obama to dump him if he won't resign. "His extremist views and coarse rhetoric have no place in this administration or the public debate," Rep. Mike Pence of Indiana said Friday, the first lawmaker to call on his resignation. Robert Beckel, a former special assistant to President Jimmy Carter and FOX News political analyst, was the first prominent Democrat to call on Jones to step down. "My guess is that the resignation letter is being written as we speak," Beckel told FOX News on Friday. A veteran of nearly 200 political campaigns, Beckel said Obama cannot afford the distractions created by Jones as the chief executive prepares to address a Joint Session of Congress on health care reform next Wednesday. But the latest controversy has also given Republicans more ammunition to attack the number of czars in the Obama administration. By some counts, Obama has more than 30 czars managing everything from the restructuring of the domestic auto industry to closing the Guantanamo Bay prison to ending the genocide in Darfur. Pence called on Obama to suspend appointment of additional so-called "czars" until Congress has a chance to examine the background and responsibilities of such individuals, as well as to determine the constitutionality of such appointments. Jones' full title is "special adviser for green jobs, enterprise and innovation" at the White House Council on Environmental Quality. "Congress, Republicans and Democrats, have been asleep at the wheel on this," Peters said. "The appointment of 30-plus czars is an attempt to short circuit the Constitution to get around Congress. "If Obama loves this country and respects the Constitution, he needs to knock it off with the czars and obey the Constitution," he added. foxnews.com

To: Sully- who wrote (73678)	9/6/2009 4:24:25 AM
From: Sully-	1 Recommendation Respond to of 90947

The Jones phenomenon signifies that, as my friend Bill Otis likes to say, the left "can't hear itself." That's why when it heard Jones, all it detected was "creative ideas" and "energy" to bring to the White House. Jeremiah Wright behind a White House desk By Paul Power Line The key point about the Van Jones affair is what it tells us about Barack Obama. Jones isn't someone who slipped through the cracks of the vetting process. We know this because, as Scott pointed out earlier today, top Obama aide Valerie Jarrett has said, "So, Van Jones, we were so delighted to be able to recruit him into the White House; we were watching him. . .for as long as he's been active out in Oakland." Having watched the rise of Van Jones, why did Team Obama nonetheless "recruit" him into the White house? Because what Jones says and believes is well within the range of what Obama believes, and thus not jarrring to him and his crew. If Jones is now beyond the pale, it is only because the Obama crowd finally hears him through the filter of a controversy. When Obama and company heard him only through the filter of what they believe, there was no controversy because his statements -- e.g., his attack on Israeli "occupation" dating back to 1948 and his claim that "U.S. tax dollars are funding violence against people of color inside the U.S. borders and outside the US borders" -- are not particularly controversial to Team Obama. This, of course, is the Rev. Jeremiah Wright phenomenon all over again. Wright's racist, anti-Israeli, anti-American statements didn't jar Obama while he was sitting in Wrights's church for 20 years because they were not that different from what Obama believes. Even when controversy erupted and Obama's political future was on the line, Obama at first found Wright's pronouncements no more in need of being "disowned" than his grandmother's view that she'd rather be driven to work than be panhandled by an aggressive black man at the bus station. It took a shot by Wright at Obama himself to cause the candidate to break with his spiritual mentor. The Jones phenomenon signifies that, as my friend Bill Otis likes to say, the left "can't hear itself." That's why when it heard Jones, all it detected was "creative ideas" and "energy" to bring to the White House. To quote Bill again, "Van Jones is simply Jeremiah Wright behind a White House desk." powerlineblog.com

To: Sully- who wrote (73678)	9/6/2009 4:27:20 AM
From: Sully-	Respond to of 90947

Van Jones's first take on 9/11 By Scott Power Line When Obama administration green jobs commissar Van Jones signed on to the Truther statement in 2004, he was concerned that 9/11 might have been an inside job perpetrated by the Bush administration. In the immediate aftermath of 9/11, on September 13, 2001, however, Jones had a different explanation. On September 13, 2001, Jones said: "The bombs the government drops in Iraq are the bombs that blew up in New York City. The US cannot bomb its way out of this one. Safety at home requires justice abroad." That's what Jones had to say while the ruins still smoldered and bodies had yet to be removed from the rubble. Consistent with Paul Mirengoff's comments below, before Jones went Truther, Jones's first take on 9/11 was on all fours with Jeremiah Wright's. What a crew. JOHN adds: Oh-oh. Jones could be in trouble now. Maybe Obama will fire him for drawing a connection between 9/11 and Iraq. powerlineblog.com

To: Sully- who wrote (73678)	9/6/2009 4:32:21 AM
From: Sully-	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 90947

Van Jones Joins the Global Struggle Against America By Michael Goldfarb WorldwideStandard.com link

To: Sully- who wrote (73678)	9/6/2009 5:05:03 AM
From: Sully-	1 Recommendation Respond to of 90947

Re: Truther or Consequences By: Jonah Goldberg The Corner I agree with Mark entirely. I believe in the need to police your own side. National Review's been doing that for more than a half century. But, while we can debate all day who is fringe and who needs policing, the right doesn't run jack these days. Meanwhile, there's a guy in the administration who believes things that every decent liberal I've ever met has always assured me has no place in mainstream liberalism. I can't tell you how much eyerolling I have put up with from liberals who insist that, for example, Michael Moore isn't part of mainstream liberalism. I don't buy it. But Van Jones is to Moore's left from what I can tell and he's drawing a paycheck from the White House. But that's an argument for another day. Now, obviously, he has to go and will. For instance: How, exactly, will Jones do his job when cap-and-trade comes up again? Does the White House really want a 9-11 Truther/Marxist whackadoodle being its "green jobs" mouthpiece on the Hill? How will that go over with the Blue Dogs? Anyway, here's the question I find interesting. What will Jones say once he's thrown under the bus? Will his apologies and disavowals remain operative or will he go back to being a radical? Mark writes: <<< Is Van Jones a real Truther or a faux Truther? The White House position is that he's the latter - hey, he just glanced at it, saw it was some routine impeach-Bush-for-killing-thousands-of-his-fellow-Americans thing, and signed it without reading it; we've all been there, right? Van Jones Trutherism, like Van Jones Communism and Van Jones Eco-Racism Theory, is a kind of decadence: If you really believed 9/11 was an inside job, you'd be in fear of your life. Instead, for a cutting-edge poseur like Jones, it's a marketing niche, one that gives you a certain cachet with the right kind of people - like, apparently, Barack Obama. >>> Quite right. But does Jones revert back to faux truther or does he maintain his newfound model citizen pose because the pay is so much better? Update: From a reader: <<< I've experienced the same "Oh, you _must_ be joking, Moore is a fringe type, not mainstream" retort. For that matter, some years ago an older liberal got hot under the collar when I mentioned in passing Senator-for-life Kennedy as a leader of his party. Here's the way it works: liberals have a comfort zone, and decree that anyone outside of their personal, emotional zone are "not real liberals". Sure, everyone does this to some extent, but liberals do it a lot, many do it all the time. The interesting thing is if you approach them from an idea-focused point of view, you can get liberals to admit they agree with almost everything a Mike Moore or even a Van Jones say, but they'll still insist "Oh, no, that guy is way out there". Duh, huh? You agree with the ideas on a one-by-one basis, but insist he's not like you? This particular form of cognitive dissonance has long mystified me. I've actually sat with people over the course of a long afternoon conversation and had the experience, and it's weird. Now, what makes you believe Van Jones will be fired? The Obama White House is astoundingly tone deaf when it comes to any group of people outside of the hothouse circuit/bubble that The Lightworker has lived in for years. You think the same people who called protesters un-American care about what anyone thinks of Van Jones? Don't forget, more than a few of the big donors to the 2008 campaign come from Bay Area / NYC / Chicago / LA circles where the same 9-11-troofer blood libels were common coin for years. Obama's supporters not only agree with Obama, they think, and talk, like Van Jones. They'll back him up. So don't count on Jones to be leaving any time soon. >>> He is toast. Guaranteed. The longer it takes the better for Republicans, but he's got to go. Not because it's the right thing to do, but because it's the necessary thing to be done. corner.nationalreview.com

To: Sully- who wrote (73678)	9/6/2009 5:29:36 AM
From: Sully-	Respond to of 90947

The Left Goes All-In By: Jonah Goldberg The Corner I love it. The NAACP is getting his back, blaming Glenn Beck. <<<NAACP Continues its Support of Special Advisor of Green Jobs Van Jones and the White House Green Jobs Initiative. The NAACP is calling for civility in the national discourse on safe, clean communities and sustainable sources of domestic energy. It is time to end the personal attacks on administration officials as a distraction to crucial discussion on our nation and our world's environmental conditions. NAACP President and CEO Benjamin Todd Jealous: “It is sad and unfortunate that our nation's precious airwaves and cable television time are being occupied with the unscrupulous, diversionary tactics launched by right wing extremists such as Glenn Beck. These desperate tactics divert America's attention and intellectual resources away from issues affecting our families and communities. These life-and-death concerns are being overshadowed by employing ruthless attacks against Van Jones, White House Special Advisor for Green Jobs and dedicated advocate for safe, clean and healthy communities. Van Jones has established himself through his many years in public service as a hardworking advocate for positive, progressive change. He is a devoted husband and father. Mr. Beck and the other news services' portrayal of Mr. Jones to the contrary is not only distracting and disingenuous but harmful and destructive. “The only thing more outrageous than Mr. Beck’s attack on Van Jones is the fact that there are sponsors that continue to pay him to provide this type of offensive commentary. I can only assume hat this is the very reason that several dozen organizations throughout our country have gone on record stating they will boycott FOX News (the television network home of Glenn Beck). While we defend the right to free speech for all Americans, we expect news outlets throughout our country to uphold civility in their portrayal of the President of the United States as well as members of his administration and others who have wrongfully come under scrutiny. America's news outlets have the responsibility to uphold accuracy and integrity in their reporting." Hilary O. Shelton, Director of the NAACP Washington Bureau and Senior Vice President of Advocacy and Policy: *“The tactics being deployed by right wing extremist commentators to divert the American people's attention* away from very important issues of our nation such as sustainable energy, lack of dependence on foreign fuel sources, and the creation of living wage jobs are not only unethical but dangerous to the future of our country. Most recently, television commentator Glenn Beck of FOX News attempted to besmirch the character and integrity of President Obama's administration officials such as White House Special Advisor for Green Jobs Van Jones. This feeble, mean spirited attack is little more than a desperate attempt to derail the adminstration's priority of clean sustainable energy while working to end our nation's dependency on foreign energy sources. “In an economy where unemployment is leaning toward 10 percent, and African-American unemployment lies at over 15 percent, the creation of employment opportunities for all Americans, including African-American and low-income communities, is a critical necessity. It is our experience that Mr. Jones’ plan to reinvigorate urban areas through the creation of green jobs not only demonstrates a constructive vision to invest in our communities, but also recognizes that climate change is indeed a civil rights issue. That is why we support his implementation of this very thoughtful plan.” ### >>> Meanwhile, others, particularly the Huffington Post crowd continue to rally. Bonus hilarity: It turns out that VJ was Huffington's political director in '03. Coming soon: Joe Biden chanting "Free Mumia!"? corner.nationalreview.com

To: Sully- who wrote (73678)	9/6/2009 5:34:30 AM
From: Sully-	Respond to of 90947

Both of the above By: Mark Steyn The Corner Powerline notices the evolution of Van the Truther's views. On September 13th 2001, as the towers still burned and the lampposts of lower Manhattan were plastered with flyers for missing loved ones, Van Jones spoke at a rally "against racism and war": <<< A recurring theme of the speakers was the brutal violence committed by or supported by the United States government on a daily basis. "The bombs the government drops in Iraq are the bombs that blew up in New York City," said Van Jones, director of the Ella Baker Center for Human Rights, who also warned against forthcoming violence by the Bush Administration. "The US cannot bomb its way out of this one. Safety at home requires justice abroad." >>> Gotcha. Blowback. America had it coming. That was Van Jones in the fall of 2001. A couple of years later and suddenly it's the 9/11-was-an-inside-job routine. Traveling through the Middle East about six months after 9/11, I was struck by the number of Arabs, from Egypt to the Gulf, who simultaneously believed (a) the Mossad were behind the attacks and (b) it was a great victory for the Muslim world. Van Jones would seem to be an American variant of the same phenomenon: a man who believes 9/11 was (a) blowback for the actions of the US government's war machine and (b) an inside job by the US government's war machine. No wonder the left derides those boorish enough to bring this stuff up: Why, surely all sophisticated persons know these positions are little more than lifestyle accessories or fashion hemlines. One season, everyone on the catwalk is agreed 9/11 was blowback by Jihadists for Social Justice. The next, everyone is equally agreed that Bush called up the White House Steel Melting Czar and buried the whole thing under "miscellaneous" in the budget. corner.nationalreview.com

To: Sully- who wrote (73678)	9/6/2009 5:38:48 AM
From: Sully-	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 90947

"On the eve of historic fights for health care and clean energy, opponents of reform have mounted a vicious smear campaign against me," Jones said in his resignation statement. "They are using lies and distortions to distract and divide." It's Official: Van Jones Resigns By: Mark Hemingway The Corner Associated Press: <<< WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama's adviser Van Jones has resigned amid controversy over past inflammatory statements, the White House said early Sunday. Van Jones, an administration official specializing in environmentally friendly "green jobs" with the White House Council on Environmental Quality was linked to efforts suggesting a government role in the 2001 terror attacks and to derogatory comments about Republicans. The resignation comes as Obama is working to regain his footing in the contentious health care debate. Jones issued an apology on Thursday for his past statements. When asked the next day whether Obama still had confidence in him, White House press secretary Robert Gibbs said only that Jones "continues to work in the administration." The matter surfaced after news reports of a derogatory comment Jones made in the past about Republicans, and separately, of Jones' name appearing on a petition connected to the events surrounding the Sept. 11, 2001 terror attacks. That 2004 petition had asked for congressional hearings and other investigations into whether high-level government officers had allowed the attacks to occur. "On the eve of historic fights for health care and clean energy, opponents of reform have mounted a vicious smear campaign against me," Jones said in his resignation statement. "They are using lies and distortions to distract and divide." >>> According to a Washington Post blog, Jones' resignation came "in a statement dated Sept 5 released around midnight on Sept 6." I guess they really, really didn't want that to be the headline in the Sunday papers. corner.nationalreview.com