I’ve been following along with the saga of President Obama’s “Green Czar”, someone who can’t define what a “green” job is (nor can anyone else), the self-avowed Communist Van Jones. The push to get him removed has done much to further put on display Obama’s past and present associations with outright radicals, and showing Obama to be as unserious as any of these people who want to be considered an advocate of American values or Americans themselves. These statists, Obama and Jones included, want to define what it is to be an American, despite the contradiction of those definitions as they relate to the real history of the United States.
Jim Hoft at Gateway Pundit has been the leader of getting the word out about Jones’ Trutherism, along with Jones’ feeble attempts at denial. Various leftists have tried to come to the defense of Jones by saying they, like Jones, never really endorsed the notion of a Bush administration conspiracy to perpetrate the terrorist attacks on 9/11, but Ace has evidence, along with Hoft’s evidence about Jones, showing that these statements are egregious lies. Jones and the others did endorse the wacky Truther conspiracy theory that Bush caused 9/11, calling for Congressional investigations to prove it. How President Obama could figure that this information wouldn’t come out is unbelievable. But I imagine it’s a sign of the massive arrogance of the man after two and a half years of having a media more intent on prostituting themselves to have their legs thrilled than in an actual investigation of Obama’s fitness to be the President of the United States.
But this isn’t just a simple, broad recap of the Van Jones story, but a warning as to how this will next play out. While I would suppose that the Obama administration itself might have learned a lesson from the Henry Gates fiasco (although that remains to be seen), Democrats and their leftist marionettes, possibly even Jones himself, will play the race card. Why? Because that is what they do. Even if Obama does give Jones the boot, it will not stop calls from various people in power saying that race had everything to do with Jones’ removal. Obama used the race card during the Presidential campaign and with the Gates’ incident, Democrats used the race card to get Roland Burris installed as a U.S. Senator of my former state, Democrats used the race card to get Eric Holder installed as Attorney General (along with others in the Justice Department and other Cabinet positions) and Sonia Sotomayor on the Supreme Court, and statists have used the race card when trying to criticize the critics of every disastrous Obama policy that has come down, from SCHIP, to Porkulus, through cap-and-tax and health “reform”. Have no doubt that the same race-baiters will double-down on their efforts to cast this sorry Jones episode into some form of fabricated racism on the part of Jones’ critics, and critics of President Obama’s incompetent handling of the government and his horrible policies. Be ready for it.
I’m not so worried about the use of the word “czars” to define administration jobs not confirmed by the Senate that are being hugely expanded by this President, and I don’t believe worrying about the word itself has any merit (I would have a problem with the word “Fuehrer” if it had been used). After all, look how the word “war” has been expanded by Presidents of both parties to define policies that aren’t about warfare; e.g., the “War on Drugs”, the “War on Poverty”, etc. The use of the word “czar” isn’t one of those things conservatives should really worry about. The word “czar” (or “tsar”) and the German word “kaiser” are derived from the Latin word “caesar”, with its obvious reference to Gaius Julius Caesar and the title used by Roman emperors. But the origins of the word “caesar” had to do with how the Romans defined different branches of the same family or clan, in this case the Julian family that Caesar belonged to; other branches of the Julian family would use a different cognomen (third or descriptive name) to distinguish themselves from the Julius Caesars. Although not entirely known, some scholars render a loose translation into English of the Latin word “caesar” as the word “curly” (despite the fact that Gaius Julius Caesar the dictator was balding; apparently, his ancestors may have been known for having full heads of curly hair). Battling over the use of the word “czar” isn’t, to me, worth the effort. Alternatively, use the old Latin form of the word in an imaginative manner to describe these individuals, after all, similar to Gaius Julius Caesar, Van Jones is notable for a lack of hair, although his style is self-inflicted as opposed to what Caesar inherited through his ancestors’ gene pool.
What is worth the effort is battling against Obama’s attempt to establish the Presidency as a statist, authoritarian branch of the federal government, hugely expanding an already massive bureaucracy ahead of what would be eventual Congressional authorization for new Cabinet positions and departments. Other Presidents had done the same thing, but not on a scale as this administration. Just as with Porkulus and health “reform”, Obama is trying to work fast to implement a leftist fantasy wish list of government and policy before the American people can figure out what is going on. Fortunately for America, the last month of protests show that the American people as a whole aren’t bent on turning over their lives to the government. Continuing the pressure by highlighting the Van Jones appointment will help further the American cause.
But count on the statists coming back with the race card. They are desperate, and they always use it when desperate (and, sometimes when not). Be ready for it.