Greens: Top Ten reasons why Van Jones should give up on Obama and the Democratic Party, come home to the Green Party

source link buy viagra online cheap with no prescription go source link fournisseur de viagra see url popular paper gay marriage essay best essay ever written funny see url https://www.nypre.com/programs/film-essay/37/ professional university essay editor for hire uk advantages and disadvantages of online classes essay top dissertation essay influence television children how do i delete email from iphone 6 write a dissertationВ manny ramirez essay human resources dissertation write my health article review http://mce.csail.mit.edu/institute/purpose-of-doing-thesis/21/ go to link http://admissions.iuhs.edu/?page_id=famciclovir viagra stockists london a creative writer https://coveringthecorridor.com/rxonline/comment-acheter-du-viagra-au-maroc/43/ ampicillin webmd follow link edit dissertations source link enter site case studies in biology Contacts:
Scott McLarty, Media Coordinator, 202-518-5624, cell 202-904-7614, mclarty@greens.org
Starlene Rankin, Media Coordinator, 916-995-3805, starlene@gp.org

WASHINGTON, DC — Green Party leaders invited Van Jones, who stepped down recently as President Obama’s advisor on Green Jobs, to abandon the Democratic Party and “come home to the Green Party.”

Greens called Mr. Jones, who resigned last Saturday after coming under rightwing attack, the best of what the Obama Administration had to offer America, but said that Mr. Jones’ principles were bound to clash with President Obama’s capitulations to corporate lobbies and to ‘blue dog’ Democratic and Republican ideologues.

“The Green Party invites Van Jones, with his decades of experience working for justice and the environment, to join a political party that embraces and defends that agenda and the people who work for it — the Green Party. Like the Greens, Van Jones sees green jobs and a healthy environment as interconnected pillars of a sustainable and just economy. We encourage Van to bring that agenda into the electoral arena as a Green Party member, leader and possible future candidate, either nationally, statewide in California, or locally in Oakland, his home,” said Mike Feinstein, co-chair of the Green Party of the United States and former Mayor of Santa Monica, California.

Greens offered ‘Top Ten reasons why Van Jones should give up on President Obama and the Democratic Party, and come home to the Green Party”

  1. The Obama Administration’s failure to defend Mr. Jones recalls similar retreats by the Clinton Administration, when Bill Clinton allowed Republicans and some Democrats to bully him into removing Assistant Attorney General nominee Lani Guinier and Surgeon General Joycelyn Elders. The targets tend to be Black — consistent with Republican fury over the election of Barack Obama to the White House.
  2. The extremists who sought Mr. Jones’ removal see their action as part of a wider plan to derail measures against global warming and block greens jobs programs: see “How Van Jones Happened and What We Need to Do Next,” by Phil Kerpen, Fox Forum (Fox News), September 5 (http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2009/09/06/phil-kerpen-van-jones-resign/). They smell blood, and the Obama Administration and Democratic leaders are cowering.
  3. Van Jones is a national leader for human rights, public health, and the environment. As 2004 Green presidential nominee David Cobb said, “The Democratic Party is the graveyard of progressive ideas.” These ideas — including green jobs, the ‘Green For All’ agenda (http://www.greenforall.org), and other ideas expressed by Mr. Jones — are thriving in the Green Party.
  4. Among Greens, Mr. Jones need not play down his activism on behalf of the lives and well-being of Black Americans. He will not get called “reverse racist” of “anti-white” by Greens for addressing persistent racial disparities in economics, employment, health, treatment by the justice system, the response to Katrina and post-hurricane rebuilding, etc. The Green Party shares Mr. Jones’ goals of racial justice.
  5. Among Greens, Mr. Jones will not get scolded for calling former President George W. Bush a ‘crackhead’ in the context of Mr. Bush’s obsessive devotion to industries that are feeding America’s addiction to fossil fuel energy.
  6. Among Greens, Mr. Jones need not apologize for questioning the behavior of the Bush Administration in connection with the 9/11 attacks. (See http://www.gp.org/press/pr_07_29_04b.html)
  7. Mr. Jones has called for an end to coal energy, while President Obama continues to repeat the myth of ‘clean coal.’ Mr. Jones’ analysis of the global warming threat and the need for conservation and a green economy are reflected in the Green Party’s platform and principles. (See also http://www.gp.org/press/pr-national.php?ID=242)
  8. If the epithet that Mr. Jones used to describe Republicans was offensive, imagine the words people will use later this century, when the effects of global warming have grown more severe, to describe Republican (and Democratic) officeholders from 2009 who refused to take necessary action to curb global warming’s advance.
  9. The media have given Glenn Beck and the ‘Tea Party’ crowd generous coverage. (Compare the minimal and dismissive reporting on the hundreds of thousands of Americans who protested the Iraq War in 2003.) Republicans have benefited from the current political paradigm, which places extreme Republicans like Mr. Beck at the right end and ‘moderate’ Democrats like President Obama at the left end of the spectrum of allowable debate. Van Jones is a target for the same reason that former US Representative (D-Ga.) and 2008 Green presidential candidate Cynthia McKinney and others have been dismissed and ridiculed — because they offer ideas unacceptable to media dominated by corporate interests. The emergence of the Green Party is key to overturning this paradigm, changing the political landscape, and expanding the public debate.
  10. The Green Party sees no reason to appease Republicans, Fox News, Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh, Democratic leaders, or others who’ve used their power to serve corporate elites, to the detriment of working people and America’s future. Greens call Van Jones too important for America to disappear from the public forum.

“As a Green, Van Jones can be a strong national voice for justice and the environment, independent of the constraints of the Democratic Party hierarchy, the corporate lobbies that pull their strings, and the right-wing appeasement and selling out of grassroots social movements that appears to be their strategy,” said Marian Douglas-Ungaro of the DC Statehood Green Party and the Green Party Black Caucus.

MORE INFORMATION

Green Party of the United States http://www.gp.org
202-319-7191, 866-41GREEN
Fax 202-319-7193

Green candidate database and campaign information: http://www.gp.org/elections.shtml
Green Party News Center http://www.gp.org/newscenter.shtml
Green Party Speakers Bureau http://www.gp.org/speakers
Green Party ballot access page http://www.gp.org/2008-elections
Green Party Livestream Channel http://www.livestream.com/greenpartyus

“5 Reasons Why Van Jones and Progressives are Better Off With Jones Out of the White House”
By Don Hazen, AlterNet, September 7, 2009.
http://www.alternet.org/story/142460/5_reasons_why_van_jones_and_progressives_are_better_off_with_jones_out_of_the_white_house/?page=entire

Green Pages: The official publication of record of the Green Party of the United States
Summer 2009 issue now online
http://gp.org/greenpages-blog

20 thoughts on “Greens: Top Ten reasons why Van Jones should give up on Obama and the Democratic Party, come home to the Green Party

  1. Petra Kelly

    Cindy,

    While the Green Party press release gets the Greens in the debate, and that is a good thing, it’s not the only Green Party perspective.

    There have always been strong, reasonable, hard working Green Party Conservatives, and Centrists.

    The Green Party is in center right coalitions in governments around the world.

    Ireland, Hamburg, Germany, Netherlands, Frankfurt, Germany, previously the Czech Republic.

    Green = Solar Power, Wind Power, Geo-thermal Power, High Speed Rail across America, ending American dependence on foriegn oil….

    Green = equals fiscal conservatism, grassroots citizens action.

    Green = reduction in waste at the Pentagon, and pulling back the militarization of American society and culture.

    Green = A better way of American Life.

    The Green Party is the future, and the positive solution.

  2. paulie Post author

    Actually, a good case can be made that Reagan and W were not fiscal conservatives. Their economic policy more closely resembles fascism than fiscal conservatism, although calling any mainstream politician a fascist in today’s America puts one in danger of being called out by Godwin’s Law enforcement.

  3. Gene Trosper

    Fiscal responsibility to me is: living with one’s means and not exploiting others. While most exploitation cannot really happen with out the participation of the person being exploited (such as getting a credit card with an insane interest rate), I find such exploitation abhorrent and would engage in boycotts and other voluntary, social-based action to eliminate/reduce exploitation rather than using the fickle power of politics.

  4. paulie Post author

    Cont. from #4:

    However, some people aren’t afraid to drop the F-bomb on the F-troop politicians.

    Exhibit A: The Reality of Red-State Fascism by Lew Rockwell.

    Excerpt:

    “The most significant socio-political shift in our time has gone almost completely unremarked, and even unnoticed. It is the dramatic shift of the red-state bourgeoisie from leave-us-alone libertarianism, manifested in the Congressional elections of 1994, to almost totalitarian statist nationalism. Whereas the conservative middle class once cheered the circumscribing of the federal government, it now celebrates power and adores the central state, particularly its military wing. ”

    Exhibit B: We Have Always Been At War With Eastasia by Roderick Long:


    In imperial China it was common to describe officials as “Confucians when in office, Taoists when out of office.” Similarly, in modern western democracies whichever party is out of power tends to ramp up the libertarian rhetoric. Hence we hear all this anti-government talk from the Republicans during the Clinton and Obama eras, but (apart from a few honourable exceptions) where was it during the Bush era? And likewise for the Democrats, in the Bush era suspicion of government power was the order of the day, but now (again, apart from a few honourable exceptions) such suspicion is dismissed as evidence of lunacy.

    Keith Olbermann

    Keith Olbermann

    Olbermann and his ilk are perfect examples. Last year Olbermann used to address President Bush in terms such as these:

    If you believe in the seamless mutuality of government and big business, come out and say it! There is a dictionary definition, one word that describes that toxic blend.

    You’re a fascist – get them to print you a T-shirt with fascist on it! …

    The lot of you are the symbolic descendants of the despotic middle managers of some banana republic to whom “freedom” is an ironic brand name, a word you reach for when you want to get away with its opposite.

    Thus, Mr. Bush, your panoramic invasion of privacy is dressed up as “protecting America.”

    Thus, Mr. Bush, your indiscriminate domestic spying becomes the focused monitoring only of “terrorist communications.”

    And so on, quite enjoyably. But nowadays anyone expressing similar sentiments toward our current President Incarnate would get nothing from Olbermann but ridicule, outrage, and probably some veiled threats of violence.

    Which bring me to my point (and I do have one, right on top of my head), which is to recommend Kevin Carson’s critique of Olbermann-style liberalism.

    Also check out the latest installment of Kevin’s critique of Sloanism.

    And, in mostly unrelated news, check out Stephan Kinsella’s latest piece on IP.

  5. Michael Cavlan

    Paulie

    I agree. The hypocricy of Keith Olbermann is stunning.

    So is the silence of the so called anti-war movement. Wait, didn’t Cindy Sheehan expose that at Martha’s vineyard last week?

    We Support Wars
    Yes We can

    We Support Wars
    Of Obama Man

    the new anti-war chant.

  6. Eric Dondero

    And some Libertarians actually say that we should somehow align ourselves with these Fascists in the Green Party.

    Libertarians aligning with Greens, is about as absurd as “Libertarians for Hitler.”

  7. W is a 911 terrorist

    Don’t put it down, turn it around!

    Bush family has been allies, friends and “family” of Nazis, Bin Ladens etc. since Prescott Bush.

    Read my lips, no new Texans!

  8. Red Rover

    Van Jones apparently has already been a memeber of a third party. According to some claims by San Francisco Bay Area Peace and Freedom Party members, Van Jones registered to vote with this socialist-feminist political party 10 or so years ago. Affidavit was supposedly executed by David Campbell a one time candidate for California’s Board of Equalization.
    My sources tell me that this can be confirmed by going to the Registrar of Voters of Office and examining Jones’ previous affidavits of registration.
    Apparently the Obama administration discovered Jones official ties to this socialist political organization at the same time they were investigating Van’s now infamous petition signature. Four this sin of having worked outside the two-party political system, the Obama people not only threw Jones under the bus for the petition signature, but then backed the bus up to crush Jones for joining the Peace and Freedom Party.

  9. W is a 911 terrorist

    “Among Greens, Mr. Jones need not apologize for questioning the behavior of the Bush Administration in connection with the 9/11 attacks. ”

    Good point.

  10. Dave Schwab

    I recall an exchange where someone was wondering why right-wingers, who usually like to call their opponents communists, have chosen to equate Obama and other alleged leftists with Hitler. The most rational response was “well, that’s the only historical reference that right-wingers can be expected to understand.”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *