CNN Again Hosts Van Jones, Host Soledad O'Brien Tosses Mostly Softballs
Once again, CNN hosted former Obama "green jobs" czar Van Jones, giving him plenty of air-time to tout his new book and defend himself against accusations from conservatives. Unsurprisingly, anchor Soledad O'Brien tossed mostly softballs at Jones on Wednesday's Starting Point.
However, even though O'Brien passsed on grilling the former Obama advisor, conservative guest Will Cain was up to the task. "You said you flirted with socialism, communism, various aspects," Cain told Jones, and asked "What I'm curious about is when you were inside, you were part of this administration. How much does your ideology reflect the ideology of the administration?" [Video below the break. Audio here.]
That question prompted a defensive response from Jones, who accused people like Cain of "smearing me and lying about what my ideas are." Jones, Obama's "green jobs" special advisor, resigned from the administration in 2009 after reports surfaced over his controversial past. He had previously signed a petition that charged the Bush administration may have allowed 9/11 to happen, called Republicans "a**holes," and described himself as a communist, among other things.
On Starting Point, Jones admitted to his radical past but put it behind him. "Look, I was on the left side of Pluto when I was in my 20s," he told the panel.
O'Brien also failed to ask Jones about the failure of "green energy" companies, like Solyndra, that received Stimulus money from the Obama administration. Jones himself told her that his philosophy of "creating green jobs, putting people to work in green industries is exactly what the President ran on." So how did O'Brien not then ask him about the failure of multiple "green energy" companies that were subsidized by Obama?
The liberal Jones has been a welcome guest on CNN before, to talk about Occupy Wall Street. CNN host Suzanne Malveaux even flattered him that he would make a "good spokesperson" for the movement.
A transcript of the segments, which aired on April 4 on Starting Point beginning at 7:53 a.m. EDT, is as follows:
[7:53]
SOLEDAD O'BRIEN: We want to talk about Van's book because not only is he a panelist this morning. He's also written a new book. It's called "Rebuild the Dream." And it's all about being inside the Obama White House. You write about the hope bubble being burst. You say this, "Where did the forces that elected Obama go wrong? The movement didn't crash primarily because of the losers of 2008 created a fear machine. It crashed because the winners mishandled and inadvertently dismantled the hope machine." That's an interesting perspective. You say this is three books in one. What do you mean?
(...)
O'BRIEN: You say this, "We overestimated our achievement in 2008, we underestimated our opponents. We did not lose because the backlashers got so loud. We lost because the rest of us got so quiet. Too many of us treated Obama's inauguration as some kind of finish line and we should have seen it as the starting line. Too many of us sat down at the very moment when we should have stood up." So what was the implication of that do you think?
VAN JONES, co-founder, Rebuild the Dream: Sure, well, the problem was I think that – progressives, Democrats and the independents that elected Obama, we thought, look, you got Obama in the White House. You got 60 votes in the Senate –
O'BRIEN: Done and done.
JONES: – you got Pelosi –
O'BRIEN: – for the Democrats –
JONES: We're done. So we thought that was enough to govern. It turns out that was only one third. You also have to have a disciplined media strategy, Fox was able to demonstrate that, and you have to have a grassroots movement, people. The Tea Party demonstrated that. LBJ did not lead the Civil Rights Movement. Obama is the head of state. He's not supposed to also be a social movement leader, but the grassroots didn't understand that. We expected him to do for us what we have to do for ourselves.
WILL CAIN, CNN contributor: Interesting that your disappointment in the accomplishments of this administration is largely focused on those outside who opposed it. Van, your ideology as opposed to your activism – we're talking about your ideology here – it's been very open. You said you flirted with socialism, communism, various aspects. What I'm curious about is when you were inside, you were part of this administration. How much does your ideology reflect the ideology of the administration?
JONES: Well, first of all, it's funny. The reason I wrote the book is because, you know, people like this had such a great job of smearing me and lying about what my ideas are.
O'BRIEN: Do we need to separate the two of you?
CAIN: No, I'm not. If I'm wrong, please tell me I'm wrong. But I thought you were open about some of these things.
JONES: Let me finish. I figured you'd jump in here and try to make some points for yourself. But here's the deal, the reality is this. I, just like a lot of people when I was younger I experiment – some people experimented with drugs and alcohol. I experimented with ideas, world views, philosophies. When I was younger, I decided that I was going to do everything I could to change the system, to make sure that poor people didn't mistreated. I grew up, I learned, I changed.
And just like Shirley Sherrod who could tell her story about how she used to be, you know, suspicious of white people and then she learned, I was going around telling my story, that the way you're going to deal with poverty is with business solutions. The way you're going to deal with poverty is with free enterprise. The way you're going to deal with poverty is putting people to work.
O'BRIEN: But you didn't answer Will's question, which is how much of what your philosophy is reflects what was going on in the administration.
JONES: My philosophy of using business-based solutions to fight both poverty and pollution, putting – creating green jobs, putting people to work in green industries is exactly what the President ran on. My mature views are the views of the administration. And so the reason I wrote the book, we are now living in a situation where the information system is very sophisticated, but the wisdom system is not.
(...)
[8:44]
O'BRIEN: And we're back with our conversation. We were talking earlier about politics and also Van's book, which is called "Rebuild the Dream." And the two of you were getting into it a little bit. You took great umbrage when you mentioned socialism and communism and then you – and asked sort of how that would frame – I think I'm re-framing this correctly – what the –
CAIN: I reflected on the President's ideology. Van took big issue with that. And I want him to tell me where have I got it wrong?
O'BRIEN: What's wrong with that question?
JONES: Oh, well, basically, I think what I wanted to be able to clarify with you, and we were talking off camera –
O'BRIEN: You can hit him if you want to.
(Crosstalk)
(Laughter)
O'BRIEN: I'm kidding.
JONES: Look, all – all these are fair questions. Look, I was on the left side of Pluto when I was in my 20s. Everybody knows that. I was talk – I talked about that on the record. But what I learned is as I was you know going through the rest of my life, those ideas were not working. We – I was going to more funerals than graduations for kids in Oakland. And I said we've got to do something to get jobs in this community.
And so we – the solar industry was taking off, so we said why don't we get these young kids jobs putting up solar panels? And it opened up a whole new way of my understanding about how it is you could use enterprise – green businesses to fight both pollution and poverty.
Wrote – wrote a book about it. Those were the ideas that I think captured the attention of a lot of people in the country. I got a chance to go to the White House, I was there for six months working on those ideas. I think those are good ideas, I think they're good ideas because they're good – if you believe in markets, they're great because they're free-market based ideas. And the book talks about that.
CAIN: So what I'm appreciating – what I appreciated about Van and it didn't come off I guess personally between us, is the honesty in his own ideology. And he's telling us now where he was versus where he is today.
JONES: Right.
CAIN: And what I'm curious about is – even – but even today you embrace some concepts like the Occupy protest. And – and what I'm curious about is how much do the Occupy protests in this – wherever we put it on the left end of the spectrum, reflect on the President? And you've had personal interactions and worked with the President, there's the source of my question.
JONES: Sure I mean, I think the President –
O'BRIEN: And did he want to you resign? When you resigned from your position was there pressure?
- Matt Hadro's blog
- Login to post comments















Comments
Is it just me, or has the MSM defaulted to interviewing
Submitted by johnsonl on Wed, 04/04/2012 - 5:38pm.
each other and agitating?
Sorry, don't buy it. This guy
Submitted by MrSnuggles on Wed, 04/04/2012 - 5:50pm.
Sorry, don't buy it. This guy is as big a marxist as he was when he was in his 20s.
Would anyone on the right ever get a pass for their Nazi past (hypothetical question)?
The National Socialists were right wing?
Submitted by almostacowboy on Wed, 04/04/2012 - 6:13pm.
mmmmmm, who knew that our socialists would adopt so many right wing policies?
1. Price controls on goods and services
2. Nationalized Health Care
3. National controls on housing including subsidies
4. Blame the rich (Jews) for societies inequalities.
5. Peoples' Automobile (Volkswagen)
6. Government-created "equality" (as long as you were the "right" race).
7. Removal of religious powers (Jews , Catholics , Lutherans , Christians)
8. Overt racism.
9. State approved media
10. Centrally planned government that controlled allocation of resources .
11. Redistribution of property that benefited the establishment party members.
12. Forced abortions, sterilizations, medical experiments and other atrocities by government done
for the common good AKA "eugenics" .
Don't get me wrong, I know
Submitted by MrSnuggles on Wed, 04/04/2012 - 8:14pm.
Don't get me wrong, I know the Nazi's were as left wing as Stalin I was merely trying to come up with a equally absurd example on the right of Van Jones suddenly NOT being a commie anymore and the media just accepting it at face value.
Actually...
Submitted by Unsane on Wed, 04/04/2012 - 8:51pm.
The Nazi's weren't Left wing. If they were, they would not permit private property. Not to mention, the KPD would be their bosom buddies, instead of brawling with the Nazis in the streets.
"CONSUMED DEMOCRACY RETURNS A SOCIALIST REGIME" - Slayer, "Fictional Reality", from Divine Intervention (1994)
Left Wing
Submitted by lilium479 on Wed, 04/04/2012 - 9:37pm.
Read your history.......Fascism , Nazism, Communism are all Left Wing.
They only differ in degree.
Read YOUR history, hypocrite
Submitted by Unsane on Wed, 04/04/2012 - 9:50pm.
Unfortunately for you I have probably studied history for longer than you have been alive. What, is Richard J. Evans three-volume series on the Third Reich not good enough for you? Or Shirer's tome?
If the Nazis were so Left wing, please explain why they permitted provate property. Please also explain why the Communists wanted nothing to do with them and engaged in street battles with the Nazis.
People in glass houses should not throw stones.
"CONSUMED DEMOCRACY RETURNS A SOCIALIST REGIME" - Slayer, "Fictional Reality", from Divine Intervention (1994)
Read some real history...
Submitted by Jer on Wed, 04/04/2012 - 9:59pm.
There were and are ideological features of nazism and fascism found in both wings.
Jer
Yeah the liberal historians use to love fascism more
Submitted by gmaniac1 on Wed, 04/04/2012 - 9:54pm.
than communism actually, especially Mussolini and Franco. Nazis may be to the right of Stalin but only ever so slightly. The liberal historians would love for us to believe that Nazis are a right wing ideology since that whole holocaust thing got in the way of their agenda.
Interesting...
Submitted by Unsane on Wed, 04/04/2012 - 9:55pm.
So why didn't Stalin order the KPD to throw in with the Nazis to form a coalition government and take over Germany legally that way?
"CONSUMED DEMOCRACY RETURNS A SOCIALIST REGIME" - Slayer, "Fictional Reality", from Divine Intervention (1994)
I don't know I'm not Stalin but if I ever see him in Hell
Submitted by gmaniac1 on Wed, 04/04/2012 - 11:41pm.
I'll ask. Maybe Stalin was having a bad hair day who knows?
From a historical perspective the Nazis and Commies were alike except in one simple fashion which is in how they industrialized their countries. Fascists do use different fiscal principles but only by means of privatization of industry through government. That's why the Ron Paul fans always called Bush a fiscal fascist because of the first stimulus bill which did just that, i.e. privatized industry through government intervention. Commies are full fledged command and control economists so need to explain that. However, Nazis and Commies are more closely related in ideological terms technically speaking than fiscal/social conservatives.
Left vs Right
Submitted by Unsane on Thu, 04/05/2012 - 5:53pm.
Actually, Stalin was having a bad moustache day. And also, Stalin knew that the Nazis and Communists did not get along. Actually, THAT is an understatement. Put a Commie and a Nazi in the same room and they will be trying to kill each other within minutes.
The reason - the SOLE reason - the Nazis and Fascists are kicked to the Right is due to one concept: private property. The Nazis and Fascists were good with private property (so long as you did what the State told you and weren't a political enemy, no problem, go ahead and own property). The Communists cannot and do not tolerate private property.
Also, so long as aristocrats/upper-class supported the State, Nazis and Fascists left them alone by and large. The Communists wanted them wiped out: aristocracy and the upper class were enemy #1 to them.
Yes, the systems of each look very much alike, but how each get to that point is the source of the political argument.
"Privatized industry through government intervention" What was privatized? Did Bush get rid of Amtrak in 2008? Last I saw, in the first stimulus bill, an argument could be made that nationalization occurred, not privatization. (But then the Ron Paul worshippers, the reactionaries that they are, don't get very much right.)
"CONSUMED DEMOCRACY RETURNS A SOCIALIST REGIME" - Slayer, "Fictional Reality", from Divine Intervention (1994)
6 things jump right out at you..
Submitted by greggy on Wed, 04/04/2012 - 6:39pm.
1. Van Jones constantly side-steps and avoids specifically answering the question, about his having identified himself as a communist, and saying he adhered to socialism.
2. Van Jones never did answer the question, concerning the extent to which socialist and communist ideology is held by other members of Obama's administration.
3. Van Jones states "people like this had such a great job of smearing me and lying about what my ideas are", but never once gives a single example of something he'd been falsely accused of saying or doing. Even when prompted by Cain to provide such an example, Van Jones was not able to state a single denial of his self-ID as a communist/socialist, nor to state a single thing he'd been "smeared" about.
4. Van Jones makes a vague reference to "dabbling" or "flirting with" communism and socialism when "he was in his 20's", yet some of his comments in question were well after that.
5. Van Jones first disingenuously states that the question Cain asked is just a smear - then later states "all these are fair questions". So, when first asked about his statements of support for communism and socialism, he flatly denies it, basically saying this is a lie and a smear, then a few minutes later, states "all these are fair questions". In other words, admitting that what Cain asked him about was true and it was legitimate - a few minutes after saying it was all "lies and smears" from people like Cain.
6. When O'Brien gives Jones permission to hit Cain, it's because she likes Van Jones and doesn't like the question Cain asks - even though she admits it's a totally legitimate question. Is she joking? Of course. But does the joke signal that she likes Van Jones and dislikes the fact that Can has put him on the spot? Of course. The joking permission to hit Cain is rooted in her genuine affection for the liberal, and lack of affection toward the conservative.
FLIRTED with
Submitted by celator on Wed, 04/04/2012 - 7:54pm.
FLIRTED with communism????
More like he jumped into Lenin's swimming pool and never got out.
Bigot birds flocking
Submitted by sngnsgt on Wed, 04/04/2012 - 8:07pm.
Bigot birds flocking together. Ain't it grand!!
Soleda, Oh Sloedad
Submitted by lilium479 on Wed, 04/04/2012 - 8:30pm.
A racist and a communist......not so strange bedfellows........and CNN?
Soledad is every bit as pointless as Mika...
Submitted by krendler on Wed, 04/04/2012 - 8:38pm.
...only Soledad's a lot more obsessed with skin color than Mika is.
Questions I'd like answered
Submitted by Radical1979 on Wed, 04/04/2012 - 9:51pm.
Who funds Rebuild the Dream? How much money is in there? How much does Van Jones make? How much are the other executives paid? Is it non-profit? What do they produce/services do they provide?
Because I'm thinking of starting up an organization with no measurable goals that I can earn a lot of money running and I'm wondering if this is my model.
The good news....
Submitted by KornKing on Wed, 04/04/2012 - 10:37pm.
9 or 10 people watch Soledad masturbating every day....
Spoken like Bill Maher.
Submitted by Radical1979 on Wed, 04/04/2012 - 10:37pm.
Aren't you special.
delete double
Submitted by motherbelt on Wed, 04/04/2012 - 11:27pm.
delete double
Korn King
Submitted by motherbelt on Wed, 04/04/2012 - 10:46pm.
Korn King, your vulgar "jokes" like this one and your description of Mike Malloy are not funny.
Try making a reasoned argument instead of tossing off lousy one-liners.
Rebuke
Submitted by KornKing on Thu, 04/05/2012 - 6:46am.
Noted and accepted
But he is soooooooooo gush, gush cute.........
Submitted by Tomorama on Thu, 04/05/2012 - 9:47am.
He was on Morning Schmoe this morning as part of his reinvention tour and as expected got total props and slurping from the usual suspects - softballs and slurps for everyone.
Of course Beck was made out to be a liar for REPORTING his actual words and thoughts - how dare he.
They would like to hold a milkshake summit to discuss their differences.
Beck would come armed with facts, Jones with lies and bullshit.
Why is this commie on TV?
Submitted by sngnsgt on Thu, 04/05/2012 - 9:57am.
Why is this commie on TV?
Ohhhh Van Jones......
Submitted by bigdaddy on Thu, 04/05/2012 - 10:13am.
....He's SO Dreamy!!!....