LiveWire

A post by Maynard

I’ll let David Horowitz say it for me:

Democrats Are Comfortable With Communists, Racists and Anti-Semites

There is no more mystery about Van Jones. He was a passionate defender of cop-killer Mumia Abu Jamal, a self-satisfied and described “Communist,” a supporter of the destruction of the Jewish state, and a promoter of the theory that the Katrina tragedy was a white racist plot, and so forth. That’s okay with Democratic chairman Howard Dean, and Obama’s Environmental Quality Council head Nancy Sutley. (See Ron Radosh’s current blog for chapter and verse, and also the many blogs on Jones at our own www.newsrealblog.com.) This should surprise no one. The recent heads of the black caucus in the House — part of the 120 member “progressive caucus” — have all been Castro-loving racists — Maxine Waters and Barbara Lee to name two off the top of my head. Diane Watson is probably next. The Democratic Party today is a “popular front” organization (to pluck an appropriate term from the 1930s when liberals and Stalinists lined up together as well). There are no scoundrels, America haters, racists — that Democrats won’t assimilate. One of the more obnoxious racists and crooks in public life — Charlie Rangel — is still chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee because Nancy Pelosi can’t remove him, so strong is his support in her party.

And if you don’t believe how far left the Democrats have lurched when I say it, here’s authentication from Alan Colmes who, after ignoring all the evidence about who Van Jones actually is and what he believes, and pretending that it’s all a Glenn Beck-World Net Daily-Horowitz plot, concludes “Van Jones is a mainstream liberal.” That’s exactly right Alan. And that’s exactly the problem.

It’s obvious that Van Jones is a rotten person, and completely unsuited to hold authority in any administration. And yet the Democrat machine defends him as if he were the victim of a witch hunt. We’re witnessing a mind-boggling level of systematic dysfunction.

I posted a comment to this effect at a random site, and a Democrat shot back at me that Van Jones hadn’t killed anyone, whereas Timothy McVeigh came out of the right wing, and thus can be blamed on Republicans. I suppose that example illustrates the case as well as any. Yes, there are mean and dangerous kooks associated (perhaps very loosely) with every cause. But at this point in American history, the bad kooks are renounced by the mainstream right. On the left, however, the bomb throwers and hatemongers are tight with the leadership.

Watching the world has taught me that political movements are largely driven by psychological dysfunction. We hear endless principled rhetoric that is, if we look at the situation honestly, incongruous with the reality. We eventually realize the fancy words are nothing more than rationalized emotional baggage. And the louder the voice, the more likely the speaker is a lunatic.

(The foregoing isn’t just true of the other side; it’s true of me too. But I’m not asking anyone to trust me with power, so my lunacy doesn’t much matter, except to me. That’s why I want the government to be a limited force in our lives. With a small government, we could ignore Obama and his merry crew of madmen and morons and get on with our lives. The big problem with Obama is thinks he has all the answers, and he’s got a compulsive need to impose his notion of enlightenment upon us, and we’re expected to be grateful for being subjugated by such a supreme being.)

This Townhall.com article, “What Van Jones Tells Us About President Obama“, offers some interesting speculations about the psychology of the president. It concludes:

[Obama] picked Jones because he is deeply insecure about his racial status. Despite his repeated insistence that he is the culmination of the American dream of racial unity, Obama surrounds himself with racial radicals — and he has for decades. Obama’s associations with black communist Frank Marshall Davis during his teenage years, his apprenticeship to Rev. Jeremiah “God Damn America” Wright during his adult years, and his continuously comfortable relationships with racialists like Cornel West and Van Jones demonstrate his commitment to racial polarization.

Where did this commitment come from? Barack Obama has always been a man in search of identity; as he writes in “Dreams From My Father,” “I was engaged in a fitful, interior struggle. I was trying to raise myself as a black man in America …” And that struggle centered on his father — a father who abandoned him in childhood, and about whom he knew little. Little, that is, except for two basic facts: Barack Obama Sr. was black, and Barack Obama Sr. was a socialist who sought to “redistribute our economic gains to the benefit of all.” President Obama has always attempted to identify with his black father rather than his white grandparents, and he has therefore sought to fill the paternal gap with black racialists rather than moderates of any stripe.

The Van Jones story isn’t about another radical federal employee or even about President Obama’s addiction to executive authority (he has appointed over 30 czars with whom he meets regularly, but he has held just one cabinet meeting since his inauguration). The Van Jones story is about our president: a man who fills the void in his emotional past with “authentic” black men who have no interior struggle for definition. President Obama has incessantly injected himself into racial matters that require no clarification (see Henry Louis Gates Jr.); he has turned every debate into a racial debate (see his 2008 campaign, which repeatedly referenced his “funny name” and the fact that he does not look like the “other presidents on the dollar bills”). He does so out of convenience — few will argue openly about race with a prominent black man, no matter how extreme. More than that, however, he obsesses about race out of insecurity.

President Obama’s pathologies are playing out before us on a national stage. Unfortunately, the policies and appointees his pathologies produce are not merely wrongheaded — they are dangerous. How much racial polarization and economic and international instability must we endure to fill the hole that Barack Obama Sr. left in his son’s heart?