…in the media over Van Jones. As someone notes in comments over there, imagine if George Bush had appointed a Klansman who spouted conspiracy theories about the Clintons and called Democrats anal orifices, and put him in charge of thirty billion dollars worth of federal activity, with no confirmation hearings.
[Late afternoon update]
Mickey thinks that the bus is revving its engine. It makes sense for him to be gone on a Friday before a holiday weekend. That will help bury the news.
[Update a few minutes later]
Does Barack Obama understand the odiousness of Trutherism? I’m not sure that he does, or that Democrats do in general. After all, Howard Dean called it “an interesting theory.” And it wasn’t that long ago (and may still be true today) that a majority of Democrats either believed that George Bush knew about the attacks ahead of time, or aren’t sure. Why would he think that a belief that is mainstream in his own party was particularly odious? In fact, I’m sure, given the “progressive” bubble in which he’s spent his entire life, he’s a little perplexed what the big deal is about Van Jones. None of this is news to him, any more than Reverend Wright’s views were. The only thing that shocks him is that anyone else would object.
[Late evening update]
Mark Steyn has some useful thoughts on Truther chique:
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.