…explained.

Makes sense to me (once I put on my loon hat).

[Update on Monday morning]

If you’re only a reader of the New York Times, you still don’t know why Van Jones resigned, though you may think you do. This is shameful, and at this point, almost surreal.

Right in the middle of holiday weekend. Does this mean that the story goes away with him, or will some intrepid reporter have the temerity to ask the White House on Tuesday how he got there in the first place, and how the vetting process broke down? If it did?

I think that it simply didn’t occur to these creatures like Valerie Jarrett that his viewpoints would be controversial. After all, it’s probably what they believe themselves.

[Update mid morning]

More thoughts from Maguire. And from Scott Johnson:

Jones claimed to have been the victim of a “vicious smear campaign.” Why cave in to such a campaign? In his resignation letter Jones explains: “On the eve of historic fights for health care and clean energy, opponents of reform have mounted a vicious smear campaign against me. They are using lies and distortions to distract and divide.” Jones was of course “smeared” with his own words, which proved indeed to be vicious, voluminous and damning.

Jones said he had received encouragement from across the political spectrum to “stay and fight.” I doubt it, but I will concede that I had meant to urge him to stick around and defend himself.

Yes, I’ll miss him now. He was a poster child for this administration.

[Late morning update]

More thoughts from Jonah Goldberg:

Van Jones’ views are now widely known. And as far as anyone can tell reading the newspapers this morning or watching the Sunday shows, this White House and this President have nothing but praise for Jones and think he’s a fine, self-sacrificing, public servant who simply took one for the team.

I can’t think of a more succinct, discrete, example illuminating why Obama’s claims to centrism are a fraud.

It is quite striking.

[Update early afternoon]

A lot of links from Ed Driscoll: Van Goes Under The Bus. I’m sure that the president will say that this isn’t the Van that he knew.

…in my home town of Flint, Michigan. Unfortunately, the usual stupidity prevails.

It’s an interesting marketing issue. Flint has been trying to rise from the GM ashes by becoming a college town, so which policy will attract more students, and their parents? Michigan is (and has been for a few years) a “shall issue” state, and the predictions of the hysterical gun grabbers haven’t panned out. So it will be interesting to see how it all comes out.

…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.

Indeed.