b066_game_bigMy review of the Big Finish audio #66 The Game staring Peter Davidson and Sarah Sutton as the 5th Doctor and Nyssa is available at Amazon.com here.

The episode is significant by the appearance of William Russell in the role of Lord Carlisle. As fans of the series know he was part of the original cast playing Ian Chesterton.

This was one of the audios I got from Trevor9661 that I mentioned before. One of them Winter for the Adept I reviewed at Amazon long ago (I had the cassette version) An alternate review is here. It turns out this one was autographed by Russell another reason for kudos for Trevor. I’ve listened to one of the other two and will be reviewing it later this week and hope to finish with the final cd by the end of the day on the 6th.


Van Jones is out.

The bottom line of this is going is the media is going to have to explain why Gateway Pundit could come up with all of this stuff via google and they could not with all their resources.

The question will NOW be will other members of the clique get “googled” by enterprising reporters? I’ll wager there are a lot more crazy uncles in there.

It’s a loss for the Obama administration but a bigger loss for the press.

I was looking at this post at Little Green Footballs and this statement of Charles:

When this “news” came out, I spent hours searching the web for any corroboration at all in Jones’ own words that he believes the 9/11 attacks were a conspiracy by the US government. If I had found something, I was prepared to start yelling as loud as anyone about it, because I utterly despise Truthers.

So I took up the challenge and started searching, not only for Jones but for matching links between him and known truthers such as Carol Brouillet.

I found quite a few events where they were both associated with, and a lot of the usual suspects of the VERY far left indymedia crowd seem to show up but no direct link to the truthers.

I then took a closer look at Gateway Pundit’s stuff, he has uncovered plenty of stuff that indicate Jones is loathsome and for his OTHER positions he is worthy of exclusion but one thing caught my eye in this post:

Gateway correctly shows that Jones was involved in the War Times but I decided to take a closer look at his link. It’s loaded with drivel and nonsense that would make Rosie O’Donnell and Michael Moore proud but right at the top I found this:


A New, Biweekly Newspaper Opposing the “War on Terrorism”

The terrorist attacks of September 11 marked the beginning of a new and frightening period in our history. Thousands of people died that day, and their families along with the country as a whole are still struggling to
recover. But President Bush’s response of “permanent war against terrorism at home and abroad” has further endangered the lives and liberties of millions of people everywhere. emphasis mine

This is a direct statement made in 2002 before even the founding of the paper saying that Terrorists are responsible for 9/11 and attacking President Bush’s response, not declaring him responsible. To quote Gateway Pundit:

Van Jones was instrumental in the creation of this publication and sat on its board for at least the first year and a half of its existence.

That being true we must conclude that although Jones is connected to vile opinions and has no business being in the White House in any capacity. He can not honestly be declared a truther.

Could he have believed it and held back to gain wider support? Possible but generally true believers aren’t shy about being true. Does he have sympathy with them, it’s possible but it’s unfair to come to that conclusion.

Barring some other revelation: I must conclude; Charles you were right and I was wrong.

Unfortunately for the White House all the OTHER info about Jones is more than enough to bring weeks worth of bad press and bad attention. He is a crazy uncle and worthy of attack.

He’s just not a truther.

What a difference a Drudge link makes

Yesterday Van Jones was the invisible man to the New York Times, the Washington Post, NBC Nightly News, ABC World News and the CBS Evening News

Today after one Drudge link the Washington post

White House officials offered tepid support Friday for Van Jones, the administration’s embattled energy efficiency guru, who has issued two public apologies this week, one for signing a petition that questioned whether Bush administration officials “may indeed have deliberately allowed 9/11 to happen, perhaps as a pretext for war.

and the CBS Evening News discovered the story.

The New York Times NBC Nightly News, ABC World News still can’t place the name.

Van Jones? Van Jones? Didn’t he play base guitar for the 60’s band Ian and the Chestertons?

No wonder people don’t worry about the Media’s opinion of them.

…as a sign of Crazy Uncle syndrome on the right:

“It’s hard to imagine anything more ridiculous than attacking the president of the United States for talking to students about the importance of getting a good education and being a good citizen,” said Kathy Miller, president of a statewide school monitoring group. “I wish our elected leaders were responsible enough to denounce this kind of wild-eyed paranoia. But the problem is too many of them are actually feeding this kind of nonsense — like when the governor flirts with secessionists and state Board of Education members say the president sympathizes with terrorists.”

That sounds so reasonable and reasonable voices on the right are questioning the opposition:

But seriously — what in the world could possibly be wrong with this? Question for you folks who are blowing the horns of doom: do you really think Obama is going to hypnotically insert socialist ideas into the minds of your children, diabolically disguised as an inspirational message?

The idea of the president speaking to the student’s of America is not new:

titled “Superman’s Mission for President Kennedy.” The story revolves around Superman encouraging the youth of America to join Kennedy’s “Presidential Fitness Program.” This program was a nationwide campaign to encourage physical fitness in America’s young people.

It was prepared “in close cooperation” with President Kennedy, and originally scheduled for publication in Superman #168, cover-dated April 1964. However, Kennedy was assassinated in Dallas, Texas, on November 22, 1963, and DC decided not to run the story…Months after Kennedy’s untimely death, President Johnson’s administration contacted DC and informed them that Johnson wanted the story published, “as a tribute to my great predecessor.” The Kennedy family also gave their OK.

The story finally saw print in Superman #170, cover dated July 1964.

If you are going to worry about this and NOT be a crazy uncle you need to have cause:

Well there is the interesting video of how Children have been used that we posted this week.

And then there is the withdrawn lesson plan that focused on how to help president Obama rather than how to help America.

But to really understand the worry you have to see what actually goes on in the public school system. To do that one should talk to a teacher who has seen it up close:

I’ve been teaching in the same public school in upstate, NY for fourteen years, and the left-wing agenda has never been so obvious to me as it was this past school year. If you think that fair and balanced teaching goes on in all classrooms, think again. I’m not saying that every single teacher is involved in Democrat indoctrination. I’m not even saying most teachers are, but I am saying it happens–too often. You listen to kids long enough, you find out what goes on and you learn the anti-Bush, anti-Palin, anti-conservative sentiments being expressed.

After Obama won the election, my school went crazy. Leading up to the inauguration, the school decided we were going to show it live to every student. Now, I was sick to my stomach because I just didn’t want to watch it, but I did believe that it should be shown, so I prepared myself to grit my teeth, suck it up, and just get through it–which I did. The problem was what went down leading up to that day–and for weeks afterward.

Let me run you through a day at school leading up to the inauguration: walk into the building; go to my mailbox; find lesson plans about Obama to use with students that were placed in my box; leave plans in my box (I did not do them!); walk down the hall where there were Obama posters on my left and right–posters about Change, Hope, and all that rhetoric he was talking during the campaign; listen to morning announcements with some quote from Obama right before the Pledge of Allegiance (everyday); go to library and see books about Obama displayed; after school go home and check email; in email find suggestions from ELA professionals about how to incorporate inauguration activities into lessons; read email with information about different seminars and workshops teachers can attend about the inauguration.

She later talked with a vice principal:

When I got an email from the assistant principal detailing the manner in which we would handle watching the inauguration ceremony, I emailed him back with a short note that basically said, “I hope you show the same enthusiasm in four years when Sarah Palin is elected president!” When I saw him later, he admitted that “teachers tend to be Democrats, as am I, but if your girl [Governor Palin] gets in in 2012, I’ll be sure we do the same thing.” My response? “Well, my boy, Bush, got in four years ago, and we didn’t do anything!”

Well it’s not as if the teachers are doing this stuff in class. Oh wait:

See, I don’t have a problem with having our students seeing an inauguration. They should see it. I don’t have a problem with them hearing from the President of the United States at the start of the school year. Hopefully, a president can inspire. My problem is with the Left-wing agenda so often displayed in the public school. My problem is with the president asking students to figure out how they can help him. My problem is with a teacher telling a student that the reason some people didn’t vote for Barack Obama is because they’re racist, as one teacher told her class. When her daughter came home and told her mom, a friend of mine, her mom had to call the teacher and ask her, “Why would you tell my child that? My husband and I didn’t vote for him, and we’re not racist. We didn’t vote for him because he’s a radical abortionist!” The teacher was left hemming and hawing.

My point is that some teachers are already indoctrinating students. How much farther will this go with the president’s September 8th speech and his request that teachers have their kids figure out how to help him? Too far, I’m afraid.

Just yesterday my son was telling me about the French Teacher at his high school going on about how horrible American is and the only reason she stays in the country was Obama.

It seems to me this is the wages of the uncritical coverage and the messianic adulation that the press gave candidate Obama over the previous 18 months. If he had been vetted normally and treated as a candidate by reporters as opposed to the slobbering love affair he had it might be different, maybe if reporters who disagreed with him weren’t personally attacked, if tea party protesters where not demonized or called nigger if racism was not ascribed to opposition to the one perhaps then the people wouldn’t mistrust his administration.

You are the parents, if you want to keep your kid out of school that’s your call not mine. My kid is going to school. He knows what propaganda is and I’ve taught him to recognize it. If you haven’t taught your children the same, then I ask, why not?

Remember we still live in a republic, there are school committee’s in every city and town. If you don’t like what is being done in your schools what are you doing about it? Are you showing up for meetings? Are you voicing concerns? Are you getting involved?

We have the power to effect change on the local level and it tends to bubble up. If we choose not to, then as always we will get the government; national, state and local that we deserve.

As for our teacher quoted above:

I say this: If I’m ever required to make my students gather around the screen to watch an Obama speech about how they can embrace and promote his agenda, they’d better be prepared for me to also gather my students around to read Governor Palin’s Facebook page when she comes out swinging against one of his dangerous policies.

As you can see, my days are numbered!

Let’s hope not.

He uses fewer words to nail the Jones mindset but then again he’s a pro and I’m in my pajamas:

Jones and other Obama radicals (the more middle- and upper-middle class the pedigree, the angrier the denunications) have a strange tendency in the past to have slandered much of American society, then abruptly — once anointed into its highest echelons — to equate their own careerist ascendency with a positive referendum on America’s sudden deliverance (the “apartheid” U.S. in need of having its entire system “changed” is now okay since a Van Jones is in the White House.)

Michelle Obama articulated that view with her trope about not previously being proud of America until her husband become a serious candidate, but apparently for the next few years we are supposed to endure lectures from a variety of leftists like Jones that their own success allows us to find (temporary) redemption from them.

I’m actually not sure if the resignation will come, Jones’ type is a fighter and he is a “true believer”. Rev Wright, older and wiser knew where his bread was buttered and understood that he had to go under the bus.

But Jones primary thought isn’t the gravy train. As a crazy uncle he passionately believes what he believes. Normally it would not be a big deal to let go someone like him but with trouble and anger among his humorless base already the discharge of a true believer for true belief might be too much at this moment.

It is not charitable but I don’t mind sitting back and watching the White House twist on the vine on this one.

Update: Charles doesn’t like Jones but he still is asking where’s the beef:

When this “news” came out, I spent hours searching the web for any corroboration at all in Jones’ own words that he believes the 9/11 attacks were a conspiracy by the US government. If I had found something, I was prepared to start yelling as loud as anyone about it, because I utterly despise Truthers.

I found: nothing. Nothing at all.

So I looked around those right wing blogs this morning because I was curious to see if any of them had found real proof for this accusation, apart from the word of Truthers and hate sites, and found: nothing. Nothing at all.

Charles is an honest man. I have to say his argument is looking better, he isn’t one to miss stuff on the web.

…But Joseph Medicine Crow deserves the honor he was given by the president

In 1939, Medicine Crow became the first of his tribe to receive a master’s degree, in anthropology. He is the oldest member of the Crow and the tribe’s sole surviving war chief — an honor bestowed for a series of accomplishments during World War II, including hand-to-hand combat with a German soldier whose life Medicine Crow spared.

After the war, he became tribal historian for the Crow and lectured extensively on the Battle of the Little Bighorn. Medicine Crow’s grandfather served as a scout for the doomed forces of Lt. Col. George Armstrong Custer..

More on this extraordinary American here here and here.

I’m not inclined to laugh about it.

…ha ha ah aha ha ha. Deep breath:

Some major donors and GOP strategists have approached Joe Scarborough, the host of MSNBC’s “Morning Joe,” about a national run, according to party sources.

Are these the same guys who told us that Tom Ridge was a leader?

ha ha AH ha ha ah ah ha ha ha

This deserves both an HA HA

and a YOU FOOL!

Clue to the clueless. Anybody pushing Joe Scarborough over Sarah Palin isn’t out to help republicans win anything.

Update: Yeah they talk about Petraeus too but with the space they give Joe it’s still a large laugh.

…If nobody ever hears about them.

11:30 AM EDT

From a Nexis search a few moments ago:

Total words about the Van Jones controversy in the New York Times: 0.
Total words about the Van Jones controversy in the Washington Post: 0.
Total words about the Van Jones controversy on NBC Nightly News: 0.
Total words about the Van Jones controversy on ABC World News: 0.
Total words about the Van Jones controversy on CBS Evening News: 0.

If you were to receive all your news from any one of these outlets, or even all of them together, and you heard about some sort of controversy involving President Obama’s Special Adviser for Green Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation, your response would be, “Huh?”

It’s unfashionable to quote oneself so quickly but it’s worth repeating this paragraph:

All are part of “subgroups” within their groups their opinion and their theories are accepted and unquestioned but when exposed to the general public they become problematic. 30 years ago one might have been able to hide these views, but in the age of the internet and YouTube that just isn’t as easy as it once was. This is why it was so vital to the media to ignore those associations for as long as possible.

I suggest that the well known non-vetting of then Candidate Obama wasn’t due to merely to adulation. I submit it is because the press knew that his positions could not survive vetting to the general public…

…and even worse to them Sarah Palin would be vice president today. What’s journalistic ethics compared to that?

Update: Nice Deb lists some nice questions.

Everybody has one, a relative who is a nice guy or a fun guy or a reliable friend when you need him, but has some totally off the wall opinions on some subject.

30 years ago I had an uncle like that who was convinced that the Spanish were part of some conspiracy to control the country.

Usually they would listen to some overnight radio show on AM where some odd host whose station had a longer range due to the night would rant and rage about this that or the other thing. Once they get started they are highly motivated too and it takes a lot of effort to change the subject or shut them up.

I have other relatives who are salt of the earth but when they get on about particular things they go mad.

It’s not so odd that 1% of any population might be off its rocker, the problem is in a country of 300,000,000 that is 3 million people. Even if 1/10 of one percent is crackers that’s 300,000 people. To give you some perspective that’s more troops than we have in Iraq or Afghanistan.

The problem is with the internet and social networking and the like that crazy 1% or 1/10 of one percent is suddenly empowered. Instead of the crazy uncle at the family gathering that you can ignore, suddenly he has 1000 friends that he can text to rebut and counter rebut all night. He is affirmed and empowered and boy is he motivated, because now there are thousands of people telling him he’s been right all along and is MUCH smarter than everyone thought.

300,000-3,000,000 crazy uncles as individuals isn’t a big deal, but get them all writing e-mails or making phone calls and most importantly AFFIRMING themselves and suddenly you have a potent economic and or political force. Suddenly there is a huge market for a book or 10,000 people willing to pay $20 for a DVD. That’s a fair amount of change and a person can make a good living off of it.

This is the technical reason why the truthers, the birthers and all the others out there have so much more power than they once did. They have whole networks ready to affirm them and back them up. And his isn’t limited to groups such as those, you have cultural subgroups that have “interesting beliefs” within that sub culture those ideas are gospel, outside of the group they tend underplay it. Doesn’t help when dealing with the general public.

Lets quote a great old piece from a guy name Bill Whittle he describes a long encounter with a skeptic of the moon landing:

Every time I would identify one of these great mysteries, Joe had the same response: okay, but what about this! No fight, no defense – nothing. And then we’d be on to some new blur or smudge that proved, incontrovertibly, that this “reality” we live in is a giant lie, and that we are all victims of Dark Forces moving beyond our control or even our awareness… and that while the sleepwalking sheeple go on with their corporate-controlled lives, the mysterious wheels of the Shadow Government turn inexorably onward, crushing those brave few individuals who are on to the whole horrid plot like so many ants. There is a word for this diseased mental state.

As I was leaving Joe’s, he said something I’m sure he thought was very funny. He said, “Man, I’ll bet a guy like you thinks Lee Harvey Oswald really shot JFK.”

Of course he shot JFK, Joe. Who do you think did it? The American Beef Council? Joe looked at me the way I had been looking at him. That is to say, he simply could not process that I could hold such a belief in my head. You’re serious? I’m dead serious. I recommended Case Closed, by Gerald Posner – without question the best piece of critical reasoning, research and logic I have ever read, bar none. I suspect he did not follow my advice. Books like that are bad for his business. Man, you’re out there, said Joe. You know, the sad thing is, I’m starting to believe he is right.

Read the whole thing and you will have a great handle on not only the mind of the conspiracy theorist but an idea of sub groups.

Dr. Sanity did some diagnosis along these lines:

You would think that a paranoid person would be reassured to discover that people or groups are NOT out to get him. That there is no conspiracy against the group. You would be wrong. This is the last thing that the Paranoid individual or group really want, because–if they are not being persecuted, or betrayed, or lied to, or oppressed–then the Paranoid must face the devastating reality of his own insignificance. This he cannot do and it is why the alternate reality was constructed in the first place.

The paranoid solution to unacceptable thoughts or feelings is to say, “If I am having these bad thoughts or feeling or behaviors, then someone else must be to blame and is making me do it.” The Paranoid person does not take responsibility for his own thoughts or feelings or behaviors.

Conspiracy theories serve one of two purposes. They either serve as a rationale for the unacceptable successes of others; or as reasons for the failures of a particular group or individual. The Arab world fixation with Jews and the reasons for Jewish successes serve as the classic fodder for conspiracy theorists in the Middle East.

Now lets look at President Obama and his crew pre-senate and pre-presidency. President Obama was dealing with groups such as ACORN, he was associating with people like domestic terrorists William Ayers and Bernadette Dohrn, he spent 20 years in a church listening to Jeremiah Wright in the pulpit and lived with Louis Farrakhan as a neighbor. All of these people have something in common.

All are part of “subgroups” within their groups their opinion and their theories are accepted and unquestioned but when exposed to the general public they become problematic. 30 years ago one might have been able to hide these views, but in the age of the internet and YouTube that just isn’t as easy as it once was. This is why it was so vital to the media to ignore those associations for as long as possible.

Now once the administration had won to the victors belonged the spoils. Many high profile positions were to be filled but even more lower level positions all over government needed to be filled. The administration naturally filled these positions with people from within their own sub culture those same ANSWER groups that they have worked aside for years.

Now it may be that these people have competence in the various fields that they were appointed to but because they are part of those sub groups they likely have positions and opinions that can not be healthy politically when exposed. In a national campaign it is necessary to get a majority of public opinion behind you. Truther conspiracies and the like don’t sit well.

Which brings us to the case of Van Jones

If you look at the far left groups such as color of change, you are dealing with a subgroup. Within that subgroup signing of a 9/11 truther statement would not constitute any clash with the perception of America as the “US of KKK” or the “Free Mumua” crowd or any of the others.

This is why I believe that Van Jones is a truther. I concede Charles Johnson’s point that it is a tactic of truthers to add false names to their support lists. Apparently it’s a tactic used by the left wing group Color of Change as well concerning their boycott.

Now I understand that some people do not like Glenn Beck. I’m not a huge fan of Beck I watch him once in a great while and never really cared for his radio show. Looking at Charles’ archives I see that Beck went after him back in April.

Very bad move. Charles is not only an excellent blogger but as people like Dan Rather, Mary Mapes, and Islamic and other faux news people have discovered, he’s is relentless.

Unlike these clowns his hits on beck have been above the waist generally using his own words against him and enjoying some schadenfreude over the boycott. I don’t support it as I see a glaring double standard at work.

However one must always beware the specter of Sullivan’s syndromethat turned a once reasonable blogger into a Bush hating trig truther. Becks’ issues (and he HAS some) do not make the Obama administration in general or Van Jones in particular clean. A lot of Bush Derangement and Palin Derangement comes from the it, On the right we have to be careful of the same thing with Obama; WND caught it over birtherism. It’s a case of the anti-antis.

During the Cold War, we used to speak of anti-anti-Communists. These were people (on the left) who were not exactly pro-Communist. But they so hated the anti-Communists, they were . . . well, anti-anti-Communists — the best, the fairest name for them.

Today, there are anti-anti-Islamofascists. They are not on the Islamofascist side in the War on Terror. But they hate those who are fighting, or attempting to fight, the Islamofascists more than they could ever hate the Islamofascists. They are anti-anti-Islamofascists.

The similarities between yesterday’s anti-anti-Communists and today’s anti-anti-Islamofascists would make a very good essay — perhaps by David Pryce-Jones or Norman Podhoretz. Of course, many of today’s anti-anti-Islamofascists were yesterday’s anti-anti-Communists — I mean, the same people, in the flesh.

It’s a fine line and likely everyone crosses it once in a while. The trick it to make sure it is ONLY once in a while.

Update: The American Spectator asks questions.

Update 2: It looks like Charles point is looking better and better:

First, Ben Smith contacted two of the other “signatories” of that document, and learned that they had indeed been misled by the Truthers, and thought they were signing a legitimate document calling for further investigations.

Ace Counterpoints.

Update 3: Game set and match to Charles, Crazy uncle yes, truther no.