Michael Barone asked earlier this week if the Washington Post is trying to “macaca” Virginia gubernatorial candidate Bob McDonnell over what he wrote in a 1989 thesis at Regent University.
…the Sunday front page story [in the Washington Post] on the thesis … sends the culturally liberal voters of Northern Virginia in the Post’s local circulation area a pretty clear message: you better not vote for this guy. He went to an “evangelical” school (Regent University Law School), described feminists as “detrimental” and “said government policy should favor married couples over ‘cohabitors, homosexuals or fornicators.’”
With the total number of stories the Washington Post has run on this subject this week preparing to break into the double digits, the answer to Barone’s question is clear.
WaPo having a liberal agenda is no surprise. Liberals having conniptions over traditional conservative beliefs, however phrased, isn’t new either. Neglecting to locate a radical liberal president’s important college work is par for the course. What’s interesting, though, is that the Post is a member of the gang of media outlets who have enforced a gag order on the Van Jones firestorm, as Byron York noted today.
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.
This means that if your range of news consumption is limited within these five sources, and if Van Jones is actually fired this afternoon, a high-level government official will have been removed amid immense controversy and you wouldn’t have heard a lick about it, if the Washington Post had any say in the matter. But you can’t turn a page in the Post without reading about how Bob McDonnell wants to chain our mothers and sisters up in the basement and make them do laundry for the rest of their lives.
Van Jones called Republicans “assholes” and laughed about it. He’s a self-avowed communist. He admitted that he signed a 9/11 Truther petition, indicating he believes the Bush administration allowed or encouraged the attacks of September 11, 2001 to occur. He was a presenter of a 2002 war protest in California alongside other 9/11 Truthers. Jake Tapper reveals that he was on the organization committee of a tabloid newspaper that promoted 9/11 Truther protests, which Van Jones also worked to organize.
His excuse that he didn’t read the petition carefully enough before signing it is ludicrous. And his apology that explained away his partisan words and radical activity as things he did before he joined Barack Obama’s elite team of advisory czars doesn’t mean they don’t matter. Apparently, the Washington Post disagrees.
The 1989 thesis paper of a then-private citizen deserves wall-to-wall coverage. A communist Truther in the White House? Covering that wouldn’t result in a Republican losing an election, now would it?
UPDATE: Information is coming out so quickly on this creep it’s hard to keep up. I forgot to list the fact that Van Jones organized a 1999 protest in support of convicted cop-killer Mumia Abu-Jamal. He also is fond of t-shirts that read “Kanye was right,” presumably meaning he agrees that “George Bush doesn’t care about black people.” Didn’t someone recently get in hot water with Van Jones’ ColorOfChange.org for claiming the president is racist?
