Story Behind the Stories

Two stories have been pretty big ones this week in the larger conservative blogosphere: the speech that Obama plans to present to the nation's schoolchildren, and the saga of "green jobs" czar Van Jones, who has a few, shall we say, exotic views of the world. A few thoughts:

• Some of the things I've seen said about the Obama speech to kids are kinda silly. I don't believe for a moment that he has some sort of special powers that are going to mesmerize the impressionable youth of America. He's most likely going to give some perfunctory, hortatory remarks about the importance of schools, paying attention to your teachers, why learning is important, etc. It would be highly surprising if he started touting the Van Jones worldview. It's not nefarious stuff.
• However (and you knew there'd be a however), there are two problems with the speech. First, his timing stinks. Our kids will be starting school next week and they have to get used to new routines, new teachers and have a lot to learn. They don't really have time to listen to a scheduled speech, even if it is from The One. And you'd better believe that some of the teachers resent the imposition.
• Which brings up the second issue: Obama doesn't seem to understand that he is completely overexposed right now. He has made himself ubiquitous since January 20. He's everywhere, all the time. He's also going to make a speech next week to a joint session of Congress to tout his latest version of Obama Care. Frankly, I have neither the time nor the inclination to stop what I'm doing to receive instruction from the President of the United States at his whim. My sense is that the healthcare debate signals two things: people are worried about what Obama is planning; and an increasing number of people would simply like to move beyond the dramatics and, shall we say, move on? Obama went on vacation this week. It would be better for him if he'd extend that for another week or two and stop getting in America's face for a while.
• In re Van Jones: yes, I agree completely with my conservative brethren, it's an outrage that a 9-11 Truther and Mumia supporter holds high office in the Obama administration, in a position that has accountability to no one but Mr. Obama himself. It's also an outrage that our mainstream media isn't concerned in the least that a whackjob like Jones is in position. Can you imagine the consternation there would have been if a President McCain had decided to make someone like Alex Jones a czar of something or other?
• It's all true and most of it is irrelevant. We're way past the time where it matters whether the MSM is fair to conservative views. They aren't and won't be. That's how it is. And of course Obama never should have appointed Jones in the first place and it says something bad about Obama that he did, but it's no surprise.
• The larger issue is the number of unaccountable czars this administration has. I know, I know -- Republican presidents have had czars, too. Bill Bennett made his bones as a drug czar under Bush 41 (and wasn't especially effective either, but that's a different post) and every president since has had some czars. Historically, presidents have selected czars to deal with a special project that is especially intractable and thus tough to solve through normal channels. The problem is that the czars are unaccountable to anyone but the president. I completely understand why a president would want that power, but I don't think it's desirable. There was a time when most Democrats would have thought so, too, but apparently it's only really a problem when a Republican is president.
• Van Jones is the czar for "green jobs." He has control over billions of dollars and no apparent oversight. And he's nuts. What could go wrong? But never mind that. It does raise another question or two. For example, why the hell do we have a Commerce Secretary? Wouldn't the encouragement of "green jobs" be the Secretary's bailiwick? And why do we have a czar (Kenneth Feinberg) who controls executive salaries at companies that have taken federal bailout money, in some cases against their will? The MSM may not be especially concerned about these matters, but word gets out.