1. Current co-founder Joel Hyatt was kind of socially awkward: A thread running through Olbermann’s lawsuit is that Current tried to distance him from his representation, sometimes to disadvantage him in negotiations. But in this case, Olbermann makes a more personal allegation, that “Hyatt also attempted to isolate Olbermann from his professional representatives in an awkward attempt to form a close personal friendship with his new star.”

2. Current underinvested in its web presence, to the detriment of its audience base: Sometime, these charges are an opportunity for snark, as when the suit alleges “Stunningly, Al Gore’s network was not interested in establishing a strong internet presence.” But the suit also suggests that the network was slow to build out its web presence and wouldn’t allow Olbermann’s show to stream online, a hook that might have helped viewers who didn’t have Current or weren’t sure where to find the network on their channel lineups, continue to watch the program. “Current even refused Olbermann’s request and contractual right, to stream segments of the Program and additional web-only content over the Program Website. It is both sad and ironic that a channel owned and founded by Al Gore, for the stated purpose of creating an independent perspective, free from the control of large corporate interests, restricted the rights of its most celebrated commentator and Chief News Officer to fully broadcast his opinions over, of all things, the internet.”

3. Current’s facilities were a mess: This has been one of the most commonly reported points of dissension between Current and Olbermann, particularly after an electrical failure while the program was on-air led Olbermann to bring a candle on set. The lawsuit alleges that “Current President David Bohrman admitted ‘the 33rd St. facility is never going to be a professional facility. We need to move to HD, and a better location.’ He further admitted in that same e-mail ‘We are paying for a Porsche and getting a Yugo.’”

4. Hyatt behavior threatened Olbermann’s staff: “Hyatt’s leadership was highly erratic. Just days before the premiere of the Program, Hyatt even threatened to fire Olbermann and the loyal staff members who had followed him from MSNBC to Current. Hyatt behaved as if he had just paid Olbermann to become his puppet instead of the Chief News Officer of the network.”

5. Hyatt and Current were moustache-twirling blackmailers: “Hyatt blackmailed Olbermann into agreeing to put himself in a position that no other major talent in the entertainment or news industries has been forced into in decades: fending for himself without the benefit of hire advisors. Olbermann gave in to Hyatt’s blackmail for the purposes of saving the premiere of the Program and the jobs of those who worked on it. Olbermann left the meeting devastated at having discovered that he was working for a blackmailer.”

6. Hyatt doesn’t know how the television ratings system works: “The very success of the Program was compromised when Hyatt, displaying his utter lack of industry knowledge, ordered incorrect ratings data and then disseminated it to the media. In essence, Hyatt took what could have been a victory and turned it into an unrecoverable defeat. A show only has one opportunity to be launched. In reality, the Program’s premiere had higher ratings than both CNN and MSNBC in the key demographic for advertisers. The incorrect ratings purchased and disseminated by Hyatt, because they did not contain statistics for same day viewing through DVRs and other such methods, did not reveal that the Program had outrated MSNBC. Because Hyatt did not know that there were two types of ratings and ordered the cheaper ones, the Program missed out on its lone opportunity to tout its success.”

7. There are two journalists out there who Olbermann would take a pay cut to work with: This may be the biggest mystery of the lawsuit. Who in journalism does Olbermann like that much? “Olbermann even offered to reduce his own salary to help pay for two journalists with whom Olbermann had previously worked, who would have been immediately recognizable and had credibility with the ‘Countdown’ audience. Despite Olbermann’s generous offer and his proven track record of identifying star progressive voices, Hyatt ignored Olbermann’s advice, arrogantly believing in his own unproven eye for talent.”

8. Olbermann didn’t think the network should hire Jennifer Granholm or Cenk Uygur, but he really doesn’t like Uygur: “Hyatt and Bohrman asked Olbermann about the possibility of hiring Cenk Uygur. Olbermann told them that he did not believe Uygur would be a good choice. Olbermann opined to Bohrman that Uygur had difficulting separating facts from things he wanted to be true…It was, therefore, reasonable for Olbermann to decline to be associated with a host with a questionable journalistic standard and a show that was not up to the standards expected by the ‘Countdown’ audience.”

9. He’s also not much of a Van Jones fan: “The month prior, Bohrman had asked Olbermann’s opinion about a prospective show to be co-hosted by Granholm and Van Jones. Olbermann advised against it.”

10. Olbermann has a pretty low bar for what constitutes disparagement: The lawsuit refers to “Hyatt’s statements to the press, including The Wrap and the Daily Beast, disparaging Olbermann and referring to him as “replaceable.”

wendyannibell via Flickr

by Van Jones and Bill McKibben in a HuffPo repost

If you wanted one word to sum up this year, it’s “noisy.” From Tahrir Square to Zuccotti Park, people who have gotten tired of the old politics have started grabbing the microphone away from the authorities and speaking themselves. And not just speaking; chanting, drumming, singing-conjuring up a new future.

As 2011 draws to a close, diplomats from almost every country will be gathering in Durban, South Africa to talk about global warming. After the warmest year on record, and endless flood and drought, you’d think they’d be digging in for real change. But, alas, they seem likely to just go on spinning their wheels, unwilling to challenge the power of the fossil fuel industry. Leaders of the world’s major economies are privately admitting that they’re unlikely to reach a global deal until 2016 at the earliest. So here too people will need to raise their voices.

But since climate change is the first truly global problem, those people have to figure out how to raise a common message, one that crosses the boundaries of language. The best method — proven in countless social movements — may be music. Earlier this week, the global climate campaign 350.org launched “Radiowave.” It’s designed to take a single powerful song, and use it as the focus of a campaign that will sweep down Africa, one country at time, for the next few weeks, finally landing in South Africa just as the UN’s climate conference begins.

“People Power” (radio version) by 350RadioWaves. Uploaded with Gobbler

The song is written and performed by a who’s who of African musicians, from Angelique Kidjo to Maria Daulne and Ahmed Soultan. Hip Hop star Talib Kweli performs the opening verse. It’s in English and French, but also Berber, Arabic, Xhosa, Zulu, Setswana, Zolani Maholo, and Fon. But it’s not just the beat that crosses borders; the sentiment, once translated, will make sense to anyone suffering the early effects of climate change. As the South African hip hop star Jabulani Tsambo puts it:

“The weather is crazy

Our leaders are lazy

Their attitude doesn’t amaze me”

In almost every country, the refrain is the same: people desperate for jobs, but governments unwilling to unleash the green energy future in any substantial way. As the song’s chorus puts it, our nations are

“Drilling for energy, like you cannot see the Sun

This earth belongs to everyone

Mining for energy, like you’ve never felt the wind

Time to change so we can live.”

But it’s not just the musicians who will be sending this Radiowave crashing across a continent. In every city and province, volunteers have been trained to use the tune as a way get discussion going. They’ll be on radio stations night after night, informing people why climate change is important enough that some of the continent’s biggest stars are singing about it. In this country, radio is too often the province of xenophobes — but in most of the developing world it’s the way everyone communicates about what matters.

Environmentalists in particular have too often appealed mainly to the left side of the brain, the part that likes bar graphs and pie charts. But we’re learning — more and more, music and art are part of the fight — because, of course, they’re part of the human experience we want to preserve.

No one can predict what 2012 will bring. But around the world lots of us are committed to keeping it as noisy as we possibly can. We’ll sing more or less in tune — but mostly we’ll sing loud. We’re tired of not being heard.

– Van Jones is the president of Rebuild the Dream. Bill McKibben is the Founder of 350.org. This piece was originally published at the Huffington Post.

In an email to Climate Progress, green jobs champion Van Jones explains how the New York Times misrepresented his quotes and his views.

The story in question is “Number of Green Jobs Fails to Live Up to Promises.”  I debunked it here yesterday for completely ignoring the “explosive growth” documented by a recent Brookings study in the clean energy jobs sector –  even though the article cited the study!

I thought that the quotes attributed to Van Jones didn’t sound like the passionate, optimistic green jobs guru I have had the good fortune to get to know at the Center for American Progress:

President Obama once pledged to create five million green jobs over 10 years. Gov. Jerry Brown promised 500,000 clean-technology jobs statewide by the end of the decade. But the results so far suggest such numbers are a pipe dream.

“I won’t say I’m not frustrated,” said Van Jones, an Oakland activist who served briefly as Mr. Obama’s green-jobs czar….

#FAIL

I asked Jones if that’s what he really said, and he replied:

I was quoted in the story as “frustrated.” I am. But not in the way that the story suggests.

“Yes, I said I was frustrated. But I was talking about my frustration with the GOP, not the green jobs movement. The whole thing is ridiculous. Dirty energy backers blocked cap-and-trade, which would have spurred green innovation and enterprise. Now they complain that we have not had more progress regarding green jobs?

That would be like someone tripping a racehorse and then saying, “See, I told you that horse was no good!”

That is the frustration that I was talking about.

What I find inspiring, if not miraculous, is that the green economy continues to blossom — despite everything that has been thrown against it. Thanks for pointing that out in your column.

But it gets better, which is to say, worse.  The Times claims that Jones has scaled-back his projections:

SolFocus’s plans do not much resemble what Mr. Jones, the former Obama administration official, had in mind in his 2008 book, “The Green Collar Economy: How One Solution Can Fix Our Two Biggest Problems,” when he described the green economy as “Joe Sixpack with a hard hat and a lunch bucket going off to fix America,” and talked of millions of new jobs.

In an interview last week, though, he seemed to have scaled back. “The green economy as we initially conceived it,” Mr. Jones said, “was never supposed to save the entire global economy.”

Jones sets the record straight again:

Also: contrary to the article, I explicitly told the reporter that I stand beside my prediction that the clean energy sector will create millions of jobs. But I warned him that a majority of those jobs could end up in China soon, unless DC starts acting aggressively. China’s government has been moving quickly to gobble up global enterprises and industries. Meanwhile, DC has been missing in action since the mid-term elections.

Most troubling,  the recession cost us nearly 10 million jobs, and there are an additional 15 million underemployed people in the United States. To fix America’s economy single-handedly, the clean energy sector would have to generate 10-25 million jobs, all by itself. We never said we could create 10-25M US clean energy jobs, under any scenario.

The most enthusiastic backers were debating numbers in the 3-5M range — and that was over a decade or longer, WITH cap and trade securely in place. We can still achieve those numbers — with the right policies, innovations and enterprises. And those are very big numbers, worthy of the effort. But unless we fix our trade policy, get our currency valued properly and reform the financial sector, we will still be short 7-22 million jobs. So, no: the clean energy sector cannot generate enough jobs to erase all of the damage that the Great Recession did to America or the world. Growing this sector is an absolutely necessary, but not ultimately sufficient, part of the solution.

I conveyed all of this at length — in a one-hour interview — but the main quotes that made it through were the ones that reinforced the premise of the article. Thanks for helping to correct the record.

We all wonder sometimes whether it is worth giving extended interviews to reporters, knowing that they may just pick out one or two words or phrases that match their desired narrative.  Fortunately, most get it right.

But right now, with Obama down in the polls and overall job creation slow and the fossil-fuel-funded disinformers pushing lies about clean energy, many in the media want to tell yet another story of how Obama failed.

I’m as critical of Obama as anyone on climate change, but the narrative in the NY Times story is just false.  Clean energy jobs have soared in recent years — thanks in no small part to Obama’s stimulus bill, as well as the business community’s understanding of the threat posed by climate change, something this article is silent on.  The promise of millions of clean energy jobs was always based on the passage of policies that the GOP have so far, successfully torpedoed.  Yes, Obama deserves some blame for the failure of those policies, but I have always said that it is under 10% of the blame.  Some 60%  belongs to the right wing and its disiniformers, with another 30% to the media itself  for failing to tell the story — see “The failed presidency of Barack Obama, Part 2.”

It is the realities of global warming and peak oil that ensure the world will generate millions of clean energy jobs in the coming decade — and far more than that in the ensuing decades when we get truly serious.  This remains the story of the decade and the century.

Below are old comments from the earlier Facebook commenting system:

• The On Project

Agree that millions of jobs will come to fruition. And you’re right to say that peak oil will play a big role – something we discussed recently at The On Project, home to discussions surrounding Ocean Thermal Energy Conversion: http://www.theonproject.org/2011/peak-performance/?utm_source=thinkprogress&utm_medium=web&utm_campaign=comment-thinkprogress-jobs.

Peter S. Mizla · Top Commenter · Vernon, Connecticut

good to see Van defend himself- and expose the NYT for what it is……

remember this the NYT still does not perceive ACC as a threat to human kind- that they twisted & misrepresented Mr. Jones- is not surprising.

Douglas Clark · Boston College

Peter: You may be right, but did the Times run an editorial to this effect? Otherwise, what are you basing this comment on?
Joseph Michael Stancati · New York, New York

Douglas-

It’s based on the fact that in 2010, zero of the 80 biggest headlines on the front page of the New York Times had anything to do with climate change. Joe Romm reported this fact here on Climate Progress:

http://thinkprogress.org/romm/2011/01/03/207280/media-coverage-fell-off-the-map-in-2010/

That fact alone should tell you all you need to know about how seriously the New York Times takes climate change.

I issue a personal challenge to my beloved brother Glenn Beck. I will debate you anytime, anywhere, at any point. I’ll give you an hour, you give me five minutes. And I will stand up for our values. But you would have to stop talking about us and start talking to us.

You got one week left before your show goes off. My phone is ringing. Call me! Call me, Glenn Beck! And let’s have this fight. Let’s have this discussion. Let’s have this argument. Let’s have this battle of ideas. Battle of ideas. And let’s fight for liberty and justice for all.

Watch it (video courtesy of Free Speech TV):

Beck’s last show on Fox will take place on June 30, 2011. In late 2009, Beck introduced a “red phone” on his set, giving his prominent critics a direct line to call him. “Call me anytime, we want to have a dialogue,” Beck said. We’ll soon find out if he’s sincere about that.

Ten thousand young people descended on Washington for the Power Shift conference this weekend to call for bold action from government leaders to address climate change and create a clean energy economy for all. Many of these young people had a more specific, and personal, message for Congress: “I need a job.”

Inspired by passionate speeches addressing youth unemployment by AFL-CIO president Richard Trumka and green jobs visionary Van Jones, the members of the Briefcase Brigades are bringing attention to the epidemic of un- and under-employed millennials:

We are ready to work. We know the economy is in bad shape. We know the country is in trouble. We want to help. But first, we need jobs.

Watch the story of the Briefcase Brigades at Power Shift 2011:

On April 27th, while Congress is in recess and members are back in their districts, young people are creating Briefcase Brigades and going to their offices all around the country to demand Congress prioritize jobs over budget cuts.

According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, there are over 5 million young people who are out of work. That doesn’t count people with unpaid internships, people with low-wage jobs that don’t have health insurance, and people who went back to school because they couldn’t find a job.

Chances are you know one of these young people. Someone living with their parents long after they decided they wanted to move out. Someone working their second or third unpaid internship. Someone working several part time jobs, with no health insurance, who still struggles to make ends meet.

What if instead, these young people were given an opportunity to address some of the problems we hear about on television everyday? What if they were given the opportunity to help develop and deploy renewable energy technology? What if they were put to work repairing our crumbling infrastructure? What if they were given a chance to help design and build new products to help us compete with the rest of the world?

Then those youth would be working, paying taxes, paying their own rent, buying things, opening bank accounts and making investments. They might even start their own businesses and create more new jobs. They would be helping to get the economy working again.

Many young people, such as the leaders of WeatherizeDC and Solar Mosaic who came to the Power Shift conference, are already taking steps to create jobs and build a strong green economy. But we should not be left to try and solve the jobs crisis alone. Our elected officials, our representatives, should be a partner to young people in this challenge.

It’s time for Congress to stop talking about cuts and start talking about jobs.

Join us on April 27th. Get dressed up for a job interview, bring your resumé and a briefcase, and a few of your friends too. Go to your local Congressperson’s office and ask them what their plan is to address youth unemployment. Tell them we are ready to work, and ask them “Where are the jobs?”

Sign up to join an event or host on of your own at www.BriefcaseBrigades.org and follow @april27brigades on Twitter.

Van Jones had harsh words for the national political establishment. “You have to be wise enough to hold both parties to high standards,” he said:

While they’re stuck on stupid in DC, your generation is rising.

Van Jones also discussed President Barack Obama, who hired him as a green jobs adviser but then let him go after Jones’ politics and person came under a relentless barrage from Fox News’ Glenn Beck. Jones argued that President Obama is like the friend who has the potential to be an A-plus student, but is only getting C’s and D’s. Jones told the assembled youth from campuses around the nation they can be a “hero for making sure your friend gets an A-plus on his presidency.”

Van Jones described how we have a civilization “fueled by death” — fossil fuels from plants and animals that died millions of years ago:

We pull out of the ground death. We burn death in our power plants. Why do we get shocked when we get death in our sky as global warming, death in our oceans as oil spills, death in our children’s lungs as asthma and cancer?

The strongest moments of his speech came when he discussed America’s basic principles, in the context of arguing with “your uncle Joe” who watches Fox News at the Thanksgiving table. “Don’t you believe in liberty?” Van asked. “Shouldn’t we have the right as Americans to be energy producers?” he asked. “Shouldn’t we have the right and liberty to be free from energy companies who dictate how much we pay, what air we breathe?” Coal and oil companies try to divide us with cultural stereotypes and political ideology, when a green economy is actually the truly American economy:

The stereotype is that solar power is just hippie power. But it’s also cowboy power, farmer power, rancher power, and Appalachian mountain power!

Van Jones addressed the Tea Party movement that sees him as a “terrorist” and “communist.” “I’m glad our sisters and brothers in the Tea Party are talking about liberty,” he said. However, he said, they’re missing something important. The Pledge of Allegiance doesn’t just talk about liberty being integral to our nation:

The Pledge of Allegiance says liberty and justice for all!

With his voiced raised to the diverse crowd, Van Jones said “justice for all” includes justice for minorities, justice for women, justice for gays, and justice for the poor.

“Shift the power!” Van Jones concluded to thunderous applause.

Photo by Josh Lopez. Follow @PowerShift11 on Twitter.

Van Jones had harsh words for the national political establishment. “You have to be wise enough to hold both parties to high standards,” he said:

While they’re stuck on stupid in DC, your generation is rising.

Van Jones also discussed President Barack Obama, who hired him as a green jobs adviser but then let him go after Jones’ politics and person came under a relentless barrage from Fox News’ Glenn Beck. Jones argued that President Obama is like the friend who has the potential to be an A-plus student, but is only getting C’s and D’s. Jones told the assembled youth from campuses around the nation they can be a “hero for making sure your friend gets an A-plus on his presidency.”

Van Jones described how we have a civilization “fueled by death” — fossil fuels from plants and animals that died millions of years ago:

We pull out of the ground death. We burn death in our power plants. Why do we get shocked when we get death in our sky as global warming, death in our oceans as oil spills, death in our children’s lungs as asthma and cancer?

The strongest moments of his speech came when he discussed America’s basic principles, in the context of arguing with “your uncle Joe” who watches Fox News at the Thanksgiving table. “Don’t you believe in liberty?” Van asked. “Shouldn’t we have the right as Americans to be energy producers?” he asked. “Shouldn’t we have the right and liberty to be free from energy companies who dictate how much we pay, what air we breathe?” Coal and oil companies try to divide us with cultural stereotypes and political ideology, when a green economy is actually the truly American economy:

The stereotype is that solar power is just hippie power. But it’s also cowboy power, farmer power, rancher power, and Appalachian mountain power!

Van Jones addressed the Tea Party movement that sees him as a “terrorist” and “communist.” “I’m glad our sisters and brothers in the Tea Party are talking about liberty,” he said. However, he said, they’re missing something important. The Pledge of Allegiance doesn’t just talk about liberty being integral to our nation:

The Pledge of Allegiance says liberty and justice for all!

With his voiced raised to the diverse crowd, Van Jones said “justice for all” includes justice for minorities, justice for women, justice for gays, and justice for the poor.

“Shift the power!” Van Jones concluded to thunderous applause.

Photo by Josh Lopez. Follow @PowerShift11 on Twitter.

This year, the conference is focused on movement building, with the intent of being the largest organizer training session in history. As many as 10,000 youth activists will be trained in community organizing, facilitation, and campaign leadership, led by professionals from the New Organizing Institute, founded by Judith Freeman and Zach Exley, using the knowledge built by the likes of Marshall Ganz. The conference is departing from the earlier Power Shifts in 2007 and 2009 with the recognition that the youth climate movement can’t simply be part of the “chorus of advocates simply calling for change,” but must emerge “into a position of leadership“:

As the largest generation in American history, we are ready to build the green economy city by city, to transform higher education, to join forces on the ground with our religious and local community leaders so together we can build the future we know is essential for our long term success as a nation.

Over the course of Power Shift, participants will work through a series of sessions to learn powerful skills to share their own stories, create powerful strategies to motivate others in collective action, and lay the groundwork to launch grassroots campaigns across the country. The organizing trainings will condense what is usually a week-long course in progressive leadership methods into two four-hour sessions, Saturday and Sunday morning.

Sunday afternoon will be spent on action-oriented training on lobbying and nonviolent direct action, preparing participants for protests and lobbying Congress on Monday, April 18.

This ambitious schedule means that participants will have to choose just three from among over 100 panels taking place Saturday afternoon, ranging from panels on the Koch brothers and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, to workshops on sustainable agriculture and weatherization training. Or participants can instead join the Clean Economy Canvass, hitting the streets of Washington DC with Weatherize DC to teach homeowners about how they can participate in the green economy.

Keynotes will be delivered by climate leaders like Al Gore, Van Jones, EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson, and Bill McKibben. However, this year the real leadership will come from the Millennial generation, who are preparing for the awesome challenge of inheriting this earth.

This weekend, David and Charles Koch, the co-owners of the $100 billion Koch Industries pollution conglomerate, hosted their annual meeting in Palm Springs to coordinate strategy and raise funds for the conservative movement. For decades, the Kochs have quietly led a political agenda to concentrate America’s wealth and power among the richest few in the name of “liberty,” at the expense of the health and opportunity of the middle class.

At an event organized by Common Cause to “Uncloak the Kochs,” Center for American Progress senior fellow Van Jones described the threat that concentration of economic power poses to American liberty, democracy, and justice:

I hear a lot of talk now about liberty. There is a movement in our country that has grown up, the Tea Party movement, that has raised the question of liberty, and I say, “Thank goodness.” I’m glad that someone’s raised the question of liberty. There’s nothing more precious to an African American than liberty and justice for all. I’m glad to hear that somebody’s concerned about liberty.

But I think that what we have to be clear about is liberty always has two threats, there’s always two threats to liberty. One is the excessive concentration of political power — excessive concentration of political authority — the totalitarian threat to liberty. And that is a threat to watch out for. But there is another threat. And it is in our country a graver threat. And it is the threat that comes from excessive concentrations of economic power. Excessive concentrations of economic power in our country pose as big a threat, and frankly a greater threat than any concentration of political power. What we have to remember is that our republic is founded not just on the question of liberty, but also on democracy and justice.

And it is when the predatory, monopolistic dimension of the economic system starts to gain momentum, then the question of justice and democracy has to come forward too. Not just liberty and property rights, but justice and human rights, and democracy, and the people’s rights to be free from economic tyranny and economic domination. We will not live on a national plantation run by the Koch brothers. We’re not going to do that. We refuse to do that.

Watch it:

Sharing Jones’ concern, former Sen. Russ Feingold said recently that “this entire society is being dominated by corporate power in a way that may exceed what happened in the late nineteenth century, early twentieth century. The incredible power these institutions now have over the average person is just overwhelming.”

According to UC Santa Cruz professor G. William Domhoff, “the average income of the top 400″ richest Americans — many of whom are attending the Koch’s secret event — “tripled during the Clinton Administration and doubled during the first seven years of the Bush Administration.” The richest 0.01 percent of the United States — now receive 6 percent of all U.S. income.

Top on the Koch agenda is the elimination of the estate tax for billionaires, the end to an open Internet, and the prevention of limits on their toxic pollution. Spending millions of dollars a year — a tiny percent of their pollution-based wealth — the Koch brothers and their ideological allies intend to manipulate American democracy to protect their private economic interests. Their selfish pursuit puts everyone else’s liberties at terrible risk, threatening the “four essential human freedoms” articulated by President Frank Delano Roosevelt: freedom of speech, freedom of worship, from want, and freedom from fear.

On a press call on the report’s findings earlier today, Van Jones, who leads CAP’s Green Opportunity Initiative, echoed the warnings issued in the report. “There are other organizations that are trying to drive wedges between communities that are seeking solutions,” stated Jones. More specifically, Jones noted that “there is a greenwashing of hate that is going on in our country.” Anti-immigrant front groups are using “green concerns as a bludgeon against immigrants and low-income communities.” However, Jones points out that it’s possible to “have an America that is green and prosperous and welcoming of newcomers.” In fact, “immigrants are not a problem when it comes to the greening of a America, they are disproportionately part of the solution. Immigrant communities live greener life styles and support greener policies.”

Madrid produced similar findings:

The assumption that immigrant-driven population growth alone drives the U.S. carbon footprint is false. The 10 highest carbon-emitting cities are home to the smallest immigrant populations. The cities with the lowest carbon footprint, on the other hand, have an average immigrant population of 26 percent.

Immigrants, especially recent immigrants, tend to lead “greener” lifestyles than the native-born and are more likely to use public transportation and practice sustainable habits like compact living, conservation, and recycling.

Immigrants, who are largely low income, are also more likely to have their lives disrupted by extreme weather events and other adverse effects of climate change. Immigrants are disproportionately hurt by the dirty energy economy and face unique environmental challenges. Consequently, they fight for greener solutions, including challenging the use of hazardous pesticides in the agricultural fields where many immigrants work.

2010 polls of key electoral states find that immigrant-rich communities overwhelmingly favor policy that will create green jobs and tend to support congressional candidates who back efforts to fight global warming.

I’ve written extensively about the claims made by anti-immigrant “environmental” front groups in the past. Those organizations include NumbersUSA, the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS), the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), Progressives for Immigration Reform, and others. Most recently, FAIR released “The Environmentalist’s Guide to a Sensible Immigration Policy.” The report connects immigration to “pollution, sprawl, congestion, and ecological degradation,” complaining that “so-called environmentalists pretend as if this connection does not exist.”

On the call, Madrid noted that “It’s important that we not let these kind of false answers go unanswered or unchallenged.” Madrid explained that environmentalists aren’t “ignoring” the connection between immigrants and environmental degradation, rather, evidence actually suggests the contrary. “These organizations are not part of the mainstream environmental movement,” affirmed Madrid. A representative from the Sierra Club who happened to be listening to the call backed Madrid’s claims.

Today, Center for American Progress Senior Fellow Van Jones spoke to ThinkProgress about Prop 23 and the oil interests polluting the energy debate. Asked about the influence of Koch in supporting Prop 23, Jones slammed the company for “trying to shove” its politics on California. To respond to the Tea Parties and other radical right groups, many of which have been organized by Koch and big business fronts, Jones encouraged the public to “stay involved and to get involved,” because otherwise the people “screaming and yelling at these Tea Party events” will win control of government. He added, “I don’t think you want the Tea Party running your community, running your family, running your government”:

JONES: Koch Industries has promoted awful environmental policies. They’ve been literally poisoning rivers, poisoning streams, and making money off of that. They’ve promoted now this awful economic idea that if you grow new industries in California you somehow hurt the economy. That’s nuts. And now they’re promoting bad politics by backing I think extreme movements in the United States. Here you have a bad actor, three strikes and you’re out. They’re bad on the environment in terms of their practices, they’re bad in terms of their economic philosophy they’re trying to shove down the throats of California, and they’re bad in their politics in terms of their supporting extreme political ideas in America. I think if you start connecting those dots, California voters are very sophisticated, and I don’t think any of them think the people who run Koch Industries wake up in the morning thinking how can Californians have better jobs? [...]

JONES: If you think things are bad now, what will happen when the people are screaming and yelling at these Tea Party events are actually in charge of your government, and in charge of your life, and in charge of your kids’ future? That is, maybe you have some hope fatigue, but you got a lot of reason to be fearful enough I think to stay involved and to get involved. I don’t think you want the Tea Party running your community, running your family, running your government.

Watch it:

As Jones states, Koch is not only corrosive to our politics because of its funding of angry and paranoid Tea Parties, but the company also manipulates the political system to pad its profits. For instance, Business Week reported on how Koch Industries used then-Sen. Bob Dole (R-KS) to try to suppress an investigation into Koch Industries’ massive theft of oil from Indian reservations. In another case, Koch Industries faced a $55 million civil suit for causing more than 300 oil spills over a five-year period. Again, Dole, a major recipient of Koch money and support, sponsored a bill that would allow Koch to easily defend itself from the oil spill charges. After Koch helped to elect George Bush in 2000, the Bush Justice Department abruptly settled a criminal case with $350 million in penalties Koch faced for discharging toxic chemicals from a refinery in Corpus Cristi, Texas.

Why is the “Kochtopus” flexing its muscle of campaign donations, Tea Parties, and front groups to enact the clean energy-killing Prop 23? In its corporate newsletter, Koch Industries explicitly states that the low carbon fuel standard California is set to adopt to comply with AB 32 carbon emissions regulations would harm its bottom line because Koch imports mostly high-carbon crude oil from Canada. Another Koch newsletter warns that its Pine Bend Refinery in Minnesota specializing in high-carbon Canadian crude would become much less profitable for Koch if low fuel standards mirroring AB 32 are adopted around the country.

The country’s frustrated, and the President has not had his megaphone moment. Remember the last president. After 9-11, people were very frustrated. They said, you know, “Where is the President?” et cetera, et cetera. He couldn’t find his voice. And then he’s stumbling at the megaphone moment. And he stood up, and he said, “They’re gonna hear from us,” you know, “soon.” And then the country said, “Okay. He gets it.”

The President has not yet had his megaphone moment. When he has it, things will calm down, but in the meantime, what we wind up doing is distracting ourselves with, “Was he mad enough?” “Is he not mad enough?” “Well, he said ‘ass.’” “Well, he said ‘jackass’ about Kanye. Well, let’s talk about Kanye.”

People actually just want to be called to service: “What are we supposed to do, Mr. President? And we will do it.” That’s what’s missing.

Watch it:

Obama agrees with Van Jones. “In the same way that our view of our vulnerabilities and our foreign policy was shaped profoundly by 9/11,” the president told Politico, “I think this disaster is going to shape how we think about the environment and energy for many years to come.” Van Jones also predicted that “people are going to be shocked” by Obama’s “passion” in his address to the American public tomorrow:

You’re going to see him down, boots on the ground. You’re going to see him speaking more from his heart, and people are going to be shocked when they actually hear how much passion this president has to see a foreign company come over here, corrupt our government, kill innocent workers, slag up the coastline, destroy the ecology and economy in an American region that has been a jewel for us. When you hear his passion, I think people are going to be shocked. And then we’re not going to be talking about the profanity; we’re going to be talking about the profundity – of having a president that cares as much as the President does care.

Forty years after the first Earth Day, we’re now embarking on Earth Day 2.0, with a different kind of environmentalism. Sleeves rolled up, hard hat, lunch bucket — that’s going to become the image of the environmentalist rather than just our beloved tree huggers.

We’re going to see a tug of war now between the interests that want to keep things in the old way and people that want to do things in a new way. Why is it important for ordinary voices to be heard? Because, frankly, if we had a clean energy economy, we would have more work, more wealth, and better health for regular people. That’s what’s not getting through. There are way more jobs putting up solar panels, building smart batteries, making wind turbines, putting them up, than we will ever have again in America in the coal lines. Period.

We need to be moving toward a technology-based job agenda rather than continuing to pull down on our natural resources that we are now beginning to see dwindle here in America. You’ll have more wealth. There are way more entrepreneurial opportunities for new businesses and new products and new services in the clean energy space. Not many people are going to go out and start an oil company tomorrow. But people can go start a solar company tomorrow.

So Earth Day 2.0 now just means straight-up common sense. There’s more wealth to be had for ordinary people in a new economy. And also from a health point of view, the green agenda is about cleaner air, cleaner water, healthier food. And so the stuff that ordinary people are dealing with—the questions around work, wealth, and health—we have much better answers, those of us who are champions for the green economy, than the people who are the champions of the dirty energy economy.

Listen to the podcast with Van Jones.

Will it be big enough and strong enough to avoid eco-apocalypse anyway? There’s a robust policy discussion about this, it’s called Copenhagen, it’s called cap and trade. . .

Secondly, will America get our fair share of the green jobs that are created in the global economy? . . .

But the third question is: will all Americans have a fair shot at America’s fair share? And there is not yet a big robust policy discussion about that. Will all Americans have a fair shot at America’s fair share? And I think that is going to be a critical piece of the puzzle here that actually helps to solve the rest of it. If all Americans are likely to get a fair shot at America’s fair share, then we’ll be a lot more aggressive about getting the renewable energy standard in place, we’ll be a lot more aggressive about getting smart climate policy in place, because everybody’s going to see that they have a dog in their race.

Watch it:

The three questions of ecological sufficiency, economic competitiveness, and societal equity underlie green economic policy debate. Another way of understanding the issues is the scale at which they are being primarily addressed — ecological sufficiency on the international stage, economic competitiveness on the national level, and societal equity at the local.

“If we don’t start having the robust policy conversation right now about inclusion and equal opportunity in the green economy, not only is that a policy failure,” Van Jones concluded, “but also political failure, which will ensure an economic and ecological failure.”

BECK: To Van Jones … I appreciate the fact that you love me. And as my eternal brother, I love you as well. Now, it’s never been a personal thing and I’m not sure why you’re trying to make it a personal issue. But it’s not a personal thing. It never has been. I was somebody who didn’t want you fired.

Watch it:

Later in the show, one of Beck’s listeners called in and explained that he presented Jones with a copy of one of Beck’s books for an autograph; the former White House advisor gladly autographed the book, writing, “Let’s be one country!” Beck offered the the listener $1000 and an autographed edition of a different one of his books for the book, and the listener agreed to give it to Beck. The hate radio host plans to use it to fundraise for his August 28, 2010, rally in Washington, D.C., “Restoring Honor.”

Last thing I want to say is this: To my fellow countryman, Mr. Glenn Beck. I see you, and I love you, brother. I love you, and you cannot do anything about it. I love you, and you cannot do anything about it. Let’s be one country! Let’s be one country! Let’s get the job done!

Watch it:

As the New York Times notes, ironically, local Fox affiliate stations carried Jones’ speech live last night. This past week, the Center for American Progress announced that Jones will be rejoining the think tank as a Senior Fellow and leader of the new Green Opportunity Initiative, which will focus on “creating economic opportunity in distressed communities.” He will also be teaching environmental and economic policy as part of a one-year fellowship at Princeton University.

. . . You’ve never seen a Columbine done by a black child . . . the white polluters and the white environmentalists are basically steering poison into the people-of-color communities . . . Wait a minute, aren’t you an oil company? Aren’t you killing —s in Nigeria? Hold on a second . . . some cowboy cliques in the police department who have a frat boy mentality . . . the President of the United States sounded like a crack head . . . like a crack head trying to lick the crack pipe for a fix . . . the answer to that is they’re a—s. And Obama’s not an a—e . . .

Watch it:

It is certainly true that Van Jones has been a harsh, sometimes incendiary critic of polluters and social and racial injustice. But he has always confronted the difficult issues of race and pollution with humor and compassion:

“You’ve never seen a Columbine done by a black child” Excerpted from a 2006 speech about social justice, Van Jones expresses his anger that both white and black young men are suffering in this country, and asks for concern, love, and compassion for young men.

“the white polluters and the white environmentalists are basically steering poison” Clipped from a January 2008 interview, Van Jones was explaining how the environmental movement evolved over the 20th century with the influence of Silent Spring and the environmental justice movement. He talks about how he is part of the “third wave” of environmentalism that is “solution oriented” and “investment oriented,” and how to make it “rainbow from the beginning.”

“Wait a minute, aren’t you an oil company? Aren’t you killing —s in Nigeria?” Date unknown. In a marginally longer excerpt used by Glenn Beck to connect progressives to terrorists, it is apparent Jones is criticizing the misleading greenwashing campaigns by companies like Royal Dutch Shell, who paid $15.5 million to settle lawsuits against the company for complicity in human rights abuses against the Ogoni people in the Niger Delta, including executions and torture.

“some cowboy cliques in the police department who have a frat boy mentality” In 2005, Bay Area Police Watch president Van Jones criticized members of the San Francisco Police Department who “ignored the diversity training” and created homophobic, misogynistic, and racist videos. Twenty officers were suspended, and the creator of the videos has since resigned. The chief of police called the videos “egregious, shameful, and despicable.”

“the President of the United States sounded like a crack head” Excerpted from his hour-long 2008 address to the Unitarian Universalist Association of Congregations, Jones mocked President Bush for begging the king of Saudi Arabia to increase oil production. Before stepping down from his White House position, Van Jones apologized.

“the answer to that is they’re a—s” Cut from a February, 2009 lecture to the Berkeley Energy and Resources Collaborative. Responding to a question about why Democrats “need” 60 senators to pass their agenda but Republicans didn’t, Jones explained that the Republicans are “assholes,” a “technical, political and scientific term” which he said also applies to himself. Before stepping down from his White House position, Van Jones apologized.

Not only were the Fox & Friends crew uninterested in context in their continued smear against Van Jones, they were unconcerned with accuracy. “Most of those were from before the time he was a green czar,” Doocy said, “and then of course they came to light and of course he had to resign from the Obama Cabinet.” In fact, Jones, who was never a member of the Cabinet, made none of the comments while at the White House.

More important than any impolite language, of course, is the reality of the dirty, deadly influence of polluters on our society, economy, and politics — which even the propaganda machine of Fox News cannot hide. Van Jones will receive his Image Award in a live broadcast Friday on Fox.

Transcript:

CARLSON: Let’s talk a little bit about Van Jones. Remember him? He was the “green jobs czar” under President Obama, officially the Council of Environmental Quality. And then a couple things started showing up about Van Jones like his past, and some comments that he made regarding Republicans and calling them not such a nice name. And that whole truther thing about 9/11.

VAN JONES [montage]: . . . You’ve never seen a Columbine done by a black child . . .

. . . the white polluters and the white environmentalists are basically steering poison into the African-American communities . . .

. . . Wait a minute, aren’t you an oil company? Aren’t you killing —s in Nigeria? Wait a minute . . .

. . . some cowboy cliques in the police department who have a frat boy mentality . . .

. . . the President of the United States sounded like a crack head . . . like a crack head trying to lick the crack pipe for a fix. . .

. . . the answer to that is they’re a—s. And Obama’s not an a—e . . .

DOOCEY: Okay. So those are some of his most spectacular sound bites that we’ve strung together in a montage form. Most of those were from before the time he was a green czar and then of course they came to light and of course he had to resign from the Obama Cabinet. Interestingly enough, the NAACP is deciding to give this guy one of their famous Image Awards. In fact, the CEO and president of the NAACP, Benjamin Todd Jealous, says the real Van Jones story is about how a young leader became the father of the green jobs movement. “In response to a longstanding job crisis in Oakland, California that he initiated, the Oakland Green Jobs Corps, this program has become a renowned model for numerous initiatives now up and running across America. In America we ultimately judge people on what they are doing today for tomorrow and not what they did yesterday. I am proud to give him the NAACP President’s award this Friday.”

KILMEADE: He’s also one of Time Magazine’s 100 Most influential people. So there. A lot of people say where did Van Jones go? Now we know at least one day where he’ll attend. I’m sure he’ll accept the award in person.

Jones will also be the recipient this Friday of an NAACP Image Award, celebrating Jones’ achievements as “one of America’s most effective and inspiring bridge-builders” to find “creative solutions to the ecological and economic crises.” According to NAACP president Benjamin Todd Jealous, Van Jones is an “American treasure“:

Van Jones is an American treasure. He is quite simply one of the few Americans in recent years to have generated powerful new ideas that are creating more jobs here. He penned the national bestseller, “The Green Collar Economy,” which provided the definitive blueprint for retooling American industry to create pathways out of poverty and generate a national economic recovery. He was a driving force behind passage of the 2007 Green Jobs Act. In fact, Van’s ideas have helped lead to the creation of tens of thousands of jobs across the industrial Midwest and throughout the nation’s decaying urban and rural areas.

John Podesta, President and CEO, Center for American Progress explains the Green Opportunity Initiative to be led by Van Jones:

Van is a pioneer in the effort to promote a clean, sustainable economy that works for all Americans. I’m proud that he’s coming back to CAP to focus on creating economic opportunity in distressed communities through the Green Opportunity Initiative and that he will be giving voice to those issues once again.

Jones will also have “a one-year joint appointment as a distinguished visiting fellow at Princeton University’s Center for African American Studies and Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs, where he will teach a seminar on environmental and economic policy.” Eddie Glaude Jr., chair of the Center for African American Studies, told the Washington Post that Van Jones is “the leading voice in the environmental justice movement.”