You are currently browsing the tag archive for the ‘John Holdren’ tag.

I have been wanting to do a post on Cass Sunstein for a while now, but I kept hoping that he would not be approved. Sadly, he was approved by the Senate as President Obama’s newly confirmed administrator of the White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs. Technically he is not what the White House would refer to as a czar because he actually had to be approved unlike the others such as Mark Lloyd, John Holdren, and Van Jones (now resigned). But he holds by far the most outlandish, unbelievably ridiculous ideas I have ever seen come across our government. This guy may need real professional help, or he just might be the biggest tree hugging animal rights kook ever!

Cass Sunstein believes that animals think, feel, and deserve equal rights and treatment as human beings. He has many times quoted authors who compare animals to slaves and say that a dog is more rational than a human baby. One of these quotes that Sunstein quoted was directly from a late 18th century social reformer by the name of Jeremy Bentham having said, “The day may come, when the rest of the animal creation may acquire those rights which never could have been withholden from them but by the hand of tyranny.” And then he goes on to quote more. Can’t believe it? See it for your self here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OoiHIbwRhSo.

Cass Sunstein also believes that animals should be able to have an attorney and bring lawsuits against humans. He wants to ban hunting all together, which of course you can see how this would in a very huge way affect the 2nd amendment. Cass is a major supporter of gun control. Sunstein thinks we should not be allowed to eat meat, we should not be allowed to remove rodents from our home if it causes them pain, AND restrictions on FARMING to prevent unnecessary animal suffering. This man also believes that ALL human beings should be organ donors, in other words, we should not have a choice. And the list goes on. His opinions really are far from that of any democrat, republican, or independent that I know. He does not reflect the will of the people, maybe the animals, but certainly not the people.

Now, here we are one day after Cass Sunstein’s approval by the Senate and he is already trying to push a new interpretation to The Bill of Rights. And although this is a surprise to most of us just learning of Cass Sunstein, it is no surprise to those who nominated and approved him into office. He has written a book in 2004 called “The Second Bill of Rights: FDR’S Unfinished Revolution and Why We Need It More than Ever” which comes from President Roosevelt’s proposal for a completely new set of bill of rights in 1944. And as published on http://www.wnd.com, in 2005 at Yale Law School, Sunstein opened a conference titled “The Constitution in 2020,” which spoke about changing the nature of the Constitution by 2020. We have to let Washington know that we do not approve of this right away! This is not acceptable and we will not stand for them changing our Bill of Rights or our Constitution. They knew who they were approving into office with the partisan vote of 57-40, and with it they gave this man way too much power. Read more about him and his proposed mandates here: Obama’s Regulatory Chief Pushes New ‘Bill of Rights’.

Resources:

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=109529

http://gunowners.org/a090809.htm

Mark Lloyd, the newly appointed chief diversity officer at the Federal Communications Commission has an interesting stance on freedom of speech indeed. Although Mark Lloyd has stated that he finds the Fairness Doctrine unnecessary, his comments and previous speeches and writings prove that he does in fact support the overall goals of the Fairness Doctrine though be it through a back door method. Mark Lloyd does in fact support more regulation, more taxes and fines, increased government intervention into the commercial media such as public radio, and more in which he believes asserts diversity. Such as in the Center for America Progress proposal co-authored by Mark Lloyd which said:

“. . . a spectrum use fee should be levied on owners to directly support local, regional, and national public broadcasting. A fee based on a sliding scale (1 percent for small markets, 5 percent for the largest markets) would be distributed directly to the Corporation for Public Broadcasting with clear mandates to support local news and public affairs programming and to cover controversial and political issues in a fair and balanced manner. We estimate that such a fee would net between $100 million and $250 million.”

Mark Lloyd’s more popular public stance is one in which he praises Hugo Chavez. He praises the way that he took over the media and controlled what was once ran by the people of his nation. Lloyd calls Chavez “incredible” and “dramatic.” So, I guess Mark Lloyd is saying he approves of Hugo Chavez forcing private media out of business? It would appear that way. He has made his opinions very clear and even put them into writing as recently as 2006 in his book Prologue to a Farce: Communication and Democracy in America. In that book Lloyd reveals his opinion of the First Amendment (our freedom of speech) by stating this:

“It should be clear by now that my focus here is not freedom of speech or the press. This freedom is all too often an exaggeration. At the very least blind references to freedom of speech or press serves as a distraction from the critical examination of other communication policies. The purpose of free speech is warped to protect global corporations and block rules [by the government], fines, and regulations, that would promote democratic governance.”

Unbelievable! You see, not only does he not hold freedom of speech in any high esteem, but he seeks to do away with it to promote democratic governance. This should alarm you no matter who you are. This isn’t a matter of bipartisanship, it is a matter of telling you what to think. It is a matter of telling you what you can and cannot know. It is EXACTLY the same thing that Hugo Chavez has done in Venezuela, the same that Mark Lloyd has praised.

Now, I hate to be the barer of bad news, but this is yet another communist “czar” being put in the White House. Is there anyone else who thinks this is just a little suspicious that all these people being put in are fans of socialism or communism? There are more; John Holdren, Van Jones, and Mark Lloyd are just a couple that I have touched on. I have a great deal of concern for the future of our ability to voice our opinions. I have a great deal of concern for the future of our freedom as a whole. Media has such a big way of reaching out and forming community with others, no matter what your political opinion is, it should never be silenced.

Resources:

Prologue to a Farce: Communication and Democracy in America by Mark Lloyd

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ysqsa_TeLys

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/53195

http://www.newsmax.com/ernest_istook/obama_pelosi_/2009/08/17/248656.html

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=106808

You may think that the story of President Obama electing to have John Holdren as the head of his Science and Technology Policy department as old news, but with the recent fear mongering of the swine flu, global warming, and other such events, I believe it is very much still a live story in need of more research. At first glance in researching John Holdren you will find that in the 1970’s he was a major adjocate for compulsory abortions in the U.S. and a “Planetary Regime”.

Having co-authored Ecoscience, it was well known John Holdren’s stance on population control and the repercussions thought at the time of letting people breed freely. The methods to unknowingly sterilize a population included methods tried by the Nazi’s, Soviet’s, and communists such as adding infertility drugs to a national food or water supply, and forced abortion to name a few. It also goes into a radical and unrealistic stance on what could happen if population were to get out of control in reference to resources and environmental impact. Like I said before, this is all very easy to find.

Now, the not so easy to find was the recent opinions of Mr. Holdren. In 1995 he also co-authored an essay called, The Meaning of Sustainability: Biogeophysical Aspects, published by the World Bank on the need to eventually have “world of zero net physical growth” and “population limitation” to sustain economic activity (ummm…very interesting considering the current economic events). Now suddenly, upon being appointed to a position in the White House his opinions change? In his White House interview he explained as stated by www.wnd.com, “when asked if he still felt population control was appropriate, health care and opportunities for women, as well as education, naturally create families more likely to have fewer children, thus solving the potential problems of population growth.” I don’t think so. Someone holding so tightly to a belief for so many years would not let it go so easily. Not to mention, Obama knows Holdren’s past, works, and beliefs having both gone to Harvard. Obama is no dummy, he would not have manged to get elected as President of the United States of America had that been the case.

In conclusion, the question in many minds at this time is if there is a connection between John Holdren’s past and the current events with the economic instability (made worse by the stimulus and will be more so by a passing of health care reform), myths of global warming, and the fear mongering of the H1N1 virus. One would have to wonder, with his new found powers as Science Czar and only having to answer to the President of the United States, not obligated to answer to Congress, John Holdren definitely warrants more scrutiny and a watchful eye on his handling of his office. Our founders would be rolling in their graves if they knew that the President gave such unlimited powers to an unelected official.

Resources:

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?pageId=103707

http://www.cnsnews.com/public/content/article.aspx?RsrcID=52080

Ecoscience: Population, Resources, Environment by Paul R. Ehrlich co-authored by John Holdren

The Meaning of Sustainability: Biogeophysical Aspects published by World Bank 1995 (full text available at http://www-wds.worldbank.org/servlet/WDSContentServer/WDSP/IB/1995/01/01/0000092
65_3961219103404/Rendered/PDF/multi0page.pdf

Posts By Category

Search Posts By Month