Gotta hand it to the right, they sure can pull a fast one.

[rdean]

C'mon...grow up.

You angry leftists are so quick to throw not only the 'racist' accusation, but the word 'lie'.

Now, here you are challenged to prove the lie charge, and you are unable to do so.

Were I a leftist, I would, of course, accuse you of 'lying' with your charge, as it is clear that the video provided in post #14 is in no way a lie, nor could you misunderstand my post which indicated that the vid was dispositive as to Fox being fair.

So, I'll simply leave you with the brand of immature, angry, sophomoric, spittle-spewing, left wing janissary, infused with the desire to paint opponents with vituperation, rather than banter about the value of each others' ideas.

There, now, isn't that more literate than 'lying racist'...

I do hope after your rant, you will proceed to answer my question: What was Mr. Brietbart's intention in posting only the portion of the Sherrod video which seems to indicate she is spewing nothing but racist comments? Was it, gasp, a desire to paint opponents (particularly black people) as angry racists?

What is Limbaugh's or Beck's "intent" when they take some innocuous comment uttered by someone in the Obama administration, or the president himself, and create an entire show about it?

Mr. Brietbart made his agenda clear when he began his website, i.e. to counter the multitude of left wing sites and publications.
He is doing just that.

Now, as for "a desire to paint opponents (particularly black people) as angry racists," this bit of projection on your part has given a glimpse into your attitude, mind, and agenda.

Moving on..."What is Limbaugh's or Beck's "intent" when they take some innocuous comment uttered by someone in the Obama administration,..." how lucky we Americans are to have the antidote to the left wing propaganda to which you subscribe.

The irony is that you have misused the word innocuous, which means "Having no adverse effect; harmless" and inadvertently, once again, shown who you are.

In my America it is hardly innocuous to have a self-proclaimed communist selected by the President, and another who looks to Mao for guidance in the same select group...again chosen by the President.

Perhaps a better strategy for you would have been to use President Obama's defense for his numerous missteps, as I believe he said early in his failed presidency, "Elections have consequences..."

That means that "I can put communists, loony scientists like Holdren, AG's who won't prosecute blacks if the victim is white, Medicare chiefs who plan on redistributing the wealth, or State Department officials who announce that the Arizona law is equivalent to Chinese human rights abuses..."

That's what 'elections have consequences' means....

and I don't see anything innocuous in the above.

How'd ya like that rant?

Loony scientists? Perfect, coming from the right, who depend on EVERYTHING they eat, wear, touch, see, listen too or live in from those "loony left wing scientists". Rich.

 

[KMAN]

Only six percent of posters will read that entire article.

Especially if there is no ink..... Looks like an opinion piece to me... Let me see, an opinion by a die hard lib....LOL Yep, about 6% will read it...

 

[rdean]

anyone notice how it is that every lefty IS ALWAYS THE POOR POOR VICTIM.

and of course it not ever their fault, as it's now FOX NEWS, THE RIGHTIES, BLAA BLAA BLAA.

lefties are either constantly OUTRAGED OR THE POOR VICTUM.

all together now.........awwwwwwwww

you can bet they wouldn't be shedding a tear if this had been a Republican.

Nobody in the media pays any attention to Republican shenanigans, that's why. The guy running for Governor of Colorado, for example, caught plagiarizing then blaming someone else for it. How much air time did that get? If it had been a Dem, and if it had happened even six months ago, we'd still be seeing it recycled by Republican bloggers. Hell, they're even still talking about Biden's plagiarizing a college thesis 40 years ago!!

Conservatives have the loudest voices this political cycle, and I know why. Do you?

It's because the right, that party of "morals", don't have "low" standards. They have "No" standards.

 

[Nonelitist]

anyone notice how it is that every lefty IS ALWAYS THE POOR POOR VICTIM.

and of course it not ever their fault, as it's now FOX NEWS, THE RIGHTIES, BLAA BLAA BLAA.

lefties are either constantly OUTRAGED OR THE POOR VICTUM.

all together now.........awwwwwwwww

you can bet they wouldn't be shedding a tear if this had been a Republican.

Nobody in the media pays any attention to Republican shenanigans, that's why. The guy running for Governor of Colorado, for example, caught plagiarizing then blaming someone else for it. How much air time did that get? If it had been a Dem, and if it had happened even six months ago, we'd still be seeing it recycled by Republican bloggers. Hell, they're even still talking about Biden's plagiarizing a college thesis 40 years ago!!

Conservatives have the loudest voices this political cycle, and I know why. Do you?

It's because the right, that party of "morals", don't have "low" standards. They have "No" standards.

Ya... thats right we have no morals (sarcasm)....

Are you trying to force your morals on us? A liberal wouldn't do that... would they?

 

[PoliticalChic]

I do hope after your rant, you will proceed to answer my question: What was Mr. Brietbart's intention in posting only the portion of the Sherrod video which seems to indicate she is spewing nothing but racist comments? Was it, gasp, a desire to paint opponents (particularly black people) as angry racists?

What is Limbaugh's or Beck's "intent" when they take some innocuous comment uttered by someone in the Obama administration, or the president himself, and create an entire show about it?

Mr. Brietbart made his agenda clear when he began his website, i.e. to counter the multitude of left wing sites and publications.
He is doing just that.

Now, as for "a desire to paint opponents (particularly black people) as angry racists," this bit of projection on your part has given a glimpse into your attitude, mind, and agenda.

Moving on..."What is Limbaugh's or Beck's "intent" when they take some innocuous comment uttered by someone in the Obama administration,..." how lucky we Americans are to have the antidote to the left wing propaganda to which you subscribe.

The irony is that you have misused the word innocuous, which means "Having no adverse effect; harmless" and inadvertently, once again, shown who you are.

In my America it is hardly innocuous to have a self-proclaimed communist selected by the President, and another who looks to Mao for guidance in the same select group...again chosen by the President.

Perhaps a better strategy for you would have been to use President Obama's defense for his numerous missteps, as I believe he said early in his failed presidency, "Elections have consequences..."

That means that "I can put communists, loony scientists like Holdren, AG's who won't prosecute blacks if the victim is white, Medicare chiefs who plan on redistributing the wealth, or State Department officials who announce that the Arizona law is equivalent to Chinese human rights abuses..."

That's what 'elections have consequences' means....

and I don't see anything innocuous in the above.

How'd ya like that rant?

Loony scientists? Perfect, coming from the right, who depend on EVERYTHING they eat, wear, touch, see, listen too or live in from those "loony left wing scientists". Rich.

Although I have often posted how uneducable you are, deanie, perhaps I can enlighten you as to what a loony scientist...albeit one chosen by the President, is..

Or does the taint extend to both you and the President?



"Holdren's radicalism dates back to the late 1960s. In 1969 Holdren wrote that it was imperative “to convince society and its leaders that there is no alternative but the cessation of our irresponsible, all-demanding, and all-consuming population growth.”

That same year, he and (the now largely discredited) professor of population studies Paul Ehrlich jointly predicted: “If … population control measures are not initiated immediately and effectively, all the technology man can bring to bear will not fend off the misery to come.” In 1971 Holdren and Ehrlich warned that “some form of ecocatastrophe, if not thermonuclear war, seems almost certain to overtake us before the end of the century.”

Viewing capitalism as an economic system that is inherently harmful to the natural environment, Holdren and Ehrlich in 1973 called for “a massive campaign … to de-develop the United States” and other Western nations in order to conserve energy and facilitate growth in underdeveloped countries."
'Science Czar' John P. Holdren's disturbing beliefs about America, capitalism and humanity

"Obama's Science Czar Wrote Book Advocating Forced Abortions, Sterilizing Americans By Poisoning Our Drinking Water "
Ehrlich, Paul R., Anne H. Ehrlich and John P. Holdren; Ecoscience:*... - White House

"He is also one of the main engineers of the Eugenics operation going on right now. A book he authored in 1977 advocates for extreme totalitarian measures to control the population. In this book he wrote that: Women could be forced to abort their pregnancies, whether they wanted to or not. The population at large could be sterilized by infertility drugs intentionally put into the nation's drinking water or in food. Single mothers and teen mothers should have their babies seized from them against their will and given away to other couples to raise. People who "contribute to social deterioration" (i.e. undesirables) "can be required by law to exercise reproductive responsibility" -- in other words, be compelled to have abortions or be sterilized. A transnational "Planetary Regime" should assume control of the global economy and also dictate the most intimate details of Americans' lives -- using an armed international police force."

"Holdren claimed that, "if the population control measures are not initiated immediately, and effectively, all the technology man can bring to bear will not fend off the misery to come."[10] In 1973 Holdren encouraged a decline in fertility to well below replacement in the United States, because "210 million now is too many and 280 million in 2040 is likely to be much too many"[11]. Currently, the U.S. population is 306,924,000[12]. In 1977 he co-authored (with Paul R. Ehrlich and Anne H. Ehrlich) Ecoscience: Population, Resources, Environment,[13] which discussed the possible role of a wide range of solutions to overpopulation, from voluntary family planning at one extreme, to a "planetary regime" of enforced population control at the other extreme."

John Holdren - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"Does being spectacularly wrong about a major issue in your field of expertise hurt your chances of becoming the presidential science advisor? Apparently not, judging by reports from DotEarth and ScienceInsider that Barack Obama will name John P. Holdren as his science advisor on Saturday. [UPDATE: Mr. Obama did indeed pick Dr. Holdren.] "

"In 1980 Dr. Holdren helped select five metals — chrome, copper, nickel, tin and tungsten — and joined Dr. Ehrlich and Dr. Harte in betting $1,000 that those metals would be more expensive ten years later. They turned out to be wrong on all five metals, and had to pay up when the bet came due in 1990. "

"Dr. Holdren’s resistance to dissenting views was also on display earlier this year in an article asserting that climate skeptics are “dangerous.” (You can read about the response to that article at DotEarth.)"

Flawed Science Advice for Obama? - TierneyLab Blog - NYTimes.com

I will assume that a non-reponse to the above data will be the equivalent of running and hiding.

 

[MaggieMae]

Not to mention... on the local news today, they had a caller trying to defend this racist bitch saying "she was taken out of context"... the problem is that she sure reveled in riling up the crowd with her story of 'sticking it to this white farmer'... and the crowd would not be knowing that she would be adding more at the end, was SURE APPLAUDING her story of what she did... showing even more the racist bullshit of the NAACP

But we will have the leftists defending racism once again, as long as it is within their ranks

I take it you haven't seen the entire video.

I take it you did not hear the racist motherfuckers applauding during her story, all the while not knowing what she had to say at the end

So? Applauding when someone is speaking means squat, especially if the person is speaking to a friendly audience, stupid.

Why were those white folks cheering when Michelle Bachman yelled out from her megaphone last week that "liberals share a common cause with radical Islam"? Did they all really believe it, or were they simply revved up?

 

[MaggieMae]

C'mon...grow up.

You angry leftists are so quick to throw not only the 'racist' accusation, but the word 'lie'.

Now, here you are challenged to prove the lie charge, and you are unable to do so.

Were I a leftist, I would, of course, accuse you of 'lying' with your charge, as it is clear that the video provided in post #14 is in no way a lie, nor could you misunderstand my post which indicated that the vid was dispositive as to Fox being fair.

So, I'll simply leave you with the brand of immature, angry, sophomoric, spittle-spewing, left wing janissary, infused with the desire to paint opponents with vituperation, rather than banter about the value of each others' ideas.

There, now, isn't that more literate than 'lying racist'...

I do hope after your rant, you will proceed to answer my question: What was Mr. Brietbart's intention in posting only the portion of the Sherrod video which seems to indicate she is spewing nothing but racist comments? Was it, gasp, a desire to paint opponents (particularly black people) as angry racists?

What is Limbaugh's or Beck's "intent" when they take some innocuous comment uttered by someone in the Obama administration, or the president himself, and create an entire show about it?

Mr. Brietbart made his agenda clear when he began his website, i.e. to counter the multitude of left wing sites and publications.
He is doing just that.

Now, as for "a desire to paint opponents (particularly black people) as angry racists," this bit of projection on your part has given a glimpse into your attitude, mind, and agenda.

Moving on..."What is Limbaugh's or Beck's "intent" when they take some innocuous comment uttered by someone in the Obama administration,..." how lucky we Americans are to have the antidote to the left wing propaganda to which you subscribe.

The irony is that you have misused the word innocuous, which means "Having no adverse effect; harmless" and inadvertently, once again, shown who you are.

In my America it is hardly innocuous to have a self-proclaimed communist selected by the President, and another who looks to Mao for guidance in the same select group...again chosen by the President.

Perhaps a better strategy for you would have been to use President Obama's defense for his numerous missteps, as I believe he said early in his failed presidency, "Elections have consequences..."

That means that "I can put communists, loony scientists like Holdren, AG's who won't prosecute blacks if the victim is white, Medicare chiefs who plan on redistributing the wealth, or State Department officials who announce that the Arizona law is equivalent to Chinese human rights abuses..."

That's what 'elections have consequences' means....

and I don't see anything innocuous in the above.

How'd ya like that rant?

--->whoosh--->

First of all, I guessed what Andrew Briebart's "agenda" was from the outset. My specific question was his INTENT in cutting the video to only reveal parts which fit that agenda. To which you added your spin.

Second, I correctly use the word "innocuous" because I refer to endless rants by Beck, et al., over a single statement or source of minor irritation that they turn into a theme for their entire programs. Recently Beck was shrieking that Obama was going to start murdering tea party members. He shockingly mocked Malia Obama for about a half hour not too long ago when she had asked her father if he had "plugged the hole yet." But you get my gist.

None of that crap has a single thing to do with the serious ISSUES OF THE DAY. So what IS their intent? To denegrate as much as possible the president and the office; to continue the ignorant drumbeat, as you do, that Obama's intent is to install a Socialist/Communist regime. The "intent" is hardly to "to counter the multitude of left wing sites and publications." They embellish upon snippets of information and flat out lie.

 

[MaggieMae]

Mr. Brietbart made his agenda clear when he began his website, i.e. to counter the multitude of left wing sites and publications.
He is doing just that.

Now, as for "a desire to paint opponents (particularly black people) as angry racists," this bit of projection on your part has given a glimpse into your attitude, mind, and agenda.

Moving on..."What is Limbaugh's or Beck's "intent" when they take some innocuous comment uttered by someone in the Obama administration,..." how lucky we Americans are to have the antidote to the left wing propaganda to which you subscribe.

The irony is that you have misused the word innocuous, which means "Having no adverse effect; harmless" and inadvertently, once again, shown who you are.

In my America it is hardly innocuous to have a self-proclaimed communist selected by the President, and another who looks to Mao for guidance in the same select group...again chosen by the President.

Perhaps a better strategy for you would have been to use President Obama's defense for his numerous missteps, as I believe he said early in his failed presidency, "Elections have consequences..."

That means that "I can put communists, loony scientists like Holdren, AG's who won't prosecute blacks if the victim is white, Medicare chiefs who plan on redistributing the wealth, or State Department officials who announce that the Arizona law is equivalent to Chinese human rights abuses..."

That's what 'elections have consequences' means....

and I don't see anything innocuous in the above.

How'd ya like that rant?

Loony scientists? Perfect, coming from the right, who depend on EVERYTHING they eat, wear, touch, see, listen too or live in from those "loony left wing scientists". Rich.

Although I have often posted how uneducable you are, deanie, perhaps I can enlighten you as to what a loony scientist...albeit one chosen by the President, is..

Or does the taint extend to both you and the President?



"Holdren's radicalism dates back to the late 1960s. In 1969 Holdren wrote that it was imperative “to convince society and its leaders that there is no alternative but the cessation of our irresponsible, all-demanding, and all-consuming population growth.”

That same year, he and (the now largely discredited) professor of population studies Paul Ehrlich jointly predicted: “If … population control measures are not initiated immediately and effectively, all the technology man can bring to bear will not fend off the misery to come.” In 1971 Holdren and Ehrlich warned that “some form of ecocatastrophe, if not thermonuclear war, seems almost certain to overtake us before the end of the century.”

Viewing capitalism as an economic system that is inherently harmful to the natural environment, Holdren and Ehrlich in 1973 called for “a massive campaign … to de-develop the United States” and other Western nations in order to conserve energy and facilitate growth in underdeveloped countries."
'Science Czar' John P. Holdren's disturbing beliefs about America, capitalism and humanity

"Obama's Science Czar Wrote Book Advocating Forced Abortions, Sterilizing Americans By Poisoning Our Drinking Water "
Ehrlich, Paul R., Anne H. Ehrlich and John P. Holdren; Ecoscience:*... - White House

"He is also one of the main engineers of the Eugenics operation going on right now. A book he authored in 1977 advocates for extreme totalitarian measures to control the population. In this book he wrote that: Women could be forced to abort their pregnancies, whether they wanted to or not. The population at large could be sterilized by infertility drugs intentionally put into the nation's drinking water or in food. Single mothers and teen mothers should have their babies seized from them against their will and given away to other couples to raise. People who "contribute to social deterioration" (i.e. undesirables) "can be required by law to exercise reproductive responsibility" -- in other words, be compelled to have abortions or be sterilized. A transnational "Planetary Regime" should assume control of the global economy and also dictate the most intimate details of Americans' lives -- using an armed international police force."

"Holdren claimed that, "if the population control measures are not initiated immediately, and effectively, all the technology man can bring to bear will not fend off the misery to come."[10] In 1973 Holdren encouraged a decline in fertility to well below replacement in the United States, because "210 million now is too many and 280 million in 2040 is likely to be much too many"[11]. Currently, the U.S. population is 306,924,000[12]. In 1977 he co-authored (with Paul R. Ehrlich and Anne H. Ehrlich) Ecoscience: Population, Resources, Environment,[13] which discussed the possible role of a wide range of solutions to overpopulation, from voluntary family planning at one extreme, to a "planetary regime" of enforced population control at the other extreme."

John Holdren - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"Does being spectacularly wrong about a major issue in your field of expertise hurt your chances of becoming the presidential science advisor? Apparently not, judging by reports from DotEarth and ScienceInsider that Barack Obama will name John P. Holdren as his science advisor on Saturday. [UPDATE: Mr. Obama did indeed pick Dr. Holdren.] "

"In 1980 Dr. Holdren helped select five metals — chrome, copper, nickel, tin and tungsten — and joined Dr. Ehrlich and Dr. Harte in betting $1,000 that those metals would be more expensive ten years later. They turned out to be wrong on all five metals, and had to pay up when the bet came due in 1990. "

"Dr. Holdren’s resistance to dissenting views was also on display earlier this year in an article asserting that climate skeptics are “dangerous.” (You can read about the response to that article at DotEarth.)"

Flawed Science Advice for Obama? - TierneyLab Blog - NYTimes.com

I will assume that a non-reponse to the above data will be the equivalent of running and hiding.

Funny how population control is acceptable for the right as long as it is contained in immigration reform.

 

[WillowTree]

Shirley Sherrod, we now know that her video was edited, yet it was played on Fox again and again. And when poor Shirley was forced to resign, Fox comes out with a report, just tonight, that Obama threw an "innocent" woman under the bus. Now, Fox says she's innocent. Only now.
What video? What report?

Then there's James O’Keefe and Acorn. A single Republican, able to bring down an organization that helped the poor, from spliced together video tapes. Well, he is getting sued. But, "he did it". Now all those poor people are a little more poor.
WTF are you talking about?

Then there were Republican leaders privately telling Obama that they would work with him and then publicly, saying they would do everything they could to bring him down (they called it "Waterloo"). And they did. And poor Obama believed them time and time again. I wonder if he believes them now?
"They" who? Which Republican leaders?

There was Iraq. That was because of WMDs, no, because of yellow-cake, no, it was to bring "freedom", no, it was.....
How many years back are we going to go here?

There was the 2.4 trillion dollar tax cut. Supposed to bring jobs. And it did. It brought them to China and India and even Mexico.
Still looking backwards?

Then there was April 16th 2008, “Healthcare Decisions Day,” proclaimed by the former Gov. of Alaska, Sarah Palin. In fact, it was such a good idea, that Democrats used the SAME legislation in the Health Care Bill. Only Sarah stopped calling it, "Healthcare Decisions Day", no, instead she called it "death panels" and "kill grandma". Another fast one.
Never heard of it..... Link?

And this unemployment bill? Stripped of everything that would help the economy. Now Republicans say, "Where's the roads being built? Where's the dam's being restored? Where's the bridges being fixed?" Well, they should know. They forced Democrats into removing them from any legislation.
Roads, dams, and bridges were supposed to be paid for with the failed Stimulus package, not the 'unemployment bill'.

Imagine if Republicans put all the sneakiness into helping the middle class. Into actually rebuilding the country. Into being on the side of regular Americans. Yea, imagine that.

Imagine if Rdean knew how to build an intelligent OP

Only six percent of posters will read that entire article.

What article?
There's not a link or a quote in the entire pile of shit post.

he babbles like tm..

 

[PoliticalChic]

Loony scientists? Perfect, coming from the right, who depend on EVERYTHING they eat, wear, touch, see, listen too or live in from those "loony left wing scientists". Rich.

Although I have often posted how uneducable you are, deanie, perhaps I can enlighten you as to what a loony scientist...albeit one chosen by the President, is..

Or does the taint extend to both you and the President?



"Holdren's radicalism dates back to the late 1960s. In 1969 Holdren wrote that it was imperative “to convince society and its leaders that there is no alternative but the cessation of our irresponsible, all-demanding, and all-consuming population growth.”

That same year, he and (the now largely discredited) professor of population studies Paul Ehrlich jointly predicted: “If … population control measures are not initiated immediately and effectively, all the technology man can bring to bear will not fend off the misery to come.” In 1971 Holdren and Ehrlich warned that “some form of ecocatastrophe, if not thermonuclear war, seems almost certain to overtake us before the end of the century.”

Viewing capitalism as an economic system that is inherently harmful to the natural environment, Holdren and Ehrlich in 1973 called for “a massive campaign … to de-develop the United States” and other Western nations in order to conserve energy and facilitate growth in underdeveloped countries."
'Science Czar' John P. Holdren's disturbing beliefs about America, capitalism and humanity

"Obama's Science Czar Wrote Book Advocating Forced Abortions, Sterilizing Americans By Poisoning Our Drinking Water "
Ehrlich, Paul R., Anne H. Ehrlich and John P. Holdren; Ecoscience:*... - White House

"He is also one of the main engineers of the Eugenics operation going on right now. A book he authored in 1977 advocates for extreme totalitarian measures to control the population. In this book he wrote that: Women could be forced to abort their pregnancies, whether they wanted to or not. The population at large could be sterilized by infertility drugs intentionally put into the nation's drinking water or in food. Single mothers and teen mothers should have their babies seized from them against their will and given away to other couples to raise. People who "contribute to social deterioration" (i.e. undesirables) "can be required by law to exercise reproductive responsibility" -- in other words, be compelled to have abortions or be sterilized. A transnational "Planetary Regime" should assume control of the global economy and also dictate the most intimate details of Americans' lives -- using an armed international police force."

"Holdren claimed that, "if the population control measures are not initiated immediately, and effectively, all the technology man can bring to bear will not fend off the misery to come."[10] In 1973 Holdren encouraged a decline in fertility to well below replacement in the United States, because "210 million now is too many and 280 million in 2040 is likely to be much too many"[11]. Currently, the U.S. population is 306,924,000[12]. In 1977 he co-authored (with Paul R. Ehrlich and Anne H. Ehrlich) Ecoscience: Population, Resources, Environment,[13] which discussed the possible role of a wide range of solutions to overpopulation, from voluntary family planning at one extreme, to a "planetary regime" of enforced population control at the other extreme."

John Holdren - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"Does being spectacularly wrong about a major issue in your field of expertise hurt your chances of becoming the presidential science advisor? Apparently not, judging by reports from DotEarth and ScienceInsider that Barack Obama will name John P. Holdren as his science advisor on Saturday. [UPDATE: Mr. Obama did indeed pick Dr. Holdren.] "

"In 1980 Dr. Holdren helped select five metals — chrome, copper, nickel, tin and tungsten — and joined Dr. Ehrlich and Dr. Harte in betting $1,000 that those metals would be more expensive ten years later. They turned out to be wrong on all five metals, and had to pay up when the bet came due in 1990. "

"Dr. Holdren’s resistance to dissenting views was also on display earlier this year in an article asserting that climate skeptics are “dangerous.” (You can read about the response to that article at DotEarth.)"

Flawed Science Advice for Obama? - TierneyLab Blog - NYTimes.com

I will assume that a non-reponse to the above data will be the equivalent of running and hiding.

Funny how population control is acceptable for the right as long as it is contained in immigration reform.

Wha'...

do I hear you making some sort of case for the Holdren sterilization plan??????

Just between us, sister, I know we both like to fight...but the implications of this post make me think that the only possible explanation is the excessive use of a certain beverage, it-seemed-like-a-good-idea-at-the-time juice.
It’s Hammer Time!

Do you find yoursefl picking up the TV remote when the phone rings?

 

[MaggieMae]

Although I have often posted how uneducable you are, deanie, perhaps I can enlighten you as to what a loony scientist...albeit one chosen by the President, is..

Or does the taint extend to both you and the President?



"Holdren's radicalism dates back to the late 1960s. In 1969 Holdren wrote that it was imperative “to convince society and its leaders that there is no alternative but the cessation of our irresponsible, all-demanding, and all-consuming population growth.”

That same year, he and (the now largely discredited) professor of population studies Paul Ehrlich jointly predicted: “If … population control measures are not initiated immediately and effectively, all the technology man can bring to bear will not fend off the misery to come.” In 1971 Holdren and Ehrlich warned that “some form of ecocatastrophe, if not thermonuclear war, seems almost certain to overtake us before the end of the century.”

Viewing capitalism as an economic system that is inherently harmful to the natural environment, Holdren and Ehrlich in 1973 called for “a massive campaign … to de-develop the United States” and other Western nations in order to conserve energy and facilitate growth in underdeveloped countries."
'Science Czar' John P. Holdren's disturbing beliefs about America, capitalism and humanity

"Obama's Science Czar Wrote Book Advocating Forced Abortions, Sterilizing Americans By Poisoning Our Drinking Water "
Ehrlich, Paul R., Anne H. Ehrlich and John P. Holdren; Ecoscience:*... - White House

"He is also one of the main engineers of the Eugenics operation going on right now. A book he authored in 1977 advocates for extreme totalitarian measures to control the population. In this book he wrote that: Women could be forced to abort their pregnancies, whether they wanted to or not. The population at large could be sterilized by infertility drugs intentionally put into the nation's drinking water or in food. Single mothers and teen mothers should have their babies seized from them against their will and given away to other couples to raise. People who "contribute to social deterioration" (i.e. undesirables) "can be required by law to exercise reproductive responsibility" -- in other words, be compelled to have abortions or be sterilized. A transnational "Planetary Regime" should assume control of the global economy and also dictate the most intimate details of Americans' lives -- using an armed international police force."

"Holdren claimed that, "if the population control measures are not initiated immediately, and effectively, all the technology man can bring to bear will not fend off the misery to come."[10] In 1973 Holdren encouraged a decline in fertility to well below replacement in the United States, because "210 million now is too many and 280 million in 2040 is likely to be much too many"[11]. Currently, the U.S. population is 306,924,000[12]. In 1977 he co-authored (with Paul R. Ehrlich and Anne H. Ehrlich) Ecoscience: Population, Resources, Environment,[13] which discussed the possible role of a wide range of solutions to overpopulation, from voluntary family planning at one extreme, to a "planetary regime" of enforced population control at the other extreme."

John Holdren - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"Does being spectacularly wrong about a major issue in your field of expertise hurt your chances of becoming the presidential science advisor? Apparently not, judging by reports from DotEarth and ScienceInsider that Barack Obama will name John P. Holdren as his science advisor on Saturday. [UPDATE: Mr. Obama did indeed pick Dr. Holdren.] "

"In 1980 Dr. Holdren helped select five metals — chrome, copper, nickel, tin and tungsten — and joined Dr. Ehrlich and Dr. Harte in betting $1,000 that those metals would be more expensive ten years later. They turned out to be wrong on all five metals, and had to pay up when the bet came due in 1990. "

"Dr. Holdren’s resistance to dissenting views was also on display earlier this year in an article asserting that climate skeptics are “dangerous.” (You can read about the response to that article at DotEarth.)"

Flawed Science Advice for Obama? - TierneyLab Blog - NYTimes.com

I will assume that a non-reponse to the above data will be the equivalent of running and hiding.

Funny how population control is acceptable for the right as long as it is contained in immigration reform.

Wha'...

do I hear you making some sort of case for the Holdren sterilization plan??????

Just between us, sister, I know we both like to fight...but the implications of this post make me think that the only possible explanation is the excessive use of a certain beverage, it-seemed-like-a-good-idea-at-the-time juice.
It’s Hammer Time!

Do you find yoursefl picking up the TV remote when the phone rings?

I'm not making a case for anything. Just stated a fact, which I note you brilliantly ignored. Population control has been a topic for deep discussion for many, many decades and I really don't lose much sleep wondering whether or not someones dissertation on the subject will become a reality anytime soon. Because I know it won't. And so does Erlich.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Funny how population control is acceptable for the right as long as it is contained in immigration reform.

Wha'...

do I hear you making some sort of case for the Holdren sterilization plan??????

Just between us, sister, I know we both like to fight...but the implications of this post make me think that the only possible explanation is the excessive use of a certain beverage, it-seemed-like-a-good-idea-at-the-time juice.
It’s Hammer Time!

Do you find yoursefl picking up the TV remote when the phone rings?

I'm not making a case for anything. Just stated a fact, which I note you brilliantly ignored. Population control has been a topic for deep discussion for many, many decades and I really don't lose much sleep wondering whether or not someones dissertation on the subject will become a reality anytime soon. Because I know it won't. And so does Erlich.

1. Your post is an absurd conflation. Since the 'science czar' of the left believed we should poison 'excess' population, you seem to feel it necessary, defensive, to claim that there is any resonance on the right.

a. School of population control is know as eugenics, and well known to be a part of the constellation of inhumanities sought by the progressives.
b. I'm sure you have read 'The Population Bomb." Why would you say that Ehrlich was unconcerned about control of same?

I was being kind to you to ignore the parviscience of your post.

2. I have not formed a comprehensive opinon on immigration, so I do not post on the subject.

 

[B. Kidd]

total bullshit OP, typical rdean

At least, he doesn't have a 'disabled rep'.
That should count for sumthin'.

 

[MaggieMae]

Wha'...

do I hear you making some sort of case for the Holdren sterilization plan??????

Just between us, sister, I know we both like to fight...but the implications of this post make me think that the only possible explanation is the excessive use of a certain beverage, it-seemed-like-a-good-idea-at-the-time juice.
It’s Hammer Time!

Do you find yoursefl picking up the TV remote when the phone rings?

I'm not making a case for anything. Just stated a fact, which I note you brilliantly ignored. Population control has been a topic for deep discussion for many, many decades and I really don't lose much sleep wondering whether or not someones dissertation on the subject will become a reality anytime soon. Because I know it won't. And so does Erlich.

1. Your post is an absurd conflation. Since the 'science czar' of the left believed we should poison 'excess' population, you seem to feel it necessary, defensive, to claim that there is any resonance on the right.

a. School of population control is know as eugenics, and well known to be a part of the constellation of inhumanities sought by the progressives.
b. I'm sure you have read 'The Population Bomb." Why would you say that Ehrlich was unconcerned about control of same?

I was being kind to you to ignore the parviscience of your post.

2. I have not formed a comprehensive opinon on immigration, so I do not post on the subject.

Translation: I have not yet researched my vast repertoire of right-wing information regarding immigration control in order to post carefully selected opinions of others with which to make my own case on the subject.

Maybe tomorrow, PC?

 

[rdean]

total bullshit OP, typical rdean

At least, he doesn't have a 'disabled rep'.
That should count for sumthin'.

There's nothing in my posts I haven't linked to a dozen times. Which one "confuses" you?

 

[rdean]

Shirley Sherrod, we now know that her video was edited, yet it was played on Fox again and again. And when poor Shirley was forced to resign, Fox comes out with a report, just tonight, that Obama threw an "innocent" woman under the bus. Now, Fox says she's innocent. Only now.
What video? What report?

Then there's James O’Keefe and Acorn. A single Republican, able to bring down an organization that helped the poor, from spliced together video tapes. Well, he is getting sued. But, "he did it". Now all those poor people are a little more poor.
WTF are you talking about?

Then there were Republican leaders privately telling Obama that they would work with him and then publicly, saying they would do everything they could to bring him down (they called it "Waterloo"). And they did. And poor Obama believed them time and time again. I wonder if he believes them now?
"They" who? Which Republican leaders?

There was Iraq. That was because of WMDs, no, because of yellow-cake, no, it was to bring "freedom", no, it was.....
How many years back are we going to go here?

There was the 2.4 trillion dollar tax cut. Supposed to bring jobs. And it did. It brought them to China and India and even Mexico.
Still looking backwards?

Then there was April 16th 2008, “Healthcare Decisions Day,” proclaimed by the former Gov. of Alaska, Sarah Palin. In fact, it was such a good idea, that Democrats used the SAME legislation in the Health Care Bill. Only Sarah stopped calling it, "Healthcare Decisions Day", no, instead she called it "death panels" and "kill grandma". Another fast one.
Never heard of it..... Link?

And this unemployment bill? Stripped of everything that would help the economy. Now Republicans say, "Where's the roads being built? Where's the dam's being restored? Where's the bridges being fixed?" Well, they should know. They forced Democrats into removing them from any legislation.
Roads, dams, and bridges were supposed to be paid for with the failed Stimulus package, not the 'unemployment bill'.

Imagine if Republicans put all the sneakiness into helping the middle class. Into actually rebuilding the country. Into being on the side of regular Americans. Yea, imagine that.

Imagine if Rdean knew how to build an intelligent OP

Only six percent of posters will read that entire article.

What article?
There's not a link or a quote in the entire pile of shit post.

he babbles like tm..

I already linked to Sarah Palin's "Health Care Decisions Day". Which one would you like a link to next. Just let me know and I'll go get it.

 

[PoliticalChic]

I'm not making a case for anything. Just stated a fact, which I note you brilliantly ignored. Population control has been a topic for deep discussion for many, many decades and I really don't lose much sleep wondering whether or not someones dissertation on the subject will become a reality anytime soon. Because I know it won't. And so does Erlich.

1. Your post is an absurd conflation. Since the 'science czar' of the left believed we should poison 'excess' population, you seem to feel it necessary, defensive, to claim that there is any resonance on the right.

a. School of population control is know as eugenics, and well known to be a part of the constellation of inhumanities sought by the progressives.
b. I'm sure you have read 'The Population Bomb." Why would you say that Ehrlich was unconcerned about control of same?

I was being kind to you to ignore the parviscience of your post.

2. I have not formed a comprehensive opinon on immigration, so I do not post on the subject.

Translation: I have not yet researched my vast repertoire of right-wing information regarding immigration control in order to post carefully selected opinions of others with which to make my own case on the subject.

Maybe tomorrow, PC?

I think that unless you can point to any untruths on my part, you should accept what I say about my personal motivations.

If and when I can find a comprehensive immigration policy with which I can agree, I will post it and champion it. I give a great deal of thought to my positions.

BTW, to state that my perspective is right wing requires not much prescience...nor do I consider same either intimidating nor pejorative.

 

[hortysir]

Shirley Sherrod, we now know that her video was edited, yet it was played on Fox again and again. And when poor Shirley was forced to resign, Fox comes out with a report, just tonight, that Obama threw an "innocent" woman under the bus. Now, Fox says she's innocent. Only now.
What video? What report?

Then there's James O’Keefe and Acorn. A single Republican, able to bring down an organization that helped the poor, from spliced together video tapes. Well, he is getting sued. But, "he did it". Now all those poor people are a little more poor.
WTF are you talking about?

Then there were Republican leaders privately telling Obama that they would work with him and then publicly, saying they would do everything they could to bring him down (they called it "Waterloo"). And they did. And poor Obama believed them time and time again. I wonder if he believes them now?
"They" who? Which Republican leaders?

There was Iraq. That was because of WMDs, no, because of yellow-cake, no, it was to bring "freedom", no, it was.....
How many years back are we going to go here?

There was the 2.4 trillion dollar tax cut. Supposed to bring jobs. And it did. It brought them to China and India and even Mexico.
Still looking backwards?

Then there was April 16th 2008, “Healthcare Decisions Day,” proclaimed by the former Gov. of Alaska, Sarah Palin. In fact, it was such a good idea, that Democrats used the SAME legislation in the Health Care Bill. Only Sarah stopped calling it, "Healthcare Decisions Day", no, instead she called it "death panels" and "kill grandma". Another fast one.
Never heard of it..... Link?

And this unemployment bill? Stripped of everything that would help the economy. Now Republicans say, "Where's the roads being built? Where's the dam's being restored? Where's the bridges being fixed?" Well, they should know. They forced Democrats into removing them from any legislation.
Roads, dams, and bridges were supposed to be paid for with the failed Stimulus package, not the 'unemployment bill'.

Imagine if Republicans put all the sneakiness into helping the middle class. Into actually rebuilding the country. Into being on the side of regular Americans. Yea, imagine that.

Imagine if Rdean knew how to build an intelligent OP

Only six percent of posters will read that entire article.

What article?
There's not a link or a quote in the entire pile of shit post.

God you guys are dumb. Don't you even watch the news?????????

Think Progress For ‘Death Panels’ Before She Was Against Them? Palin Endorsed End Of Life Counseling As Governor

Do any of you guys know how to use a "search engine". Every fucking thing has to be "spoon fed". And still you believe lies over truth.

Try, "Sarah Palin Health Care Decisions Day" and there's about a million hits in 3.5 seconds.

And you don't know about Acorn and James O'Keefe? Seriously?

And what's happening today is because of what happened, uh, "backward".

Goofs.

I don't spend my days surfing for news bytes to find something to bitch about.
Contrary to the persistent vomiting of 24hr news networks, the news doesn't really change as often as their advertisers would have you believe.

You opened with vague remarks, assuming the world knows WTF you're talking about, and respond by calling people goofs for not being as lacking in a real life so as not to be stuck watching bullshit 24/7 like you.

 

[rdean]

Imagine if Rdean knew how to build an intelligent OP



What article?
There's not a link or a quote in the entire pile of shit post.

God you guys are dumb. Don't you even watch the news?????????

Think Progress For ‘Death Panels’ Before She Was Against Them? Palin Endorsed End Of Life Counseling As Governor

Do any of you guys know how to use a "search engine". Every fucking thing has to be "spoon fed". And still you believe lies over truth.

Try, "Sarah Palin Health Care Decisions Day" and there's about a million hits in 3.5 seconds.

And you don't know about Acorn and James O'Keefe? Seriously?

And what's happening today is because of what happened, uh, "backward".

Goofs.

I don't spend my days surfing for news bytes to find something to bitch about.
Contrary to the persistent vomiting of 24hr news networks, the news doesn't really change as often as their advertisers would have you believe.

You opened with vague remarks, assuming the world knows WTF you're talking about, and respond by calling people goofs for not being as lacking in a real life so as not to be stuck watching bullshit 24/7 like you.

Vague? What was vague? About Shirley Sherrod? About James O’Keefe and Acorn? About Health Care Decisions day? About the unemployment bill? What was "vague"?

Those are truths Republicans can't bear to face.

 

[hortysir]

Let's overlook the tools mentioned and focus on this unemployment bill you're obsessing about?
Is there really monies in this UE ext. bill for roads and brisges?