Unreported Administration

I still see some people saying "Obama is doing a good job considering what he inherited" and "change can't happen in 200 days, but change will happen" and it just amazes me that people I respect can be so blind as to what is actually happening behind the scenes in this administration. Yes, change is coming, but I don't think it is the kind of change for which they voted. Republican, democrat, or independent, most Americans are good people who mean well - not communist sympathizers or people who want our freedoms taken away. Yet, they are either unable or unwilling to see the dangers of this administration.

First, what Obama inherited was a deficit that is now 4x what it was when he inherited it. So, in 6 months, he has quadrupled the problem. How exactly is this a good job & who would ever get away with this running a real business?

Second, the big, scary problem - we have a president who has appointed over 30 "czars" so far in his administration while he has failed to fill legitimate seats within his cabinet. Why do we think this is? Could it be that the types of people Obama has appointed could never pass REAL congressional hearings - so this is the only way to get then into executive positions in his administration? Why doesn't the prospect of this failure in the checks and balances system scare more people? Could it be that most people are unaware of this? Even Senator Byrd of WV, a Democrat, has written of the dangers of these appointments. Let's talk a little about these appointees.

As part of this administration of unelected, largely unconfirmed officials we have Green Jobs Czar, Van Jones. Excerpt from a Nov. 2005 interview in the East Bay Express: Jones had planned to move to Washington, DC, and had already landed a job and an apartment there. But in jail, he said, "I met all these young radical people of color -- I mean really radical, communists and anarchists. And it was, like, 'This is what I need to be a part of.'" Although he already had a plane ticket, he decided to stay in San Francisco. "I spent the next ten years of my life working with a lot of those people I met in jail, trying to be a revolutionary." In the months that followed, he let go of any lingering thoughts that he might fit in with the status quo. "I was a rowdy nationalist on April 28th, and then the verdicts came down on April 29th," he said. "By August, I was a communist." In 1994, the young activists formed a socialist collective, Standing Together to Organize a Revolutionary Movement, or STORM, which held study groups on the theories of Marx and Lenin and dreamed of a multiracial socialist utopia. Recently, Jones signed a petition backing 9/11 truthers and also said "The white polluters and the white environmentalists are essentially steering poison into the people of color communities." Yes, this is what he believes and he was chosen as an advisor to the president. Van Jones recently resigned his position when these things were brought to light. Of course, despite the Obama administration's promise of unparalleled transparency, Jones' resignation came at night during a holiday weekend - why do this thing out in the open when you can hide it from the news cycle?

Next, we have Cass Sunstein - Obama's appointee for Regulatory Czar. Mr. Sunstein has argued in favor of OUTLAWING sport hunting and meat-eating, and written that animals should be allowed to file lawsuits "with human beings as their representatives." All of you out there who like an occasional steak should worry about Mr. Sunstein. In his world, if you ate a steak, the cow's family may sue you for wrongful death.

Then, we have John Holdren - Obama appointee for Science Czar. Holdren is probably the most despicable in this list of Obama's appointees. Does this guy really represent the president's views? If so, we are all in big trouble. If not, then why would Obama choose him for this position. It was Obama himself who said that we should judge him by the people he surrounds himself with. In 1977, he co-authored a book entitled "Ecoscience" with Paul and Anne Ehrlich. This book advocated the following:

• Page 837: Compulsory abortions would be legal - so, the governement could force you to have an abortion in order to control overpopulation. The book concluded that such steps would be sustained under the US Constitution.
• Page 786: Single mothers should have their babies taken away by the government; or they could be forced to have abortions.
• Page 787-8: Mass sterilization of humans though drugs in the water supply is OK as long as it doesn't harm livestock.
• Page 786-7: The government could control women's reproduction by either sterilizing them or implanting mandatory long-term birth control.
  
• Page 838: The kind of people who cause "social deterioration" can be compelled to not have children.
• Page 838: Nothing is wrong or illegal about the government dictating family size.
• Page 942-3: A "Planetary Regime" should control the global economy and dictate by force the number of children allowed to be born.
• Page 917: We will need to surrender national sovereignty to an armed international police force.
• Page 749: Pro-family and pro-birth attitudes are caused by ethnic chauvinism.
• Page 944: As of 1977, we are facing a global overpopulation catastrophe that must be resolved at all costs by the year 2000.

I won't even try to explain why Mr. Holdren scares me. If these positions don't scare you, there is nothing I will be able to do to convince you.

Finally, we have Mark Lloyd, FCC Diversity Czar. In a 2008 conference on media reform, he spoke of Venezuela's Hugo Chavez's ``incredible revolution, a democratic revolution," and of the ``property owners and the folks who then controlled the media in Venezuela" who ``rebelled" and who ``worked to oust him." Still, said Lloyd, Chavez ``came back with another revolution, and then ... began to take very seriously the media in his country." His plan is to stifle free speech against the administration by forcing dissenting media to pay an additional 100% of their operating costs toward a government run media (Yes, I said 100% - so, they would have to pay their own costs PLUS another 100% of their costs). Now, what business do you know that can spend double what they are spending now and still stay in business? This is an obvious ploy to prevent dissenting opinions and fund a propaganda machine.

Now, don't take my word for any of this. PLEASE look it up - do your homework - and then decide how you feel about this administration and the change that is about to come. I would hope that, regardless of party affiliation, you are not in favor of these sorts of policies. I don't believe that the view of these czars are what most Democrats believe. So, why then are you ok with how Obama is handling the presidency? Please, please, please learn all you can about what is actually happening. Don't trust the rhetoric. Stand up for your country. Don't let them separate us with party affiliation. We are all Americans.