Barack Obama

[randolph]

After the Clinton Administration, Browner became a founding member of the Albright Group, a "global strategy group" headed by former U.S. Secretary of State Madeleine Albright.[16] As a Principal in that firm, Browner assists businesses and other organizations with the challenges of operating internationally, including the challenges of complying with environmental regulations and climate change. Coca-Cola and Merck have been among the clients for such international assistance.[11] She also became a founding member and principal of Albright Capital Management, an investment advisory company.[2][16]

Browner was the chair of the Audubon Society; her term expired in 2008.[17] She also joined the board of the Alliance for Climate Protection, an organization founded by Gore in 2006.[16] In 2008 she joined the board of APX, Inc., which specializes in technology infrastructure for the environmental commodities markets[18], including those for carbon offsets and the CDM Gold Standard.[19] She is or was also on the boards of the Center for American Progress, the Alliance for Climate Protection, the League of Conservation Voters.[18] and the Commission for a Sustainable World Society.

Her previous year's income, in a 2009 report, was reported by the The Wall Street Journal to be between $1 million and $5 million from lobbying firm Downey McGrath Group, Inc., where her husband, Thomas Downey, is a principal. She also reported $450,000 in "member distribution" income, plus retirement and other benefits from The Albright Group.[20]

Doesn't sound like a "socialist" to me.

[TracyCoxx]

Van Jones - Communist

Source? Van Jones:
http://www.eastbayexpress.com/gyroba...wFullText=true

"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.

Now why would anyone think this guy is a communist?

He may be a 'nice' guy. But there's no room for communists in the US government.

[TracyCoxx]

John Holdren, science "czar" - proposed "compulsory sterilization" and forced abortions to control population

I already talked about him. Here it is again. The references are still there so don't tell me he didn't advocate sterilization.

"The fetus, given the opportunity to develop properly before birth, and given the essential early socializing experiences and sufficient nourishing food during the crucial early years after birth, will ultimately develop into a human being," Holdren wrote in "Human Ecology," a 1973 textbook he co-authored with environmental activists Paul and Anne Ehrlich.

Holdren heralded a "tightly reasoned essay" by law professor Christopher Stone, who said, "I am quite seriously proposing that we give legal rights to forests, oceans, rivers and other so-called 'natural objects' in the environment -- indeed, to the natural environment as a whole." Holdren, writing in 1977's "Ecoscience," which was also co-authored with Paul and Anne Ehrlich

In a future society, "It would even be possible to require pregnant single women to marry or have abortions, perhaps as an alternative to placement for adoption, depending on the society," Holdren and his co-authors wrote.

Another "coercive fertility control" program floated by Holdren involved "the development of a long-term sterilizing capsule that could be implanted under the skin and removed when pregnancy is desired ... The capsule could be implanted at puberty and might be removable, with official permission, for a limited number of births."

"Adding a sterilant to drinking water or staple foods is a suggestion that seems to horrify people more than most proposals for involuntary fertility control. Indeed, this would pose some very difficult political, legal, and social questions, to say nothing of the technical problems," Holdren wrote in "Ecoscience."

To help achieve their goals, Holdren and the Ehrlichs formulated a "world government scheme" they called the Planetary Regime, which would administer the world's resources and human growth. They also discussed the development of an "armed international organization, a global analogue of a police force" to which nations would surrender part of their sovereignty.

[TracyCoxx]

Carol Browner, global warming "czar" - was part of Socialist International, a group for "global governance"

Originally Posted by randolph

Doesn't sound like a "socialist" to me.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...ocialist-ties/
"Until last week, Carol M. Browner, President-elect Barack Obama's pick as global warming czar, was listed as one of 14 leaders of a socialist group's Commission for a Sustainable World Society, which calls for "global governance" and says rich countries must shrink their economies to address climate change."

[TracyCoxx]

Randolph, this information was very easy to find and very easy for you to confirm if you looked. Why are you going out of your way to find information about these people that doesn't happen to mention their communist and/or revolutionary ideas?

And seriously, why does Obama surround himself with communists, revolutionaries and world society types? Why do his supporters still claim "oh that may be what the people around him think, but Obama isn't that way". Wake up people!

[randolph]

Originally Posted by TracyCoxx

Randolph, this information was very easy to find and very easy for you to confirm if you looked. Why are you going out of your way to find information about these people that doesn't happen to mention their communist and/or revolutionary ideas?

And seriously, why does Obama surround himself with communists, revolutionaries and world society types? Why do his supporters still claim "oh that may be what the people around him think, but Obama isn't that way". Wake up people!

Its very easy to label people, but what does it mean? I chose excerpts from biographies from Wikipedia that focused on what people do, not what some conservatives accuse them of being. Obama is choosing people based on their performance working in our society. Labeling someone a "communist" is absurd, communism is dead. Like it or not, this country is socialist, that is what the citizens want. All democratic countries are basically socialistic.

[TracyCoxx]

Originally Posted by randolph

Its very easy to label people, but what does it mean? I chose excerpts from biographies from Wikipedia that focused on what people do, not what some conservatives accuse them of being. Obama is choosing people based on their performance working in our society.

Which excerpt that I posted about these people was from what a conservative accused them of being? I quoted Van Jones own words. I quoted John Holdren's writings. And stated the fact that Carol Browner was a leader of a socialist group. These are facts, not accusations from some conservative.

Originally Posted by randolph

Labeling someone a "communist" is absurd, communism is dead. Like it or not, this country is socialist, that is what the citizens want. All democratic countries are basically socialistic.

Absurd or not, that is what Van Jones said. And I highly doubt the citizens want this country to be socialist.

Originally Posted by randolph

I grew up as a Republican and I still believe in fiscal conservatism(aka, Eisenhower).

I'm glad you're not one of those who want a socialist country. As a fiscal conservative, I'm sure you are aware that socialism with the quality of life Americans expect is simply unsustainable. This should now be abundantly clear due to BO's policies to all except people like Jen. I think you'll see in 2010 than Americans most definitely do not want socialism. They are projecting that democrats will lose more than 20 seats in the senate. BO was wise not to get into any details when he was campaigning. Just stick to hope and change. Don't tell them that his goal is nothing less than the end of America as we know it.

[randolph]

Originally Posted by TracyCoxx

Which excerpt that I posted about these people was from what a conservative accused them of being? I quoted Van Jones own words. I quoted John Holdren's writings. And stated the fact that Carol Browner was a leader of a socialist group. These are facts, not accusations from some conservative.

Absurd or not, that is what Van Jones said. And I highly doubt the citizens want this country to be socialist.


I'm glad you're not one of those who want a socialist country. As a fiscal conservative, I'm sure you are aware that socialism with the quality of life Americans expect is simply unsustainable. This should now be abundantly clear due to BO's policies to all except people like Jen. I think you'll see in 2010 than Americans most definitely do not want socialism. They are projecting that democrats will lose more than 20 seats in the senate. BO was wise not to get into any details when he was campaigning. Just stick to hope and change. Don't tell them that his goal is nothing less than the end of America as we know it.

Again we are hung up on a label, "socialism". I view "socialism" as a means of equitably distributing the wealth being produced in a country. This can be done by taxes, laws and regulations. I don't believe in the government owning and controlling the means of production. England found out the hard way that it doesn't work. Conservatives seem to have an ego centered idea that the money they earn is entirely the result of their actions. They don't realize or accept that they are enabled to make money because they are in a society that cooperates and controls wealth making. Yes, we are now investing vast amounts of public funds in our private enterprise system. We are not socializing the country in the England sense. We are trying to save our "free enterprise system". Yes it is very scary indeed.

[TracyCoxx]

Originally Posted by randolph

Again we are hung up on a label, "socialism".

Well that's what we humans do. We come up with a word to describe some concept or thing. That's how communication works.

Originally Posted by randolph

I view "socialism" as a means of equitably distributing the wealth being produced in a country. This can be done by taxes, laws and regulations.

That's not how America works. It leads to all kinds of problems that this country has avoided.

Originally Posted by randolph

Conservatives seem to have an ego centered idea that the money they earn is entirely the result of their actions. They don't realize or accept that they are enabled to make money because they are in a society that cooperates and controls wealth making.

It's not an ego centered idea. It's a system based on fairness. You put in the work and you will be rewarded. You don't work, you don't get rewarded. This is a system that encourages its people to become educated and to be a constructive member of society. With socialism, you put in the work and you get squat.

It is the ego of the poor who do not accept capitalism to think they deserve a piece of the pie despite the fact that they contribute little of value.

[tslust]

Originally Posted by randolph

I chose excerpts from biographies from Wikipedia

Ahh, the all-knowing Wiki.

Don't worry, I like to use it too, but it's not always a reliable source.