# Obama's Science Czar Considered Forced Abortions, Sterilization as Population Growth



## WillowTree (Jul 21, 2009)

President Obama's "science czar," Paul Holdren, once floated the idea of forced abortions, "compulsory sterilization," and the creation of a "Planetary Regime" that would oversee human population levels and control all natural resources as a means of protecting the planet -- controversial ideas his critics say should have been brought up in his Senate confirmation hearings.

Holdren, who has degrees from MIT and Stanford and headed a science policy program at Harvard's Kennedy School of Government for the past 13 years, won the unanimous approval of the Senate as the president's chief science adviser.

He was confirmed with little fanfare on March 19 as director of the White House's Office of Science and Technology Policy, a 50-person directorate that advises the president on scientific affairs, focusing on energy independence and global warming.

But many of Holdren's radical ideas on population control were not brought up at his confirmation hearings; it appears that the senators who scrutinized him had no knowledge of the contents of a textbook he co-authored in 1977, "Ecoscience: Population, Resources, Environment," a copy of which was obtained by FOXNews.com.








Obama's Science Czar Considered Forced Abortions, Sterilization as Population Growth Solutions - Political News - FOXNews.com










you democwats owe the rest of us an apology!


----------



## KittenKoder (Jul 21, 2009)

Know what Willow ... I honestly don't care. I don't like having so many damned hairless apes clogging up my streets ... so meh. Whatever the reasoning, and this is why I supported Bush's war, if it cuts the number of idiots I have to deal with down, I'm all for it. So thanks for giving me a reason to support Obama on one thing.


----------



## Sweet Willy (Jul 21, 2009)

Over population is probably the single largest problem the human race faces.  Considering that we don't allow the weak and the sick to die out,  instead using our intelligence to circumvent mother nature,  it stands to reason that we now have to use our intelligence to figure out how we will keep the population in check ourselves.  We kind of took that responsibility away from nature.  Now it's ours to think about.  I guess we could outlaw medical care and give that job back to mother nature.  The population would thin out according to nature again.


----------



## Maple (Jul 21, 2009)

Yep, that sounds like our guy, Bill Ayers and Reverend Wright, why not more radicals running things.


----------



## WillowTree (Jul 21, 2009)

KittenKoder said:


> Know what Willow ... I honestly don't care. I don't like having so many damned hairless apes clogging up my streets ... so meh. Whatever the reasoning, and this is why I supported Bush's war, if it cuts the number of idiots I have to deal with down, I'm all for it. So thanks for giving me a reason to support Obama on one thing.



You are a freak of nature!


----------



## WillowTree (Jul 21, 2009)

Sweet Willy said:


> Over population is probably the single largest problem the human race faces.  Considering that we don't allow the weak and the sick to die out,  instead using our intelligence to circumvent mother nature,  it stands to reason that we now have to use our intelligence to figure out how we will keep the population in check ourselves.  We kind of took that responsibility away from nature.  Now it's ours to think about.  I guess we could outlaw medical care and give that job back to mother nature.  The population would thin out according to nature again.



you and KK could single handedly decrease the population by two..


----------



## KittenKoder (Jul 21, 2009)

WillowTree said:


> KittenKoder said:
> 
> 
> > Know what Willow ... I honestly don't care. I don't like having so many damned hairless apes clogging up my streets ... so meh. Whatever the reasoning, and this is why I supported Bush's war, if it cuts the number of idiots I have to deal with down, I'm all for it. So thanks for giving me a reason to support Obama on one thing.
> ...



Never did claim to be otherwise.


----------



## Sweet Willy (Jul 21, 2009)

WillowTree said:


> Sweet Willy said:
> 
> 
> > Over population is probably the single largest problem the human race faces.  Considering that we don't allow the weak and the sick to die out,  instead using our intelligence to circumvent mother nature,  it stands to reason that we now have to use our intelligence to figure out how we will keep the population in check ourselves.  We kind of took that responsibility away from nature.  Now it's ours to think about.  I guess we could outlaw medical care and give that job back to mother nature.  The population would thin out according to nature again.
> ...





By poisoning you and who else?


----------



## WillowTree (Jul 21, 2009)

Sweet Willy said:


> WillowTree said:
> 
> 
> > Sweet Willy said:
> ...






we let you drink first,, if you make it then give some to KK


----------



## xsited1 (Jul 21, 2009)

WillowTree said:


> President Obama's "science czar," Paul Holdren, once floated the idea of forced abortions, "compulsory sterilization," and the creation of a "Planetary Regime" that would oversee human population levels and control all natural resources as a means of protecting the planet -- controversial ideas his critics say should have been brought up in his Senate confirmation hearings.



Compulsory Sterilization for Obama supporters.


----------



## Meister (Jul 21, 2009)

Sweet Willy said:


> Over population is probably the single largest problem the human race faces.  Considering that we don't allow the weak and the sick to die out,  instead using our intelligence to circumvent mother nature,  it stands to reason that we now have to use our intelligence to figure out how we will keep the population in check ourselves.  We kind of took that responsibility away from nature.  Now it's ours to think about.  I guess we could outlaw medical care and give that job back to mother nature.  The population would thin out according to nature again.



Another brilliant thought...strerilization from the far left, and your all for it, more government control.  There are no limits for the government is there?
How about a novel idea such as rewarding a husband and wife who choose not to have children?  Not like your idea that would end up being government mandated.


----------



## Sweet Willy (Jul 21, 2009)

Meister said:


> Sweet Willy said:
> 
> 
> > Over population is probably the single largest problem the human race faces.  Considering that we don't allow the weak and the sick to die out,  instead using our intelligence to circumvent mother nature,  it stands to reason that we now have to use our intelligence to figure out how we will keep the population in check ourselves.  We kind of took that responsibility away from nature.  Now it's ours to think about.  I guess we could outlaw medical care and give that job back to mother nature.  The population would thin out according to nature again.
> ...




I am not advocating sterilization.  Didn't mention it once in my post.  I am merely pointing out the fact that looking at our options is UNAVOIDABLE.  We will,  at some point,  be forced to implement some sort of compulsory population control,  so long as we chose to use modern medicine to defeat natural selection.  The choices are pretty narrow.  There are only so many ways to stop people from having babies.  Unless of course,  you would advocate killing them later or letting them starve.


----------



## Meister (Jul 21, 2009)

Sweet Willy said:


> Meister said:
> 
> 
> > Sweet Willy said:
> ...



OK, Ok you convinced me, we'll just let the government do it for us.


----------



## Mr.Fitnah (Jul 21, 2009)

Sounds like a true progressive 

Eugenics and American social history, 1880-1950.

Allen GE.
Department of Biology, Washington University, St. Louis, MO 63130.
Eugenics, the attempt to improve the human species socially through better breeding was a widespread and popular movement in the United States and Europe between 1910 and 1940. Eugenics was an attempt to use science (the newly discovered Mendelian laws of heredity) to solve social problems (crime, alcoholism, prostitution, rebelliousness), using trained experts. Eugenics gained much support from progressive reform thinkers, who sought to plan social development using expert knowledge in both the social and natural sciences. In eugenics, progressive reformers saw the opportunity to attack social problems efficiently by treating the cause (bad heredity) rather than the effect. Much of the impetus for social and economic reform came from class conflict in the period 1880-1930, resulting from industrialization, unemployment, working conditions, periodic depressions, and unionization. In response, the industrialist class adopted firmer measures of economic control (abandonment of laissez-faire principles), the principles of government regulation (interstate commerce, labor), and the cult of industrial efficiency. Eugenics was only one aspect of progressive reform, but as a scientific claim to explain the cause of social problems, it was a particularly powerful weapon in the arsenal of class conflict at the time.

Eugenics and American social history, 1880-1950. [Genome. 1989] - PubMed Result


----------



## Sweet Willy (Jul 21, 2009)

Meister said:


> Sweet Willy said:
> 
> 
> > Meister said:
> ...




As I said,  we can just do nothing and sooner or later,  nature will take over.  Considering our skill at overcoming disease and birth defects,  starvation is the next natural point.  Makes little difference to me but running down a scientist for stating an obvious option for an obvious problem doesn't make any kind of valid point.


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Jul 21, 2009)

So maybe that why Ruth Ginsburg is retiring, to assist Obama on his Eugenics program?


----------



## Lycurgus (Jul 22, 2009)

WillowTree said:


> President Obama's "science czar," Paul Holdren, once floated the idea of forced abortions, "compulsory sterilization," and the creation of a "Planetary Regime" that would oversee human population levels and control all natural resources as a means of protecting the planet -- controversial ideas his critics say should have been brought up in his Senate confirmation hearings.
> 
> Holdren, who has degrees from MIT and Stanford and headed a science policy program at Harvard's Kennedy School of Government for the past 13 years, won the unanimous approval of the Senate as the president's chief science adviser.
> 
> ...




Hitler is long dead, but, his avid followers live on, as in the case above.


----------



## Care4all (Jul 22, 2009)

sounds like a twisted, out of context, lie to me...but par for the course for FOX



> Holdren's office issued a statement to FOXNews.com denying that the ecologist has ever backed any of the measures discussed in his book, and suggested reading more recent works authored solely by Holdren for a view to his beliefs.
> 
> "Dr. Holdren has stated flatly that he does not now support and has never supported compulsory abortions, compulsory sterilization, or other coercive approaches to limiting population growth," the statement said.
> 
> "Straining to conclude otherwise from passages treating controversies of the day in a three-author, 30-year-old textbook is a mistake."


----------



## Sock Puppet (Jul 22, 2009)

CrusaderFrank said:


> So maybe that why Ruth Ginsburg is retiring, to assist Obama on his Eugenics program?


 
Hmmm...  I never have thought about it that way.  You might be on to something.


----------



## mal (Jul 22, 2009)

KittenKoder said:


> Know what Willow ... I honestly don't care. I don't like having so many damned hairless apes clogging up my streets ... so meh. Whatever the reasoning, and this is why I supported Bush's war, if it cuts the number of idiots I have to deal with down, I'm all for it. So thanks for giving me a reason to support Obama on one thing.



Eh?...

Are you Serious about that?



peace...


----------



## Xenophon (Jul 22, 2009)

Sweet Willy said:


> Over population is probably the single largest problem the human race faces.  Considering that we don't allow the weak and the sick to die out,  instead using our intelligence to circumvent mother nature,  it stands to reason that we now have to use our intelligence to figure out how we will keep the population in check ourselves.  We kind of took that responsibility away from nature.  Now it's ours to think about.  I guess we could outlaw medical care and give that job back to mother nature.  The population would thin out according to nature again.


If the planent is too crowded, why don't you step off?


----------



## brownlou (Jul 22, 2009)

Do you have a copy of this textbook? Did the article show actually passages from the textbook? The article refered to some passages out of context but did not actually show any in the book itself.
Hmmm........
And it is from Fox News?
Sure, I believe it.
I believe it to be another distraction to keep American citizens divided.


----------



## Sweet Willy (Jul 22, 2009)

Xenophon said:


> Sweet Willy said:
> 
> 
> > Over population is probably the single largest problem the human race faces.  Considering that we don't allow the weak and the sick to die out,  instead using our intelligence to circumvent mother nature,  it stands to reason that we now have to use our intelligence to figure out how we will keep the population in check ourselves.  We kind of took that responsibility away from nature.  Now it's ours to think about.  I guess we could outlaw medical care and give that job back to mother nature.  The population would thin out according to nature again.
> ...




Only if I get to take a republican under each arm.


----------



## Immanuel (Jul 22, 2009)

Meister said:


> Sweet Willy said:
> 
> 
> > Over population is probably the single largest problem the human race faces.  Considering that we don't allow the weak and the sick to die out,  instead using our intelligence to circumvent mother nature,  it stands to reason that we now have to use our intelligence to figure out how we will keep the population in check ourselves.  We kind of took that responsibility away from nature.  Now it's ours to think about.  I guess we could outlaw medical care and give that job back to mother nature.  The population would thin out according to nature again.
> ...



If this had come from President Bush's staff, I would have been pissed.  As it is, coming from President Obama's staff it just seems as it should be expected. /shrug



Care4all said:


> sounds like a twisted, out of context, lie to me...but par for the course for FOX



Maybe so, but I would sure like to see the textbook so that I could make up my own mind.  Did he advocate it?  Did he suggest as Sweet Willy did that it is something we would have to face in the future?  Was there a chapter on the possibilities of such things happening?  Was he for it or against it?

People have written about where things were going in the future without being thrilled that the future was coming.  I'm thinking of people like Nostradamus or the Old Testament Prophets who foretold the enslavement of Israel by the Babylonians.  

Immie


----------



## Coyote (Jul 22, 2009)

brownlou said:


> Do you have a copy of this textbook? Did the article show actually passages from the textbook? The article refered to some passages out of context but did not actually show any in the book itself.
> Hmmm........
> And it is from Fox News?
> Sure, I believe it.
> I believe it to be another distraction to keep American citizens divided.



I think that, as usual - the controversy is an hysterical distortion of what he wrote.

According to: John Holdren - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia 

Overpopulation was an early concern and interest, and in 1969, writing with Paul R. Ehrlich, 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."[15] 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"[16]. Currently, the U.S. population is 306,963,000[17]. In 1977 he co-authored (with Paul R. Ehrlich and Anne H. Ehrlich) Ecoscience: Population, Resources, Environment,[18] which discussed the possible role of a wide range of solutions to overpopulation, *from voluntary family planning at one extreme, to enforced population controls at the other extreme.*

One of his articles - The No-Growth Society -  can be read here: The No-growth society - Google Books


----------



## WillowTree (Jul 22, 2009)

Coyote said:


> brownlou said:
> 
> 
> > Do you have a copy of this textbook? Did the article show actually passages from the textbook? The article refered to some passages out of context but did not actually show any in the book itself.
> ...



oopsie doopsie!


----------



## brownlou (Jul 22, 2009)

WillowTree said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > brownlou said:
> ...



Willow--- Your childish behavior just proved my point. American citizens divided. 

Coyote gives me an intelligent and well thought out answer with links. The Fox article should have been as good but it went for the sensational. I believe Fox about as much as I believe MSNBC. Both have agendas.
I believe this is not an issue.
In 1977, my hair was almost to my ass. I was smoking dope and bitching about disco music. Now, my hair is almost gone. It's been a couple decades since I smoked a joint and I am deaf in one ear due to occupational hazzards.


----------



## WillowTree (Jul 22, 2009)

brownlou said:


> WillowTree said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...



NewsFlash Dahlink,, remember the last eight years? Remember McCain/ Palin, Joe the Plumber, Carrie Prajeen and anybody else who disagress with your sorry liberal azz???? and all you watch is MSNBC and you wonder why we are divided??? and you want to call me childish??? I mock you.


----------



## Caligirl (Jul 22, 2009)

I kinda wish there were 1/10 the number of people on the planet. This would instantly solve wars, hunger, climate change, and bad traffic. But it's not the sort of thing you can discuss, because there are really no good options and everyone knows that. Adjusting family credits to smaller family size would be a good start though.


----------



## PubliusInfinitum (Jul 22, 2009)

WillowTree said:


> President Obama's "science czar," Paul Holdren, once floated the idea of forced abortions, "compulsory sterilization," and the creation of a "Planetary Regime" that would oversee human population levels and control all natural resources as a means of protecting the planet -- controversial ideas his critics say should have been brought up in his Senate confirmation hearings.
> 
> Holdren, who has degrees from MIT and Stanford and headed a science policy program at Harvard's Kennedy School of Government for the past 13 years, won the unanimous approval of the Senate as the president's chief science adviser.
> 
> ...




ROFL... This is simply eugenics... utilitarianism...  

This nothing... the next whackjob 'Czar'... Cass Sunstein... 'believes' that animals have 'human rights'...  and what's MORE, that some animals have SUPERIOR rights to human beings.

Friends, this is the Animal Farm crowd...  

Senator Joe McCarthy warned of the Communists infiltration, 60 years ago...  and what we're seeing today, with the appointing of these freak-shows, is simply the results of that generation having tolerated it, instead of snuffing it out.


----------



## WillowTree (Jul 22, 2009)

PubliusInfinitum said:


> WillowTree said:
> 
> 
> > President Obama's "science czar," Paul Holdren, once floated the idea of forced abortions, "compulsory sterilization," and the creation of a "Planetary Regime" that would oversee human population levels and control all natural resources as a means of protecting the planet -- controversial ideas his critics say should have been brought up in his Senate confirmation hearings.
> ...





Yes! I just heard that,, on FOX NEWS,, and that includes giving animals the right to sue!   goddamn we need some of that fricking koolaid the democwats are dwinking.


----------



## brownlou (Jul 22, 2009)

WillowTree said:


> brownlou said:
> 
> 
> > WillowTree said:
> ...



Hmmm.....gibberish...Did Sarah Palin help you write that?


----------



## WillowTree (Jul 22, 2009)

brownlou said:


> WillowTree said:
> 
> 
> > brownlou said:
> ...



dwink you some mo kook aid


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jul 22, 2009)

Care4all said:


> sounds like a twisted, out of context, lie to me...but par for the course for FOX
> 
> 
> 
> ...




"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


----------



## PubliusInfinitum (Jul 22, 2009)

Care4all said:


> sounds like a twisted, out of context, lie to me...but par for the course for FOX
> 
> 
> 
> ...



ROFLMNAO... 

Isn't it WONDERFUL how these people are FLEEING from their OWN PERSONAL HISTORIES?

Hussein never associated with domestic terrorists... despite his association with Domestic terrorists...

Bill Ayers was never a domestic terrorists, despite being THE LEADER of a group which bombed the US Pentagon and a NY City Police Station...  "He was never convicted of anything'...  which is true... the liberal judge threw out the evidence which proved he was guilty, because of a technicality relevant to how it was gathered... BUT HIS WIFE WAS CONVICTED...  

But that was THEN... He's a English prof' now...    can't judge him on THEN... despite his position that HE DIDN'T DO ENOUGH BACK THEN and WISHES HE HAD DONE MORE...

These are dangerous Marxists.... and you've elected them to the highest positions in our government.

Change indeed...


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jul 22, 2009)

Sweet Willy said:


> Over population is probably the single largest problem the human race faces.  Considering that we don't allow the weak and the sick to die out,  instead using our intelligence to circumvent mother nature,  it stands to reason that we now have to use our intelligence to figure out how we will keep the population in check ourselves.  We kind of took that responsibility away from nature.  Now it's ours to think about.  I guess we could outlaw medical care and give that job back to mother nature.  The population would thin out according to nature again.



If I wanted find a really good essay as an example of an Antisocial Personality Disorder the  above would be a perfect fit.

Sweet Willie, and the name is as appropriate as "Tiny" would be for a 6 foot 6, 280 pound linebacker, and Thomas Malthus, and Paul Ehrlich and John P. Holdren, must have studied in the same kindergarten class. Taken as a whole, the planet is far from overcrowded. And food is more plentiful than when Ehrlich wrote "The Population Bomb."

Could Willie's favorite dish be Soylent Green?

And the essay above serves as the outlook of those who put forth the current bill for healthcare 'reform.'
These folks want to kill off the elderly to save money and make room.   What is the solution they see?  Here is a hint:

Democrat Governor Dick Lamb once created a firestorm in Colorado (a few years after leaving the Governors office) when he said: the elderly have a patriotic duty to die.

The idea is political one, and based on a) the idea that the elderly have medical requirements greater than the young, and there are greater costs associated with them  B) the elderly are no longer contributing to the GDP.  
So, we can kill , pun intended, two birds with one stone. Decline to fulfill our promise to the elderly, who have contributed to our great nation, ration healthcare, which means deprive them of the drugs and technology that they need, and encourage them to, as Dick Lamb ordered, do their patriotic duty.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jul 22, 2009)

PubliusInfinitum said:


> Care4all said:
> 
> 
> > sounds like a twisted, out of context, lie to me...but par for the course for FOX
> ...



Great point about these lefties fleeing from their past, and hiding it from the public, but let's not forget that right-winger Sonia Sotomayor, who disavowed all of her racist, sexist, radical and anti-judicial views at the hearings.

And, perhaps more pertinent to this discussion, Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, brother of Rahm Emanuel, and appointed to the Office of Management and Budget as health advisor, who believes that doctors should no longer be wedded to the Hippocratic Oath:

"True change, writes Dr. Emanuel, must include reassessing the promise doctors make when they enter the profession, the Hippocratic Oath. Amazingly, Dr. Emanuel criticizes the Hippocratic Oath as partly to blame for the "overuse" of medical care: "Medical school education and post graduate education emphasize thoroughness," he wrote. Physicians take the "Hippocratic Oath's admonition to 'use my power to help the sick to the best of my ability and judgment' as an imperative to do everything for the patient regardless of the cost or effects on others." (Journal of the American Medical Association, June 18, 2008.) Of course that is what patients hope their doctors will do. But Dr. Emanuel wants doctors to look beyond the needs of their own patient and consider social justice. They should think about whether the money being spent on their patient could be better spent elsewhere. Many doctors are horrified at this notion, and will tell you that a doctor's job is to achieve social justice one patient at a time. "
Defend Your Health Care


----------



## KittenKoder (Jul 22, 2009)

tha malcontent said:


> KittenKoder said:
> 
> 
> > Know what Willow ... I honestly don't care. I don't like having so many damned hairless apes clogging up my streets ... so meh. Whatever the reasoning, and this is why I supported Bush's war, if it cuts the number of idiots I have to deal with down, I'm all for it. So thanks for giving me a reason to support Obama on one thing.
> ...



Mal, you're new so I'll clue you in, I don't like humans ... I only tolerate people I don't know. Until I get to know someone, they are just livestock to me. Does that answer your question?


----------



## WillowTree (Jul 22, 2009)

KittenKoder said:


> tha malcontent said:
> 
> 
> > KittenKoder said:
> ...



Spoken like a true Nazi!


----------



## KittenKoder (Jul 22, 2009)

WillowTree said:


> KittenKoder said:
> 
> 
> > tha malcontent said:
> ...



No, Nazis hate everyone but their own kind. 

More like "spoken like a true computer chip".


----------



## EriktheRed (Jul 22, 2009)

A Lib response:


Holdren's Controversial Population Control Past | The American Prospect






Personally, though I don't really believe this is the problem Cons wanna make it out to be, I wouldn't be bothered if the guy's nomination was withdrawn. The controversy doesn't seem to be worth it, whether the outrage is faux or real and I'm sure there's someone else just as qualified for the position without this bit of baggage.


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Jul 22, 2009)

EriktheRed said:


> A Lib response:
> 
> 
> Holdren's Controversial Population Control Past | The American Prospect
> ...



"Holdren and the Ehrlichs were writing during a time of national, bipartisan panic about overpopulation"

That makes it OK. (Notice the panic was "bipartisan" meaning both Leftists AND Marxists were in agreement that it was a real problem)

So we have more or less people on the planet than in the 1970's?

Anyone?

Bueller?

Anyone?


----------



## Coyote (Jul 23, 2009)

WillowTree said:


> Yes! I just heard that,, on FOX NEWS,, a*nd that includes giving animals the right to sue!*  goddamn we need some of that fricking koolaid the democwats are dwinking.



Ok...perhaps you can link to something (anything?) showing the Democratic party promotes that kind of legislation?

Didn't think so.

Typical moron, using the actions of extremists to define the whole.


----------



## Lookout (Jul 23, 2009)

KittenKoder said:


> Know what Willow ... I honestly don't care. I don't like having so many damned hairless apes clogging up my streets ... so meh. Whatever the reasoning, and this is why I supported Bush's war, if it cuts the number of idiots I have to deal with down, I'm all for it. So thanks for giving me a reason to support Obama on one thing.



I really hope you have not contributed to the American Gene Pool! In case you haven't figured it out yet it is people who think like you that will be the first targets. Dear God, please .......Oh never mind, it would just be the pearls before swine thing anyway.


----------

