Al Sharpton Angry With Callers Critical Of Barack Obama

Faced with an increasing number of calls from African-American listeners angry with Barack Obama’s performance, a frustrated Reverend Al Sharpton has begun to turn against his own radio audience in an attempt to diffuse it.

Until a week or so ago, Sharpton’s radio callers remained seemingly euphoric over Obama’s victory, rarely raising critical points. Almost with the flick of a switch, however, listeners are suddenly phoning the syndicated liberal talk host to express their concerns over unfulfilled promises and unclear results.

While polls still show Obama with as much as 97% approval among African-Americans, that doesn’t mean there aren’t significant concerns beneath the surface.

But these frustrated supporters, both men and women, have clearly phoned the wrong program. Rather than discuss their grievances, Sharpton has taken to angry outbursts, personal insults and threats. Only one, a woman named Fay from Detroit, seemed able to find him agreeable to her points.

Though Sharpton is known for attention-generating public confrontations, his radio program is normally quite the opposite, generally featuring polite conversation and often avoids controversy altogether.

In order to save Obama’s strongest base of political support, is Sharpton willing to sacrifice his audience? You betcha.

Upheaval in Honduras: A Defining Moment for Obama

Dr. Mark W. Hendrickson

Center for Vision & Values

July 10, 2009

Quick, what’s the capital of Honduras? Probably fewer than 10 percent of Americans could answer that question prior to the recent news that Honduran President Mel Zelaya was sent packing to Costa Rica by the Honduran military. While it’s too early to say whether the so-called “coup” will stick, or whether Zelaya, like Venezuela’s Hugo Chavez a few years ago, can regain power, it isn’t too early to assess Barack Obama’s response. In fact, Obama’s reaction has been most illuminating, and may indeed be one of the defining moments of his presidency.

When the “mullah-cracy” that controls the government in Iran made a mockery of the rule of law with its sham election earlier in June, Obama was strangely silent. Days later, he finally paid lip service to the legitimate aspirations of the Iranian people, although he was clearly following American public opinion rather than leading by personal commitment to the principle that the people of the world have certain inalienable rights that their governments cannot abrogate. The cop-out used by Obama essentially amounted to respecting other countries’ sovereignty and not wanting to “interfere” in their business.

By contrast, Obama’s response to events in Honduras was immediate and energetic. He condemned the expulsion of Zelaya from his office and his country, asserting that it was “not legal” and “a terrible precedent.” What happened to Obama’s alleged respect for sovereignty and unwillingness to “meddle?” The only constant element in Obama’s differing reactions to upheaval in Iran and Honduras is that in both cases our president refused to condemn the party that was trampling the rule of law. (Or, at least in Iran’s case, initially.)

Upheaval in Honduras: A Defining Moment for Obama.

John Holdren, Obama’s Science Czar, says: Forced abortions and mass sterilization needed to save the planet

Forced abortions. Mass sterilization. A “Planetary Regime” with the power of life and death over American citizens.

The tyrannical fantasies of a madman? Or merely the opinions of the person now in control of science policy in the United States? Or both?

These ideas (among many other equally horrifying recommendations) were put forth by John Holdren, whom Barack Obama has recently appointed Director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy, Assistant to the President for Science and Technology, and Co-Chair of the President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology — informally known as the United States’ Science Czar. In a book Holdren co-authored in 1977, the man now firmly in control of science policy in this country 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.

Impossible, you say? That must be an exaggeration or a hoax. No one in their right mind would say such things.

Well, I hate to break the news to you, but it is no hoax, no exaggeration. John Holdren really did say those things, and this report contains the proof. Below you will find photographs, scans, and transcriptions of pages in the book Ecoscience, co-authored in 1977 by John Holdren and his close colleagues Paul Ehrlich and Anne Ehrlich. The scans and photos are provided to supply conclusive evidence that the words attributed to Holdren are unaltered and accurately transcribed.

This report was originally inspired by this article in FrontPage magazine, which covers some of the same information given here. But that article, although it contained many shocking quotes from John Holdren, failed to make much of an impact on public opinion. Why not? Because, as I discovered when discussing the article with various friends, there was no proof that the quotes were accurate — so most folks (even those opposed to Obama’s policies) doubted their veracity, because the statements seemed too inflammatory to be true. In the modern era, it seems, journalists have lost all credibility, and so are presumed to be lying or exaggerating unless solid evidence is offered to back up the claims. Well, this report contains that evidence.

Of course, Holdren wrote these things in the framework of a book he co-authored about what he imagined at the time (late 1970s) was an apocalyptic crisis facing mankind: overpopulation. He felt extreme measures would be required to combat an extreme problem. Whether or not you think this provides him a valid “excuse” for having descended into a totalitarian fantasy is up to you: personally, I don’t think it’s a valid excuse at all, since the crisis he was in a panic over was mostly in his imagination. Totalitarian regimes and unhinged people almost always have what seems internally like a reasonable justification for actions which to the outside world seem incomprehensible.

John Holdren, Obama’s Science Czar, says: Forced abortions and mass sterilization needed to save the planet.

---

The inmates are in charge

Gore: U.S. Climate Bill Will Help Bring About ‘Global Governance’

Former Vice President Al Gore declared that the Congressional climate bill will help bring about “global governance.”

“I bring you good news from the U.S., “Gore said on July 7, 2009 in Oxford at the Smith School World Forum on Enterprise and the Environment, sponsored by UK Times.

“Just two weeks ago, the House of Representatives passed the Waxman-Markey climate bill,” Gore said, noting it was “very much a step in the right direction.” President Obama has pushed for the passage of the bill in the Senate and attended a G8 summit this week where he agreed to attempt to keep the Earth’s temperatures from rising more than 2 degrees C.

Gore touted the Congressional climate bill, claiming it “will dramatically increase the prospects for success” in combating what he sees as the “crisis” of man-made global warming.

via Gore: U.S. Climate Bill Will Help Bring About ‘Global Governance’ | Climate Depot.

<hr>

This is what the Global Warming malarkey was all about from the start. A Global Government.

Billions in aid go to areas that backed Obama in ‘08

“There’s no politics at work when it comes to spending for the recovery,” White House spokesman Robert Gibbs says.

Counties that supported Obama last year have reaped twice as much money per person from the administration’s $787 billion economic stimulus package as those that voted for his Republican rival, Sen. John McCain, a USA TODAY analysis of government disclosure and accounting records shows. That money includes aid to repair military bases, improve public housing and help students pay for college.

via Billions in aid go to areas that backed Obama in ‘08 – USATODAY.com.

---

Slowly but surely, the sleeping masses are learning that OBama is nothing more than a liberal hack politician who says one thing with great bravado, then sneaks off and does the opposite.

Viva the gullible voter for they have be fooled.

BAM’S BLUNDERS ABROAD – New York Post

It took a week for President Obama to say something of substance against the violent repression of anti-government protesters in Iran. Fear of meddling, he said, was the reason for the delay.

Yet it took just hours for him to publicly denounce the removal of Honduran President Manuel Zelaya, an ally of Venezuelan America-hater Hugo Chavez, by that nation’s army and demand his immediate reinstatement.

No fear of meddling this time.

That’s because Barack Obama’s foreign policy is very much a moment-to-moment affair, with no guiding principles.

Certainly, President George W. Bush would’ve understood that what has been portrayed as a “banana republic” military coup was nothing of the sort — that Zelaya’s ouster was meant to preserve Honduran democracy, not suppress it.

Zelaya’s removal, after all, came at the direct order of the Honduran Supreme Court and was approved by both the nation’s attorney general and its Congress.

Replacing Zelaya as president was not a military junta but the head of the Congress, a member of Zalaya’s own political party, which had declared him unfit for public office. And the replacement immediately called for new national elections and vowed to abide by the results.

Some coup.

In fact, the monumentally incompetent Zelaya had tried to follow in Chavez’s anti-democratic footsteps, unilaterally overturning Honduras’ constitution by staging an illegal referrendum to give cover to his plan to sidestep strict term limits and run for re-election indefinitely.

When the head of the army refused to cooperate, Zelaya fired him — a move the Supreme Court quickly declared illegal.

Sad to say, international opinion backed Obama and rallied behind Zelaya.

The UN General Assembly called for Zelaya’s reinstatement (which gives a pretty clear indication of just which side holds the high moral ground here).

And the Organization of American States — which just recently moved to readmit Castro’s Cuba after a 47-year suspension — threatened to suspend Honduras’ membership unless Zelaya is reinstated.

Bad enough that Obama doesn’t seem to know when taking sides constitutes irresponsible meddling — and when it doesn’t.

Even worse that when he does choose teams, he chooses the wrong one.

via BAM’S BLUNDERS ABROAD – New York Post.

Amid Criticism, Post Drops “Appalling” Plan to Sell Access – ABC News

The Politico newspaper reported Thursday morning the venerable Washington paper had invited lobbyists to participate in “off-the-record,” non-confrontational meetings with Post reporters and editors, as well as with administration officials and others, by paying between $25,000 and $250,000

‘Caught with it’s pants down – the Post responds’

In an emailed statement to ABC News Thursday morning, a Post spokeswoman paper called the flyer a “draft” that had not been properly vetted.

Amid Criticism, Post Drops “Appalling” Plan to Sell Access — ABC News

---

If  ‘integrity’ sells news papers then it stands to reason the lack of integrity has the opposite effect.

tabloids excluded…