- Joined
- Oct 3, 2008
- Messages
- 12,753
- Reaction score
- 2,321
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Undisclosed
Sorry don't know of that book. Bush was a Democrat as is McCain. It is not their fault that their party was hijacked by Liberals and the Republican party was the only place for them.
Thanks for clarifying the position... I know now that I'm essentially in full agreement here.
It's like with the soviet union there was 1 party... here in america we have the choice... do we want the hammer or the sickle?
About the book; 'ecoscience' written by John P Holdren and Paul R. Ehrlich. It's essentially a policy book about ways in which to handle 'overpopulation'. One of the main points was discussing ways to sterilize men and women without also sterilizing other animals, in such a way that there would be an 'antidote' which could be obtained through a successful application process where you would have to prove why you are worthy of being a parent. Which ties into my next point :
How many scientist do you think are not Liberal? How hard do you think it would have been for Bush to find an Conservative scientist?
I forget where the suggestion was made, but I remember reading the challenge to go to the heads of the psychology, sociology, or biology in ANY university and ask them about 'overpopulation' or 'the people bomb' and likely in EVERY case the heads of those departments would be all to happy to tell you of the need to depopulate the planet...
I have seen this movement grow for the last 40 years of my life, so it is no surprise to me. It is a movement of "lies and hatred", this is all the motivation and cause they need. They wake up in the morning and their eyes scan the horizon for things to hate. and then their minds start to whirl on how they can manipulate it with lies.
I haven't been around for 40 years... but I have spent time when I was younger researching corporate corruption, which tied into politicians surprisingly often in cases that are too numerous to list.
As I looked deeper, then I started to be called a 'conspiracy theorist' in spite of the fact that others under the same label, who were legitimate researchers and experts in their fields that have a surprisingly good track record of predicting future events... (one example : when oil was around 60$ /barrel I heard of the discussion to manipulate the cost of oil to bring it to the 150-200$ range within a year... this was blasted as nonsense... yet, like clockwork it happened.)
Then you come across books like 1968's "limits to growth" and 1991's "the final revolution" (both coming from the club of Rome, of which Al Gore is a standing member) and the picture becomes even more clear... so when climate gate came out, it was more a 'finally' then a 'seriously?', in my view.