Once the Government OWNS Your Children; What’s Left? The Obama “Plan” for America?

=============================

==============

**This post is LONG, however it contains a wealth of information that Americans need to know, understand, and realize what is Obama’s “Plan” for America……and Americans.***

Enlightenment

Education

Empowerment

=================================

From Trevor Loudon:

NoisyRoom
By: Terresa Monroe-Hamilton

November 20, 2011

“Parsons was Winston’s fellow employee at the Ministry of Truth. He was a fattish but active man of paralyzing stupidity, a mass of imbecile enthusiasms—one of those completely unquestioning, devoted drudges on whom, more even than on the thought police, the stability of the Party depended.”

“Nearly all children nowadays were horrible. What was worst of all was that by means of such organizations as the Spies they were systematically turned into ungovernable little savages, and yet this produced in them no tendency whatever to rebel against the discipline of the Party. On the contrary, they adored the Party and everything connected with it… All their ferocity was turned outwards, against the enemies of the State, against foreigners, traitors, saboteurs, thought-criminals. It was almost normal for people over thirty to be frightened of their own children.”
“Thoughtcrime does not entail death: thoughtcrime is death.”

George Orwell’s 1984

Not content with the massive government growth since Obama came into power, Comrade Pelosi wants even more. This time she’s campaigning for federal child care which is a true Communistic principle:

Just as housework withers away, so the obligations of parents to their children wither away gradually until finally society assumes the full responsibility. Under capitalism children were frequently, too frequently, a heavy and unbearable burden on the proletarian family. Communist society will come to the aid of the parents. In Soviet Russia the Commissariats of Public Education and of Social Welfare are already doing much to assist the family. We already have homes for very small babies, creches, kindergartens, children’s colonies and homes, hospitals and health resorts for sick children. restaurants, free lunches at school and free distribution of text books, warm clothing and shoes to schoolchildren. All this goes to show that the responsibility for the child is passing from the family to the collective.

The parental care of children in the family could be divided into three parts: (a) the care of the very young baby, (b) the bringing up of the child, and (c) the instruction of the child. Even in capitalist society the education of the child in primary schools and later in secondary and higher educational establishments became the responsibility of the state. Even in capitalist society the needs of the workers were to some extent met by the provision of playgrounds, kindergartens, play groups, etc. The more the workers became conscious of their rights and the better they were organised, the more society had to relieve the family of the care of the children. But bourgeois society was afraid of going too far towards meeting the interests of the working class, lest this contribute to the break-up of the family. For the capitalists are well aware that the old type of family, where the woman is a slave and where the husband is responsible for the well-being of his wife and children, constitutes the best weapon in the struggle to stifle the desire of the working class for freedom and to weaken the revolutionary spirit of the working man and working woman. The worker is weighed down by his family cares and is obliged to compromise with capital. The father and mother are ready to agree to any terms when their children are hungry. Capitalist society has not been able to transform education into a truly social and state matter because the property owners, the bourgeoisie, have been against this.

Communist society considers the social education of the rising generation to be one of the fundamental aspects of the new life. The old family, narrow and petty, where the parents quarrel and are only interested in their own offspring, is not capable of educating the “new person”. The playgrounds, gardens, homes and other amenities where the child will spend the greater part of the day under the supervision of qualified educators will, on the other hand, offer an environment in which the child can grow up a conscious communist who recognises the need for solidarity, comradeship, mutual help and loyalty to the collective. What responsibilities are left to the parents, when they no longer have to take charge of upbringing and education? The very small baby, you might answer, while it is still learning to walk and clinging to its mother’s skirt, still needs her attention. Here again the communist state hastens to the aid of the working mother. No longer will there be any women who are alone. The workers’ state aims to support every mother, married or unmarried, while she is suckling her child, and to establish maternity homes, day nurseries and other such facilities in every city and village, in order to give women the opportunity to combine work in society with maternity.

The masks are coming off the Progressives. They don’t even try to hide their Marxist agendas any more. Pelosi wants to be reinstated as Speaker of the House (she must dearly miss the power that position has) and as her primary campaign topic, she is going all out for national child care.

Last week, the California congresswoman hit five cities in five days, barnstorming for money to try to win the 25 more seats it would take to regain control. And if that happens — or when, according to her — at the top of her to-do list, she says, will be “doing for child care what we did for health-care reform” — pushing comprehensive change. …

Of the need for child-care legislation, she says, “I could never get a babysitter — have five kids in six years and no one wants to come to your house. . . . And everywhere I go, women say the same thing” about how hard it is to find the kind of reliable care that would make their family lives calmer and work lives more productive. When it comes to “unleashing women” in a way that would boost the economy, she says, “this is a missing link.”

Congress did pass such a bill, in 1971, but President Richard M. Nixon vetoed it because he thought it would undermine families and force them to put children in government-run centers.

Tell me that doesn’t sound exactly like the Marxists in 1920′s Russia. They never, ever give up and have been pushing the destruction of the central family unit along with complete government involvement in child care for a long, long time. The Communists wanted women to have to work, so the government would get to step in with national child care and an iron grip on citizens from cradle to grave. She wants to resurrect the bill form 1971 that Nixon vetoed as her next big goal. Pelosi is just the corrupt, Marxist Progressive to get it done too. She is incredibly dangerous and evil.

Pelosi is an elitist and very, very bitter over being replaced as Speaker of the House. But true to her nature, she learned everything she knows from Daddy and will never give up getting her power back. From She’s The Boss:

Pelosi’s mastery of the insider game most definitely took place beyond the classroom walls. Indeed, Pelosi possesses the political street smarts of a party boss harking back to the days of Boss Tweed of Tammany Hall or the Daley Machine in Chicago. And that’s not surprising, since her father, “Big Tommy” D’Alesandro, Jr., ran his own well-oiled machine. She saw precinct party politics up close where the means to power was deal making, backroom bargains and, when necessary, strong-arm tactics and intimidation. New York Times reporter David Firestone writes, “The ability to make merry while reaching for the jugular is an essential characteristic for politicians, and friends say Ms. Pelosi learned it from one of the classic political bosses and characters of an earlier era, Thomas J. D’Alesandro, Jr., a congressman, mayor of Baltimore and doler of favors for Northeastern Maryland for 40 years.

Don’t make the mistake of thinking she is incompetent or crazy. Pelosi is anything but. She is aggressive, brutal and power hungry. She crushes anyone who gets in the way of her agenda. Now she is coming after our children. Parents, it’s crunch time. You need to get your children out of the government controlled school system and now. You need to find a way to NOT let the government take care of your child as well. They are masters at propaganda, thought policing and brainwashing. The government and our elites are the ultimate bad man offering our children candy and many parents are nudging their children right into the government’s loving arms. God help us all.

If indeed Pelosi achieves her goal and the government does for child care what it did for healthcare, it might look something like this:

  • A childcare mandate requiring all parents to buy childcare for their children and enter the workplace.
  • A national electronic database of all parents and their parenting habits, ostensibly to determine and enforce the use of “best practices” for raising children.
  • Forcing all private-sector child care professionals out of business, creating a single-caregiver government monopoly subjecting impressionable young children to government indoctrination in everything from climate change to illegal immigration and abortion.

1984 comes knocking on our doors and our children are the price of government oversight. Makes you all warm and fuzzy doesn’t it? More likely, it chills you to the bone and there is fear in the pit of your stomach for your family and children. You have to ask yourself, “Once they own your kids, what’s left?”

***Emphasis added****

LINK

================================

THINK of it this way:

1.  Government wants women to have FREE access to abortions.  Abortion clinics (Planned Parenthood) was started by Margaret Sanger to get RID of the “Misfits” and the UNWANTEDS.  Think forced abortions in China.

2.  World “Sustainability”, controlling our population in America and the World.  Carol Browner, the former Obama’s “Global Warming Czar”. Until late 2008 Browner was a member of Socialist International Commission for a Sustainable World Society. Our current Science Czar for Obama is John Holdren advocates EUGENICS.

3.  Barbara Bowman, Valerie Jarrett’s (Obama’s brain) MOTHER is an expert on CHILD REARING:

**OF MAJOR NOTE HERE: Barbara Bowman, Valerie Jarret’s mother, founded the Erikson Institute in Chicago in the honor of Eric Erikson.

Professor Barbara Bowman is one of three faculty founders of Erikson Institute and served as president of the institute from 1994 to 2001. She is the Irving B. Harris Professor of Child Development.http://www.erikson.edu/default/faculty/faclistings/facbio.aspx?c=300

The school—originally known as the Chicago School for Early Childhood Education—enrolled its first class of 16 student in the fall of 1966.  Classess were held in the Hyde Park Bank building. In 1967, the school formed an affiliation with Loyola University Chicago to grant a master’s degree. In 1969, it was renamed for Erik Erikson (1902–94), the German-born psychoanalyst and former colleague of Piers who first proposed that children are not simply biological organisms but also products of society’s expectations, prejudices, and prohibitions.
http://www.erikson.edu/default/aboutei/history.aspx

As part of the Erickson Institute; the Herr Research Center.

The Herr Research Center for Children and Social Policy at Erikson Institute builds on the work of an applied research center established at Erikson in 1997 with generous gifts from the Jeffery Herr family.  The center expanded its mission in 2005 with an additional gift from the Herr family and with grants from the McCormick , Joyce, and Spencer Foundations and the Children’s Initiative, a project of the Pritzker Family Foundation.

http://www.erikson.edu/hrc/hrcabout.aspx

Valerie Jarrett’s mother, early childhood education authory Barbara Taylor Bowman also has some interesting connections.

For several years she has run the Chicago based Erikson Institute. An ealy Erikson board member was Chicago businessman and “liberal” activist Tom Ayers-father of Weather Underground terrorist leader and long time Obama colleague Bill Ayers.

Bernardine Dohrn, wife of Bill and reputedly the real leader of Weather Underground has also served on the Erikson board in recent years.

According to World Net Daily’s Brad O’Leary;

Tom Ayers served as a trustee of the Erikson Institute. The Institute distributed $46,025 in Northern Trust scholarships. At the time, the Erickson Institute Board of Trustees also included Ayers’ convicted felon daughter-in-law, Bernadine Dohrn Ayers. In addition, the Institute’s co-founder, Barbara Bowman, is the mother of close Obama adviser Valerie Jarrett.

In an obvious reference to Barbara Taylor Bowman, Bill Ayers wrote on page 82 of his book, “A Kind and Just Parent”, describing his Hyde Park neighborhood:

“Just south I see the Robert Taylor Homes named for the first head of the Chicago Housing Authority, whose daughter, a neighbor and friend is president of the Erikson Institute.”

Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn have both been leaders of the radical Movement for a Democratic Society-alongside Van Jones associates Roxanne Dunbar-Ortiz and Betita Martinez.

Barbara Bowman was interviewed for Timuel Black’s “Bridges of Memory: Chicago’s First Wave of Black Migration-an Oral History”. Timuel Black, serves on the advisory board of Committees for Correspondence for Democracy and Socialism alongside Manning Marable and Van Jones’ mentor and friend Betita Martinez.

Timuel Black is also a long time friend of Barack Obama.

The Erikson Institute is named after pioneering child educationalist Erik Erikson, an errant disciple of Sigmund Freud and coiner of the phrase “identity crisis”.

In 1950 Erikson became a cause celebre on the left after leaving the University of California rather than sign an anti-communist loyalty oath.

Interestingly Larry Friedman, activist and author of the 1999 book “Identity’s Architect: A Biography of Erik H. Erikson” also had ties to communism and California.

Both my parents were very active in the Communist Party…So that’s very much where I picked up the activism.”

In the late 1940s, Larry’s family moved from Ohio to California, ostensibly for health reasons as Larry “was always getting sick. The real reason, as Dorothy Healy later explained to me, is the Party reassigned my father to California to organize.”

Larry friedman states that he been in contact with Erikson since the 1960s. Did the introduction come through his Communist parents?

Coincidentally Dorothy Healey, once the top communist in Southern California, later attended the 1992 founding conference of the Committees of Correspondence in Berkeley-alongside later Van Jones associates Betita Martinez, Roxanne Dunbar-Ortiz, Max Elbaum, Arnoldo Garcia and Bob Wing.

Barbara Bowman greets Barack Obama

In March this year the Communist Party’s People’s Weekly World reprinted an IPS article on the prospects for children under Obama.

Some are hopeful that the new administration of President Barack Obama, who appears focused on children’s welfare and education, will reverse this decline.

“It is important to remember that for the first time in a long time we have a person who gets it,” said Barbara Bowman, a consultant to the U.S. Secretary of Education, praising Obama for “(understanding) the importance of early childhood care and education.”

LINK

****

4.  John Holdren, Obama’s Science Czar is advocate of Eugenics and Population Control.

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

Book he authored in 1977 advocates for extreme totalitarian measures to control the population

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 FrontPagemagazine, 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.

Direct quotes from John Holdren’s Ecoscience

Ready? Brace yourself. And prepare to be shocked.

Page 837Compulsory abortions would be legal

Statement about compulsory abortionsStatement about compulsory abortions

Reiterated:

Indeed, it has been concluded that compulsory population-control laws, even including laws requiring compulsory abortion, could be sustained under the existing Constitution if the population crisis became sufficiently severe to endanger the society.

Page 786Single mothers should have their babies taken away by the government; or they could be forced to have abortions

One way to carry out this disapproval might be to insist that all illegitimate babies be put up for adoption—especially those born to minors, who generally are not capable of caring properly for a child alone. If a single mother really wished to keep her baby, she might be obliged to go through adoption proceedings and demonstrate her ability to support and care for it. Adoption proceedings probably should remain more difficult for single people than for married couples, in recognition of the relative difficulty of raising children alone. 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.

Page 787-8Mass sterilization of humans though drugs in the water supply is OK as long as it doesn’t harm livestock

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. No such sterilant exists today, nor does one appear to be under development. To be acceptable, such a substance would have to meet some rather stiff requirements: it must be uniformly effective, despite widely varying doses received by individuals, and despite varying degrees of fertility and sensitivity among individuals; it must be free of dangerous or unpleasant side effects; and it must have no effect on members of the opposite sex, children, old people, pets, or livestock.

Page 786-7The government could control women’s reproduction by either sterilizing them or implanting mandatory long-term birth control

Involuntary fertility control

A program of sterilizing women after their second or third child, despite the relatively greater difficulty of the operation than vasectomy, might be easier to implement than trying to sterilize men.

The development of a long-term sterilizing capsule that could be implanted under the skin and removed when pregnancy is desired opens additional possibilities for coercive fertility control. The capsule could be implanted at puberty and might be removable, with official permission, for a limited number of births.

Page 838The kind of people who cause “social deterioration” can be compelled to not have children

If some individuals contribute to general social deterioration by overproducing children, and if the need is compelling, they can be required by law to exercise reproductive responsibilityjust as they can be required to exercise responsibility in their resource-consumption patterns providing they are not denied equal protection.

To me, this is in some ways the most horrifying sentence in the entire book — and it had a lot of competition. Because here Holdren reveals that moral judgments would be involved in determining who gets sterilized or is forced to abort their babies. Proper, decent people will be left alone — but those who “contribute to social deterioration” could be “forced to exercise reproductive responsibility” which could only mean one thing — compulsory abortion or involuntary sterilization. What other alternative would there be to “force” people to not have children? Will government monitors be stationed in irresponsible people’s bedrooms to ensure they use condoms? Will we bring back the chastity belt? No — the only way to “force” people to not become or remain pregnant is to sterilize them or make them have abortions.

But what manner of insanity is this? “Social deterioration”? Is Holdren seriously suggesting that “some” people contribute to social deterioriation more than others, and thus should be sterilized or forced to have abortions, to prevent them from propagating their kind? Isn’t that eugenics, plain and simple?And isn’t eugenics universally condemned as a grotesquely evil practice?

Page 917We will need to surrender national sovereignty to an armed international police force

If this could be accomplished, security might be provided by anarmed international organization, a global analogue of a police force. Many people have recognized this as a goal, but the way to reach it remains obscure in a world where factionalism seems, if anything, to be increasing. The first step necessarily involves partial surrender of sovereignty to an international organization.

To Read the ENTIRE article go HERE

==================================

*********************

Related Links:  Abortion…..or Eugenics?

Obama Administration Covering Up Abortion Data. WHY?

************

Science Czar John Holdren’s Eugenicist Idol….Harrison Brown; Ezekiel Emanuel and Cass Sunstein’s Life/Lives Systems (Darwinism). Rockefeller Subsidized Government Programs (NSSM 200)

*********

Obama Czar John Holdren: Besides Climate Hoax….Into Population Control!

===================================

=======================

The above information IS REAL America!

Wake Up!

Is Obama Building a Politburo ONE STEP at a time; waiting for financial collapse to initiate the Totalitarian “Transformational Change” for his ideology of what America Should Be?

Is Obama Creating a Politburo Right Under American’s Noses?

=================================

***Listen carefully from 1:00 to 1:37 minutes***ALSO listen from 0:40 to 0:45  “When we visited his home country……Kenya.”

“World as it IS and What the World should look like”***

Saul Alinsky quote:

“The means-and-ends moralists, constantly obsessed with the ethics of the means used by the Have-Nots against the Haves, should search themselves as to their real political position. In fact, they are passive — but real — allies of the Haves…. The most unethical of all means is the non-use of any means… The standards of judgment must be rooted in the whys and wherefores of life as it is lived, the world as it is, not our wished-for fantasy of the world as it should be….” pp 25-26

 LINK


==============================

==============

The URI to TrackBack this entry is: https://romanticpoet.wordpress.com/2011/11/22/once-the-government-owns-your-children-whats-left-the-obama-plan-for-america/trackback/

RSS feed for comments on this post.

7 CommentsLeave a comment

  1. […] Once the Government OWNS Your Children; What’s Left? The Obama “Plan” for America? […]

  2. […] Once the Government OWNS Your Children; What’s Left? The Obama “Plan” for America? […]

  3. […] Once the Government OWNS Your Children; What’s Left? The Obama “Plan” for America? […]

  4. […] Once the Government OWNS Your Children; What’s Left? The Obama “Plan” for America? […]

  5. […] Once the Government OWNS Your Children; What’s Left? The Obama “Plan” for America? […]

  6. […] Once the Government OWNS Your Children; What’s Left? The Obama “Plan” for America? […]

  7. […] Once the Government OWNS Your Children; What’s Left? The Obama “Plan” for America? […]


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: