"A socialist is someone who has read Lenin and Marx. An anti-socialist is someone who understands Lenin and Marx" -Ronald Reagan
For some time we have discussed some of the communists, racists, and quite frankly, out and out loons that populate the major positions in the Obama regime.
Everyone is familiar with radicals like Dr Ezekiel Emanuel, brother of Obama’s Chief-of-Staff, Rahm "Naked Shower Boy" Emanuel, who serves as Obama’s health care adviser. Dr Zeke is the author of the "Complete Lives System" that is the blue print for health care rationing, and determines who is "worthy" of health care under the Obama regime. Emanuel’s program basically denies the very young, the old, and the disabled, setting up boards that would enforce these standards, or as Sarah Palin rightly calls them, "death panels."
We also know about Cass Sunstein, who is Obama’s "Regulatory Czar" in charge of, well... everything. This is a guy who thinks animals should have lawyers and be able to sue in court. He also thinks the government has the right to your organs, presumably at death, and should be able to harvest them without consent. There’s a lot more, but you get the idea.
Then we have John Holdren, Obama’s "Science Czar." This guy is a real winner who thinks humans should be eliminated, a common theme among far left environmental zealots, and has talked about the need to add sterilants to the water supply, as well as forcing certain "undesirables" to have abortions. This of course, is right in line with Klan sympathizer, and Planned Parenthood founder, Margaret Sanger who fought to make abortions acceptable in order to eliminate blacks and other "undesirables" (her words) whom she called "human weeds."
Everyone is also familiar with former "Green Jobs Czar" Van Jones, an openly communist, racist, hate monger who was fired after pressure from Glenn Beck and others, and we are becoming more familiar with Jim Wallis, the Obama regime’s new "spiritual adviser" and a radical communist, who hates capitalism and the American way.
Now, thanks to Aaron Klein and Brenda J. Elliot over at World Net Daily, we are learning more about the radical head of the Environmental Protection Agency. The EPA has been a problem for some time. They are out of control. Now that Obama is in office, he plans to use the EPA to institute job killing, economy crushing rules and regulations, which are basically wealth redistribution schemes.
Obama’s Congress has not been able to pass this crippling cap and tax legislation, so as is Obama’s standard M.O., he is looking for another way to impose his will on the American people, despite their strenuous objections.
With that said, meet Lisa Jackson, EPA administrator:
Does Environmental Protection Agency Chief Lisa Jackson view her post as an activist position that can be used to spread America's wealth?
Jackson has given scores of speeches touting "environmental justice" and recently launched an initiative aimed at achieving "environmental justice," a policy critics warn could be a ruse to spread the country's wealth.
WND reported another top administration official, Obama's regulatory czar Cass Sunstein, wrote it is "desirable" to redistribute America's wealth using "environmental justice."
Meanwhile, Jackson, the first African American to head the EPA, routinely mixes environmental activism with racial politics.
Jackson has made remarks on race that seem to echo controversial statements by Obama's former "green jobs" czar, Van Jones, who resigned in September after it was exposed he founded a communist organization. Jones previously stated his advocacy for green jobs was part of a broader movement to destroy the U.S. capitalist system.
In an EPA video announcing a new "environmental justice" initiative, Jackson opens with, "There are too many places in this country where pollution and environmental degradation fall disproportionately in low-income and minority communities. ... We can't stand by and accept those disparities. As a start we are building our environmental team."
Similarly, Jones drew fire for remarks he made in 2008 when he claimed, "The white polluters and the white environmentalists are essentially steering poison into the people-of-color communities because they don’t have a racial justice framework."
The concept of "environmental justice" permeates Jackson's work.
For her first public appearance after being confirmed by the Senate in January, Jackson chose a national conference of "environmental justice" groups meeting in New York.
Just after she was confirmed, Jackson gave a press conference touting her decision to "expand the conversation on environmentalism and working for environmental justice."
In , Jackson declared, "We, as a nation, must address this environmental justice issue."
"New Jersey's ports are located in Newark and Camden – two environmental justice communities. The residents of these cities, along with many other urban residents throughout the state, are disproportionately impacted by diesel exhaust."
After Obama tapped Jackson to head the EPA, Monique Harden, co-director of the far-left Advocates for Environmental Human Rights, a nonprofit legal advocacy group in New Orleans, stated, "This is certainly a person who understands environmental justice and who has launched and initiated efforts to reduce pollution and therefore the cancer and health impacts in communities of color."
Last August, Jackson was a speaker at the annual conference of the National Association of Black Journalists, discussing the theme, "This Land Is Our Land Too: Justice, Jobs and Environmental Protection." At the conference, she stated it is necessary to make clear to people suffering immediate economic distress the relationship between "traditional civil rights and social justice issues" and environmental justice.
'Leftist scheme' to redistribute wealth?
What does "environmental justice" mean?
Wikipedia defines the concept as "an equitable spatial distribution of burdens and benefits to groups such as racial minorities, residents of economically disadvantaged areas, or residents of developing nations."
Ross Kaminsky, writing at Human Events yesterday calls Jackson's concept of "environmental justice" a "leftist scheme to justify redistribution of wealth and the resulting regulations are not based on scientific evidence or cost/benefit analysis."
If so, Jackson would not be the only administration official to think that way.
WND reported Obama's regulatory czar Sunstein, wrote it is "desirable" to redistribute America's wealth to poorer nations using "environmental justice."
According to Sunstein, global climate change is primarily the fault of U.S. environmental behavior and can, therefore, be used as a mechanism to redistribute the country's wealth.
The Obama czar penned a 2007 University of Chicago Law School paper – obtained and reviewed by WND – in which he debated whether America should pay "justice" to the world by entering into a compensation agreement that would be a net financial loss for the U.S.
Sunstein heavily leans on the side of such an agreement, particularly a worldwide carbon tax that would heavily tariff the U.S.
A prominent theme throughout Sunstein's 39-page paper, entitled "Climate Change Justice," maintains U.S. wealth should be redistributed to poorer nations. He uses terms such as "distributive justice" several times. The paper was written with fellow attorney Eric A. Posner
"It is even possible that desirable redistribution is more likely to occur through climate change policy than otherwise, or to be accomplished more effectively through climate policy than through direct foreign aid," wrote Sunstein.
He posited: "We agree that if the United States does spend a great deal on emissions reductions as part of an international agreement, and if the agreement does give particular help to disadvantaged people, considerations of distributive justice support its action, even if better redistributive mechanisms are imaginable."
"If the United States agrees to participate in a climate change agreement on terms that are not in the nation's interest, but that help the world as a whole, there would be no reason for complaint, certainly if such participation is more helpful to poor nations than conventional foreign-aid alternatives," he wrote.
Sunstein maintains: "If we care about social welfare, we should approve of a situation in which a wealthy nation is willing to engage in a degree of self-sacrifice when the world benefits more than that nation loses."
Sunstein is not the only Obama czar to make such an argument. Van Jones made similar remarks before he resigned his position.
Two weeks before Jones started his White House job in March, he delivered the keynote address at Power Shift '09, billed as the largest youth summit on climate change in history. A reported 12,000 young people were at the D.C. Convention Center for the event.
During his speech, available on YouTube, Jones used terms such as "eco-apartheid" and "green for some," and preached about spreading the wealth while positing a call to "change the whole system."
In one section of his 29-minute speech, Jones referenced "our Native American brothers and sisters" who, he claimed, were "pushed," "bullied," "mistreated" and "shoved into all the land that we didn't want."
"Guess what?" Jones continued. "Give them the wealth! Give them then wealth! No justice on stolen land ... we owe them a debt."
"We have to create a green economy, that's true, that's true. But we have to create a green economy that Dr. King would be proud of," Jones exclaimed.
It makes me sick to see these radical communists to invoke Dr King's name as they push their vile agenda. Dr King was a man of peace, a conservative, and a Republican. When these people use his name it is a slap in the face to everything Dr King and his followers stand for.
It also makes me sick to see, just like Obama himself, there seems to be a real hatred for America, and a want to blame all of the world's problems on her coursing through these people's veins.
As we have learned, anytime you hear someone use a word like "economic" or "social" and add the word "justice" to what they are saying, we are dealing with a socialist, a communist, a Marxist. These phrases are nothing more than code for "hey, let’s ‘spread the wealth y’all." This is basically the government forcibly stealing from one group and giving to another. It can be money, opportunity, or as we are about to see, health care.
The problem is, with communism, is you don’t bring everyone up to a higher level. It’s just the opposite, in fact. Marxism, whether you call it socialism, or communism, seeks to drag the successful down to the level of the unsuccessful, because that’s somehow "fair" in the warped minds of those who espouse this failed ideology.
Sir Winston Churchill said it best:
"Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery."
To which Lady Margaret Thatcher added:
"The problem with socialism is that at some point you run out of other people’s money."
Our nation was founded on liberty and freedom. Marxism, offers none. The course of action the Obama regime promises is comprised of nothing but tyranny, oppression, and enslavement.
George Bernard Shaw one said:
"Liberty means responsibility. That is why most men dread it."
Are we willing to abandon self-respect for a handout? Are we willing to surrender risk and reward for indentured servitude to the government? Are we willing to exchange freedom and opportunity for a welfare state? Are you ready to shirk you responsibilities to yourself?
This is you choice folks: Retain your liberty and freedom, or submit to a life of slavery under an ever expanding, and oppressive, command and control government. A government that determines what’s "good for you" and what you "deserve."
You can fight to retain the right to make your own decisions, chart your own path, and retain the fruits of your own labor.
If you choose liberty, one of the responsibilities you will have is to take on these communists and remove them from office. We must work with maximum effort to defeat each and every one of these un-American Marxists at the ballot box.
But what then? Once we regain control of Congress this fall, sanity must be restored. We need to make sure those we put in place will actually listen to the people. We also need to make sure those we elect will have the moral courage to do the hard work. We must de-fund out of control agencies, like the EPA, until order can be restored.
"They say the world has become too complex for simple answers. They are wrong. There are no easy answers, but there are simple answers. We must have the courage to do what we know is morally right." -Ronald Reagan
This will not be easy, in fact, it will be hard, anything worth having is generally hard to attain. But if liberty and freedom from tyranny aren’t worth the effort, then what is?