New White House Rural Council

9 posts / 0 new
Last post
Wendy S. Delmater's picture
Wendy S. Delmater
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Dec 13 2009
Posts: 1982
New White House Rural Council

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/does-the-new-white-house-rural-council-uns-agenda-21/

While Americans were distrcted by a sex scandal involving Rep Anthony Wiener, this happened. It sounds nice in that the word "sustainability" is inolved, but honestly - do we need this kind of intervention in rural lives?

When solutions are local, having the Federal Goernment step in and "help" you might hurt more than it helps.

A. M.'s picture
A. M.
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Oct 22 2008
Posts: 2367
...
Quote:

The Federal Government has an important role to play in order to expand access to the capital necessary for economic growth, promote innovation, improve access to health care and education, and expand outdoor recreational activities on public lands.

Growth, is the antithesis to sustainability.

Terminally myopic. How many of those staffed to these positions will be "rural Americans".

This is nonsense.

Aaron

pinecarr's picture
pinecarr
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Apr 13 2008
Posts: 2237
You have to wonder what the

You have to wonder what the motive for this was... I mean, other than a hidden motive, what "real" (above-board) motive would even make it worth the bother? 

maceves's picture
maceves
Status: Gold Member (Offline)
Joined: Aug 23 2010
Posts: 281
thinking about this...

I've been thinking about this and it seems to me that the powers that be in Washington are anticipating problems----currency collapse, oil supply problems, food shortages, and/or domestic unrest.  They are positioning themselves so that when the time comes they will be authorized to step in.  I doubt the welfare of those country folks has anything to do with it.

The power that Monsanto and big business weilds in Washington is very unsettling.  

I was also wondering that if we were facing a food crisis, could people be forced to surrender their land?  Especially if they were not working it?  It was done in WWII for national security.

It does certainly seem odd.  They have to know something the public doesnt know yet.

pinecarr's picture
pinecarr
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Apr 13 2008
Posts: 2237
maceves wrote: I've been
maceves wrote:

I've been thinking about this and it seems to me that the powers that be in Washington are anticipating problems----currency collapse, oil supply problems, food shortages, and/or domestic unrest.  They are positioning themselves so that when the time comes they will be authorized to step in.  I doubt the welfare of those country folks has anything to do with it.

+1.  I think you nailed it, maceves.  Add to this story the release of oil from the strategic oil reserves today, and it just doesn't feel good.

MarkM's picture
MarkM
Status: Platinum Member (Offline)
Joined: Jul 22 2008
Posts: 837
They do nothing without a

They do nothing without a motive and we are certainly never privy to the real motivations behind their actions. The thin end of the wedge never seems particularly obtrusive.

I have no doubt that, given the right circumstances, food production would be brought under government control, for the greater good of course.

dshields's picture
dshields
Status: Platinum Member (Offline)
Joined: Oct 24 2009
Posts: 599
I do not like it - I do not like it at all...

I do not like the agenda 21 gig.  I do not like any of it.  I do not believe we (America) should be involved in any way shape or form.  Obama's executive order is not worth the paper it is written on.  Obama and many more of the dems will be history in a year and a half and there will be a lot of change after that.  The negation of this will be just one of many of those.  America got stupid and lazy.  We quit paying attention.  Obama ran an excellent campaign targeting the ignorant with his "hope and change" message - which turned out to be more big gov spending and a left turn into socialism.  There has been a gigantic wake up call.  People I know who never talked about politics talk about politics all the time now.  In November 2012 there is going to be a huge flushing sound.  Obama and the dems will exit stage left.

 

jumblies's picture
jumblies
Status: Silver Member (Offline)
Joined: Jun 13 2010
Posts: 244
On silvergoldsilver there

On silvergoldsilver there was a link to a Fox News (!) story covering this. I thought it was interesting because of what the Caroline Heldman said with regard to Executive Order 13575:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=i5H1CUM6IWE

In particular she pulls the conspiracy theory card at around the 5:20 mark. Instead of giving any good reasons why some of the following departments are involved she instead calls the others on the panel conspiracy theorists.

  • Department of the Treasury
  • Department of Defense
  • Department of Justice
  • Department of the Interior
  • Department of Commerce
  • Department of Labor
  • Department of Health and Human Services
  • Department of Housing and Urban Development
  • Department of Transportation
  • Department of Energy
  • Department of Education
  • Department of Veterans Affairs
  • Department of Homeland Security
  • Environmental Protection Agency
  • Federal Communications Commission
  • Office of Management and Budget
  • Office of Science and Technology Policy
  • Office of National Drug Control Policy
  • Council of Economic Advisers
  • Domestic Policy Council
  • National Economic Council
  • Small Business Administration
  • Council on Environmental Quality
  • White House Office of Public Engagement and Intergovernmental Affairs
  • White House Office of Cabinet Affair

Just because you call someone a conspiracy theorist, that doesn't mean they don't have a point!

So let's just, just hypothetically, that the govt wanted to take control of pretty much everything. What would it have to do? Would the above not be at least one of the actions?

 

dshields's picture
dshields
Status: Platinum Member (Offline)
Joined: Oct 24 2009
Posts: 599
everything

In order for the government to take control of everything they would have to void the constitution and elections.  That would be the beginning of the next civil war.  I do not believe this is a likely outcome. 

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Login or Register to post comments