Obama's Science Czar John Holdren, Wrong Now and in 1977

News seems to be going around the last couple of days about Obama's Science Czar John Holdren's 1977 book that documents his really radical approaches to population control, including forced abortions and forced sterilization including mass sterilization of the population through drugging the water supply. (Click the book image to get to ZombieTime's post on his work)

The book was written in 1977 and the book's prediction of population chaos by the year 2000 was clearly off by a mile. And of course he and his defenders will point out that his population control view has changed since then. But what about his view of the population in general?

He and his co-authors looked at controlling not just the population but controlling the population through birth control of undesirable classes of the population. What is his view on class these days? Who are the undesirable classes of today's population? Does it still include single mothers? What about:

• Gay parents?
• Blacks?
• Hispanics?
• Whites?
• Those without a high school education?
• The unemployed?
• Illegal aliens?
• Foreigners in general?
• Those on public assistance?
  

This guy had a view of the US Population that is unacceptable today. Not only that, but these views on forced population control and on a class society were also unacceptable in 1977. And all this from a guy who is now the President's go-to guy for all science issues.

The 'people' wanted change, Obama is surely giving it to us all, one kook at a time. I am not sure what is next for Mr. Holdren, but I think he not only needs to explain his population control theory, better than he already has, but also explain his view on society and class because this guy is judging people. We all do it, but this guy has also advocated denying part of the population basic rights based on their level of education and lifestyle. I think that part of his past needs to be probed just as much as the suggestions he has made in the past. Because his current views are relevant especially considering how unacceptable his past views are. No matter, the President should be looking for a replacement, lest he be associated with his science ccar's past.

I wonder, did Mr. Holdren include his book and past views in his Obama Administration 63-part employment questionnaire?

The questionnaire leaves no stone unturned in its 63-part effort to excavate any personal or professional transgressions in a candidate's past. Sample indiscretions run the gamut from criminal convictions and tax fraud to text messages or personal diary entries that could be a "possible source of embarrassment" to the President-elect if made public. - Time

Note: I found this story through Ace of Spaces here.

-------------------- --------------------