The Absurdity Of Julianne Malveaux's Position That Climate Change Is A Civil Rights Issue

According to Julianne Malveaux  Climate Change  is a civil rights issue.  That is without a doubt the biggest kettle of horse dung I've read in quite sometime. This is preposterous on so many levels that my mind is reeling in bewilderment laced with amusement due to the absurdity and awe at the unmitigated gall of black intelligentsia (I use that term loosely).  She is no better than a dope dealer in my opinion. She is pushing a drug of sorts a "grievance" opiate that so many of us black folks are addicted to. Whatever, it takes  for us to achieve the "victim" high -- right Ms. Malveaux. It's horrifying that as the President of Bennett College that Julianne Malveaux  is shaping the minds of young black women.  She is the greatest example of a sell-out as she executes the dictates of Adolf Hitler who wrote: "All propaganda has to be popular and has to accommodate itself to the comprehension of the least intelligent of those whom it seeks to reach."  

What do the "least intelligent" black folks understand best? Racism. Both real and imagined.

She writes: "Climate change is more than an environmental issue. It is a human rights and economic justice issue. Why? Because though climate change impacts all of us, different nations, and different communities within nations, experience the effects of climate change in varying ways, some worse than others."

Notice how what used to be called "Global Warming" is now "Climate Change" since the weather isn't cooperating with Al Gore and the UN's hoax. They have opted to change the name in an effort to hide the fact their data is cooked, contrived, bogus and dead wrong. Isn't it curious how they claim that CO2 levels are rising but the global temperatures are not rising as predicted? Hmm....how do they get around that? Diversion is how. They start a dialogue about social injustice. Historically it's worked like a charm. They employ influential black people (Margaret Sanger used black ministers) to carry the message (propagandize) to the masses and before you know it Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid cut deals behind closed doors and legislation is pushed through whether the people who are wise to their devices like it or not.

She continues: "This point was clearly made at last month's U.N. climate change conference in Copenhagen, where it quickly became evident that the rich and powerful nations — particularly the U.S. and members of the European Union — dictate the debate at the expense of poorer countries. That needs to change."


So according to Ms. Malveaux and the UN poorer countries should be able to force the United States (who will be a poorer country if Obama acheives his goals) to give them our wealth ( I hear a Van Jones loop playing in my head -- "give them the wealth, give them the wealth"). How is this not wealth distribution also known as Socialism? It is wrong according to Ms. Malveaux that the US should dictate the debate. The debate should be dictated by Zimbabwe or Chad or some other 3rd world country apparently via international treaty-- United States sovereignty be damned.

She also writes: "Robert Bullard, who runs an environmental justice program at Clark Atlanta University, has noted that the adverse impacts of climate change fall most heavily on people of color who are concentrated in urban centers, coastal regions and areas where the air quality is poor."

What does climate change and pollution (poor air quality) have to do with each other?  Oh, silly me how could I have forgotten. According to the Socialist religion known as Global Climate Change the Earth is over-populated which leads to too many people breathing and exhaling the pollutant known as Carbon Dioxide (CO2). So if one were to follow this to it's logical conclusion then we'd understand why abortion is so important and necessary (especially in the black community where 80% of the abortuaries are located). No wonder China has a one child rule -- coming soon to America folks. What about all those old people exhaling CO2? Do you think ObamaCare will go green and give the aged a little "nudge" by informing them of there duty to die in order to improve the air quality and all? It's sounds absurd but following the logical path and our current tract how far-fetched is it really. I'm sure 30 years ago same-sex marriage was absurd. Hey, that fits into the paradigm as well because same sex couples can't procreate little "breathers" who pollute the enviroment.

Fortunately, however God is on the throne! He sits high and  He looks low (real low). So in that knowledge, I'll try not to get so angry and riled up remembering Who is in control.