Is President Barack Obama trying to force all Americans to move to the city? Sure, it sounds like a very far-fetched and incredibly illegal endeavor, but the Agenda 21 style regionalist movement should not be dismissed too quickly. The alleged belief by the president that living outside of urban areas is a global warming problem gives allegations about plans to force suburban and rural residents into the city a frightening amount of credence.
An extremely detailed map of America created by the United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity shows exactly where United States citizens would be living if the global group has its way. Although President Obama cannot legally force Americans to leave their crime-free spacious homes or cabin in the woods, he can force federal agencies to consider the environmental impact and carbon dioxide emissions associated with suburban and rural grant proposals and infrastructure funding proposals.
The regional equity movement subscribes to a definite anti-suburb mindset, which by logical extension, thrusts even more ire towards rural residents. The abolish the suburbs goal will arguably extend beyond any purse-strings effort by a single president and includes plans to fold urban and suburban areas together through outright annexation.
President Obama’s spreading the wealth around mindset appears to suggest a belief that suburban and rural areas are less worthy of taxpayer dollars than cities, which are not as reliant on fossil fuels. Author Stanley Kurtz wrote Spreading The Wealth: How Obama is Robbing the Suburbs to Pay for the Cities. Kurtz believes that President Obama has plans to abolish the suburbs and “Manhattanize” America. The outspoken critic of the liberal president points to the Saul Alisnky mindset which appears to be running rampant through the most progressive administration in the history of the United States, to make his point.
Stanley Kurtz’s investigation into the Agenda 21 type push for so-called biodiversity led to the discovery of multiple links between President Obama and key regionalist movement advocates. President Obama was reportedly trained by pioneers in the regionalist movement, some of the same equity advocates work with him today at the White House, according to Kurtz.
The author maintains that Barack Obama was a primary source of foundation funding for their groups’ efforts when he was an Illinois State Senator – and during his brief time in the US Senate before misguided Americans voted him into the Oval Office. Stanley Kurtz steadfastly believes that President Obama’s regionalist movement buddies are pushing him to put conditions on future federal aid projects that adhere to regional planning commissions recommendations based upon the dictates of the Sustainable Communities Initiative.
During the Obama administration, the White House has allegedly “lent its prestige and facilities” to Building One America. The group is headed by Mike Kruglik. He was reportedly one of the “bosses” of then community organizer Obama. Greg Galluzzo and Jerry Kellman, the other two supervisors of Barack Obama, are also high-profile regionalists. The three men are credited with establishing the Gamaliel Foundation, which has been deemed the most influential voice behind the regionalist equity movement to abolish the suburbs. When Kruglik was at the West Wing of the White House for the Building One America conference, he reportedly met with Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood and senior Obama adviser Peter Rouse. Valerie Jarrett was also supposedly slated to attend but was pulled away for debt ceiling discussions. The Building One America conference was convened by the invitation of the White House (i.e. Obama administration) according to Kurtz. President Obama and Mike Kruglik were photographed together later inside the Oval Office.
An excerpt from the Building One America mission statement reads:
“To stabilize and revitalize communities, reinvigorate local economies and promote regional opportunity through broad-based mobilization, leadership development, and the direct engagement of policy makers at the state and federal level.”
Although the regionalist equity movement group’s statement might not sound too Constitution infringing at first glance, the liberal rhetoric noted elsewhere on the website offers a bit more clarity on the thinly veiled anti-suburbs ideals. Phrases like “regional mobility,” “fair school funding,” and “inclusionary housing” give clear voice to the progressive spread the wealth mantra. True to liberal form, specific details about exactly what the catchy phrases would mean to both the entitlement-loving and taxpaying public are omitted.
John Powell, a law professor and director of the Kirwan Institute for the Study of Race and Ethnicity at Ohio State University, has also been a “strategic partner” for both the Gamaliel Foundation and Building One America. Powell reportedly feels that there is a significant amount of “structural racism” in America and referred to as a nationally recognized scholar on regional equity.
Building One America strategic partner John Powell had this to say about racism and the suburbs:
“In creating the suburbs it was explicit that the suburbs were for whites only. You had demands for civil rights, and you had the federal government essentially paying white people to leave the central city and to live in this new space – a white space – called the suburbs. The structure of that is still what we’re living with today. So much of the work of Jim Crow laws was maintaining social distance between blacks and whites. Now whites lived in the suburbs, and blacks and racialized others lived in the city. Social differences became redefined through these fragmented, racialized, metropolitan areas. Money was divested from the city, which were old neighborhoods where black were more likely to live, and suburbs were created”.
Powell goes on to claim that home buying in the suburbs “redefined the racial geographic spaces” in America in a fundamental manner – creating an association between “whiteness” with the suburbs and urban areas with people of color. The regional equity movement expert has also claimed that the creation of the suburbs drained resources from cities. Such statements give credence to Kurtz’s assertions about President Obama’s opinion on the subject.
When asked his opinion about the development of housing in the suburbs, Powell had this to say:
“Jobs were moving out of the central cities. So we’re isolating people away from the tax base, from good schools, and from jobs, and really building ghettos for black people. Now, this was a federal program [Housing] but it was administered through local control, so each community had complete control over whether or not to build public housing, and how to build public housing. And it’s not surprising that many of the suburbs – in fact, most – said no, we do not want any public housing. We do not want those people out here. And the federal government said fine. Even though we’re the federal government, even though we have the right to exercise control over the federal purse, we will do it in a completely fragmented way that will give each community a veto over who can live there. And that’s still the way we operate the federal housing program.”
There is obviously no way to know if President Obama shares all the same thoughts as the Building One America folks. But the mere suggestion of an association with a group which could favor forcing annexation or relocation to cities via location biased federal guidelines is extremely concerning. President Obama’s recent statements in Africa that not everyone can have a car or refrigerator based upon his flawed climate change beliefs, make the regional equity movement allegations seem at least plausible.