Overview of what Book Covers:

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

Fight the New World Order and Progressive Movements With Your Vote on November 6, 2012

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

CURRENT EVENTS FROM THE AUTHOR

041012   PROGRSSIVISM IN THE UNITED STATES SENATE

041012   AGENDA 21 BY TOM DeWEESE

030912  WE WON - BUT WHO ARE "WE"

011712   BLAMING THE GOP-THROW THEM ALL OUT!

122011   OWS AND ANTI-AMERICAN CORRUPTION

120111   UNIONS, PROGRESSIVES, AND THE AMERICAN EDUCATION DILEMMA

101611   WHO ARE YOU WITH?

091211   WHO ARE THE DEMOCRATS OF TODAY?

080811   PROGRESSIVISM IN ACTION

080611   LARGEST THEFT IN HISTORY

080211   WE MUST NOT FORGET!

080211   THE POLITICS OF PROGRESSIVISM

080211   INTRODUCTION TO PROGRESSIVISM

040311   PROGRESSIVE MAJORITY-SOROS INTRUDES IN LOCAL ELECTION

031711   ECONOMIC WELFARE: RISKS AND RESPONSES

022411   PROGRESSIVE MOVEMENT SUPPORTS "RELIGION OF PEACE"

021111   FINANCIAL CRISIS INQUIRY COMMISSION REPORT

010612   RESPONSE TO KATHLEEN PARKER EDITORIAL

April 10, 2012

Progressivism in the United States Senate

Related Articles. Recent articles titled “We Won, But Who Are We?” and “Who’s To Blame, Throw Them All Out” clearly documented two of the fundamental reasons why corruption and lack of unity in Congress are prevalent throughout the legislative process.

 In the “We Won, But Who Are We?” article, the statement by Nancy Pelosi that “We Won” after the 2010 elections was analyzed in light of the GOP takeover of the House of Representatives. It quickly became evident that Nancy Pelosi was right as her Progressive allies held 160 of 166 seats held by Progressives prior to the 2010 election. From another perspective, with 160 of the 193 Democrats left in the House, it is clear that the traditional Democrat Party no longer exists while the Progressives are still in place to dominate any future Democrat majority.

In the “Who’s To Blame, Throw Them All Out” article, the power structure in Washington DC was analyzed over the past 62 years. It quickly became evident that the Republican Party had never held power to implement its agenda in any of those 62 years while the Democrat Party held unbridled power in 14 years. Examining those 14 years revealed that legislation was passed during those years that accounts for the majority of the national debt, currently at $16 trillion. In addition, foreign relations during those 14 years led to the phenomenal loss of American lives in Korea and Vietnam, the Bay of Pigs failure, the fall of the Shah in Iran, loss of the Panama Canal, and now the Arab Spring.

U. S. Senate Progressivism. While Bernie Sanders is the only senator who openly belongs to the Congressional Progressive Caucus, the voting records of the vast majority of the 51 Democrat Senators  in the 112^th Congress are more Progressive than the voting records of the House members who openly belong to the Congressional Progressive Caucus. Yes, you read it correctly, the great contemplative body, the great body seeking unity, the great body seeking bipartisanship, the great body seeking compromise for the good of the country, is dominated by Progressive Democrats who demonstrate a voting record that is left of the Progressive Democrats who dominate the House of Representatives.

In some respects, this is somewhat surprising given the historical reputation of the US Senate. However, recent history has clearly demonstrated that the Senate Democrats are Progressives in their voting patterns. For instance, during the Bush Administration, the only major legislative actions that were passed by the Senate were the Prescription Drug and the No Child Left Behind, both of which were progressive pieces of legislation that were supported by the furthest left Democrats in the Senate. At the same time, the two signature legislative pieces sought by Bush were Partial Privatization of Social Security and Tax Reform, neither of which would the Democrats allow. During the Obama Administration, the Progressive bias is even more evident as nothing of consequence that the House presents is even heard on the floor of the Senate. Let’s repeat that in a different way, Harry Reid with the support of his Progressive Democrat base blocks every meaningful bill presented by the GOP dominated House. Effectively, the Progressive Democrats are allowing one man to control the entire U. S. Congress. As a side note, what does this say about the hypocrisy and dishonesty of the President who falsely blames the GOP for blocking his “progress?”

The Voting Records Reveal The Truth. Like so many other aspects of the National Democrat Party, the difference between their words and reality reveal an ongoing level of hypocrisy that is beyond words. While blasting the Republicans on a daily basis as the “Party of NO” and as “Obstructionists”, the voting records tell the real story as the Progressivism ideology accepts nothing but the advancement of their political agenda. In plain language, it is “either their way or no way” while any disagreement is cast as anything from “throwing grandma under the bus” to “abandoning children with needs” to “Republicans want dirty water” to the dangerously inflammatory statements such as Republicans want sick people to “die quickly.”

According to the Heritage Action For America Score Card as of August 23, 2011, 24 of the 51 Democrat Senators rated a conservative score of zero meaning absolute and total refusal to work with any concept or idea that does not meet their Progressive agenda. Amplifying this ideological bias is that 18 additional Democrat Senators rated 6% or less meaning that 42 of the 51 Democrat Senators are totally closed to any bipartisan activity unless it meets their socialist agenda. Completing the analysis, only 2 Democrat Senators showed any willingness to even consider conservative thinking with scores of 15% and 25%. The deliberative body looking out for the American people no longer exists as these Progressive ideologues attempt to transform America by destroying any and all opposing thought while totally ignoring our Constitutional foundation.

Since the Democrats and their liberal media friends would cast the above as biased, a source rating Progressivism or Liberalism was used to validate the Heritage Foundation ratings. The Liberal Action Score prepared by That’s My Congress was chosen titled Progressive Rankings and Contact Information for Members of the Senate in the 112^th Congress. There ratings rank 38 of the Democrat Senators as being Liberals(Progressives) ranging from Weakly to Strong Liberals. It might be noted that the Weakly Liberal group contains strong Progressives such as Chris Coon, Robert Casey, and John Kerry. Using typical liberal language, the next group of 11 Democrat Senators are called the Mushy Middle and includes Harry Reid as an example of what is mushy. Like the Heritage study, that only leaves 2 Democrat Senators with any conservative or moderate voting record! To further validate the bias and hypocrisy of the National Progressive Democrats, Senator Mary Landrieu from Louisiana is classified as a “Milquetoast Conservative.”

It is shameful that the National Democrat Party has allowed itself to be totally controlled by the Progressive Movement. In effect, there is no National Democrat Party any longer as it is now the Progressive Party. There is no compromise with this ideology, only capitulation. It is time for the John Kennedy Democrats that are left to stand up and take back your party. As the days of two-way compromise fade further into the past, the division and hatred that is encouraged by the modern day Progressive Movement can only become worse. This must be stopped or the loss of liberty and individual freedom that is being eroded away by the Progressive Agenda will eventually destroy American greatness and supremacy.

The fact that influential Democrats such as George Soros support the destruction of American greatness must never be overlooked as we prepare to go to the polls on November 6, 2012. We must defeat the 23 Democrat Senators up for election such that Congress is no longer controlled by Harry Reid and Barack Obama. We must elect a President who loves America and seeks to build upon the successes of the past rather than transforming America into an undefined socialistic country without “We The People” being either involved or informed. The destruction of America by the Progressive ideologues must be stopped on November 6, 2012!

April 10, 2012

STOP AGENDA 21 by Tom DeWeese

#1 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OkcsdObf-94

#2 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yT0PBeR1xVQ&feature=relmfu

#3 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P-gkrSBmAB4&feature=relmfu

#4 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D2B6XiBBTEc&feature=relmfu

#5 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dVQEnIFrDC0

#6 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rdi6BnbEKs8

Stop Agenda 21 Kit

http://americanpolicy.org/2012/03/08/stop-agenda-21-action-kit/

MARCH 9,2012

or

NANCY PELOSI AND THE PROGRESSIVES

After the 2010 midterm elections, the GOP trumpeted retaking a majority in the House of Representatives. Having just lost her position as Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi’s gleeful response of “We Won!” seems odd. Understanding why she made this statement is absolutely critical to protecting and preserving our American way of life.

On the surface, this seems to be another of the infamous Pelosi statements that makes no sense in her never ending attempts to mask a situation that is politically bothersome to her Progressive agenda.  However, upon analyzing the 2010 election results, her statement appears to be factually correct from the perspective of the Progressive Movement agenda and the Pelosi definition of who “We” represents.

While the GOP celebrated the results of the midterm elections of 2010, several critical aspects of the current Washington dilemma were largely ignored. First and foremost, the ongoing threat to America as a Constitutional Republic, known as the Progressive Movement, was not defeated in 2010 leading directly to Pelosi’s declaration of victory. Second, and of critical importance, was the failure to win even a simple majority in the Senate. This has allowed the Democrats in the Senate to block any and all attempts by the House of Representatives to reverse the Progressive tsunami that has dominated the national scene since 2006.

Examining the impact of the 2010 elections on the Progressive Movement reveals some very skewed results in comparing those Democrats who are clearly Progressives versus those generally known as Blue Dogs (moderates). In total, while the Democrats lost 64 seats in the House, the Progressives lost only 6 seats to Republican challengers! Very simply, this means that the gradual takeover of the traditional Democrat Party by the Progressives was strengthened, hence a victory for the Pelosi Progressives. This non-compromising minority maintains the ability to block and demean GOP majority efforts. Within the House Democratic Caucus, 66% of the House Democrats were Progressives before the 2010 election and 83% after the election!

In attempting to understand the magnitude of the Progressive Movement, several definitions have been used to identify the specific House members who have demonstrated their Progressive mentality by either words or votes. These people constitute a voting bloc that will rarely, if ever, reach across the aisle in any form of bipartisan cooperation. Their objective is to implement the Progressive agenda which, by definition, means unwavering dedication to that agenda in opposition to any GOP initiatives and even opposing any moderate Democrats (Blue Dogs) who might be willing to reach across the aisle.

In the 112^th Congress, Democrats hold 193 seats of which 160 are clearly in the hands of the Progressives. These 160 (all Democrats) were identified within the following definitions:

               Congressional Progressive Caucus (CPC)                                 73

               Former CPC Members (Pelosi, Waxman, Hastings)                    3

               Public Option Co-Signers                                                        42

               Debt Ceiling                                                                           19

               12% Club per Heritage Rankings                                              23

 Definitions follow:

Congressional Progressive Caucus: Taken directly from the CPC website showing current members. Over 60 of these members are also listed on the Democratic Socialist of America website.

Public Option: These 42 House members were part of the 129 co-signers for the Public Option Bill H.R. 5808 entered in the 111^th Congress who are not listed on the CPC website.

Debt Ceiling: These 19 House members voted to raise the Debt Ceiling in 2011 without any spending reductions who are not listed on the CPC website or the Public Option list of co-signers.

12% Club: These 23 House members all scored 12% or less when rated by Heritageaction.com  using scores as of August 23, 2011 developed from individual voting records and on bills co-sponsored. None were listed with the CPC, the Public Option, or the Debt Ceiling vote.  

As a final comment concerning the House Progressives and the 2010 election, only 4 of the sitting Congressional Progressive Caucus members and only 2 of the Public Option co-signers were defeated by GOP challengers in 2010 making the total of 6 reported above. All of the Debt Ceiling and 12% Club House members either won re-election or defeated a GOP challenger in 2010.

Concerning the Senate, the GOP failure to win three key states (Oregon, Nevada, and Delaware) had a huge impact in that these losses allowed one man, Harry Reid, to completely negate any legislative advantage achieved in the House. That Harry Reid follows the Progressive Agenda defined by Pelosi and Obama is clearly evident. Reaching across the aisle is strictly a one-way street with Reid and his bloc which controls the power structure for the entire legislative process.

So, who did win the 2010 elections? From a realistic perspective, it was a stalemate which clearly makes Pelosi’s statement a true assessment. The good news is that Pelosi and the Progressive Democrats did, in fact, lose their ability to force legislation down the throats of the American people as was the case in 2009-2010. However, the core bloc of Progressives in the House is still in place waiting for their next opportunity which would create a socialistic America for many years. In addition, Pelosi knew that Harry Reid held the power thanks to GOP failures in three states as noted above, which would preserve the Progressive Movement gains that had been accomplished. Finally, Pelosi also knew that the only power that had been gained by the GOP was an ability to shut down the government which would enhance, if not assure, the re-election of Obama and possibly an accompanying sweep of congressional seats for the Progressives and their Democrat allies.

In closing, all of the above has been amplified by the failure of many right-of-center voters to recognize and understand the victory celebrated by Pelosi. Many have made statements like “they are not doing what we sent them there to do” and “we need to throw them all out as the GOP is as bad as the Dems” and the “GOP are progressive just as the Dems. ” The lack of understanding leading to such statements is a threat to all of us who are fighting daily to restore and preserve our great country.

While pointing out why Pelosi and the Progressives consider that they “Won” in 2010, the reality is that the elections were a huge victory for the GOP in that the House can now stop the Democrats, and the supermajority in the Senate no longer exists putting the filibuster in play if necessary.

If there is one message that the content of this article pleads to the reader to hear, it is that we must never let Pelosi and the Progressives win again.  The steps to accomplish this are very straightforward: (1) Defeat Obama in 2012, (2) Defeat 23 Democrat senators up for re-election, and (3) Hold the House. These successes would collectively stop the Progressive Movement led by Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, and Barack Obama, and would be a “Win” for America.   

(Note: To determine if your representative is a part of the Progressive Movement, all 160 are listed under Progressivism at webpatrioticservices.com.)

January 17, 2012

BLAMING THE GOP-THROW THEM ALL OUT!

The negative rhetoric expressed by various right-of-center friends has been astounding. Amplifying the impact of this rhetoric is that some have even expressed the desire to re-elect Obama rather than settle for any Republican nominee who does not meet their specific litmus test. Others seem to take pleasure in declaring that they (Congress) are all corrupt and that we must throw all of them out. The sad part of all of this type of rhetoric is that it indicates a lack of understanding of the threats to our country, the urgency required to stop these threats, and the potentially horrific consequences given another four years of the Obama transformation process. How can anyone forget the Obama approach to ramming Obamacare down America’s throat? How can anyone forget how he and his Democrat pals in the Senate bought votes to pass the Dodd-Frank Regulatory Reform Act? How can anyone forget the use of Executive Orders and regulatory decrees that both bypass and usurp the authority of Congress? Last, how can anyone take a position that would assist in the election of Obama when America is just one heartbeat away from a liberal, Progressive Supreme Court?

When confronted with the above, it has been my approach to respond that there are two huge factors that render the above rhetoric to be both meaningless and dangerous. First, the U. S. Representatives elected in 2010 do not deserve the above rhetoric. Second, and perhaps even more important, is the recognition that “We The People” were soundly asleep until after the election of 2008, thereby providing neither support nor accountability to those GOP representatives elected prior to 2010. Unfortunately, many of the right-of-center voters who use the above rhetoric do not recognize that the new Republicans are listening and attempting to fulfill their campaign promises while being blocked by the Democrat Senate.  

In search for a more definitive approach to demonstrate the folly of lumping congressional members together as if there is no difference between the Republicans and Democrats, a historical review of the Washington power structure by political party was conducted starting in 1950. The highlights follow:*

• ·        Years that the Republicans controlled the Presidency, Senate, and House____4
• ·        Years that the Democrats controlled the Presidency , Senate, and House____20
• ·        Years that the Republicans controlled the Senate and House_______________10
• ·        Years that the Democrats controlled the Senate and House________________42
• ·        Years that the Republicans held a Senate supermajority___________________0
• ·        Years that the Democrats held a Senate supermajority____________________12

Does anybody see a pattern? Never, in the last 62 years, have the Republicans had the power to enact their legislation if the Democrats did not agree! In only 4 of the 62 years did the Republicans have the power to set the congressional agenda under a Republican president. Would it surprise anyone to learn that most of the programs that have created huge Budget Deficits were approved when the Democrats had the Presidency, the House, and a Senate supermajority? Some of the most significant examples are Obamacare and the Financial Regulatory Reform Act of 2010, CRA of 1977, and the Great Society legislation with its multitude of social and welfare programs, including Medicare and Medicaid,  enacted during the 1960s.

Very simply, the right-of-center voters engaging in this type rhetoric need to take a good hard look in the mirror. These right-of-center voters have miserably failed for the past 62 years to provide Republicans in both the Legislative and Executive branches of our government with the mandatory power to have successfully thwarted the Progressive zealots operating within the national Democrat Party. The Democrat voters have provided their elected officials with the power to enact their agenda while the right-of-center voters are, at minimum, equally complicit with the Republican Party in having granted almost unchallenged control of our nation’s government to the Democrats since 1950!!!

It is time for the voters who are right-of-center to unite and start dealing with the real problems that our country faces. Instead of blaming the elected Republicans and failing to vote based upon various personal litmus tests, perhaps everyone needs to examine why they were not a part of an endeavor that would have at least accomplished a balance of power. In short, none of us know what a Republican supermajority might do. In the four years that the Republicans did have control of Congress and the Presidency, the filibuster and the threat of such was used by the Democrats to stop initiatives such as Tax Reform, Private Accounts for Social Security, and the 2005 bill to improve regulations for Fannie and Freddie. This 2005 bill (S. 190), as documented in the book Masters of Audacity and Deceit, was the last chance to have stopped or minimized the Financial Crisis and it received no, meaning zero, support form the Democrats in the Senate including our current President. 

While the Democrat voters unite, the right-of-center voters entertain 3^rd parties, not voting protests, defeating RINOs, and ridiculous declarations that Republicans must be taught a lesson. The very future of our country depends on the outcome of the 2012 elections. Do we want freedom or socialism, balanced budgets or financial disaster, our proven constitution or Progressivism, national sovereignty or global submission? With moderates and right-of-center Americans constituting the voting majority, the opportunity to create real “change” by providing the necessary power to the Republicans for the first time in the last 62 years seems readily available. With Obama and his Progressive allies making it clear that they intend to transform America, the importance for seizing this opportunity cannot be overstated. We must not let differences within the right-of-center voters destroy this last chance to stop Obama and the Progressive Democrats. Unity is mandatory for 2012 election success so that restoration can begin before it is too late!    

*Source: http://uspolitics.about.com/od/usgovernment/l/bl_party_division_2.htm

DECEMBER 20,2011

OWS AND ANTI-AMERICAN CORRUPTION

While the Obama Administration, the congressional Progressive Democrats, and their Mainstream Media allies have likened the OWS to the TEA Party, the reality is that similarities are minimal. The blatant hypocrisy inherent in the posturing of the OWS apologists becomes undeniable when the direct linkages are understood between the OWS leadership and corrupt Anti-American leftists.  In general, these anti-American leftists are the same groups and individuals who were instrumental in the Housing Crisis, Financial Crisis, Great Recession, and ultimately in the election of Barack Obama. In my book, Masters of Audacity and Deceit, these Anti-American leftists are identified while seeking the root causes of the 2008 disasters.

Francis Fox Piven. It is the involvement of this anti-American leftist with both the Housing Crisis and the OWS that inspired this article. In my book, I root the causal ideology that eventually led to the Housing Crisis to the 1960s and the formation of the Cloward-Piven strategy. Francis Fox Piven, the Piven in the Cloward-Piven strategy has also been instrumental in the development of OWS. On December 22, 2010 she published an article urging violence in the streets like Greece. In October, 2011, she participated in an even more direct role by appearing with the OWS in Manhattan. In fact, she was videotaped offering encouragement and advice to the OWS participants as she continued her role as agitator and leader of a strategy to destroy capitalism and, therefore, American freedom.  

ACORN. An offshoot of the Cloward and Piven activities of the 1960s was the creation of ACORN after Cloward hired George Wiley who in turn hired Wade Rathke to create community activism. The rest of the story is history as ACORN developed into an organization that intimidated and forced bankers to make housing loans that had low probability of being repaid as mortgage lending standards were destroyed. That ACORN descendants are critical to the OWS is visible in many locations, but the most obvious and incriminating is the support for OWS provided by New York Community For Change. This group openly advocates and provides support for OWS from their office, which is the former ACORN office, under the direction of Jon Kest. Kest was the former ACORN Director in the same exact office space!!! Effectively, ACORN has provided support and shock troops to both the OWS effort and the destruction of mortgage lending standards.

Democrat Party. Next, examine the actions of high level Democrat officials such as Barney Frank and Nancy Pelosi. Barney Frank was the critical legislative force behind the destruction of lending standards. Barney Frank blocked all meaningful attempts to improve regulations as the Housing Bubble developed while literally lying to the American public by saying the federal government would not bail out Freddie and Fannie. Nancy Pelosi has supported the OWS as exemplified by her “God Bless…” the OWS protesters. Both Pelosi and Frank are members of the Congressional Progressive Caucus that dominates the national Democrat Party.

Congressional Progressive Caucus. The role of the Congressional Progressive Caucus leads to another similarity in that the caucus is directly linked to the Institute for Policy Studies which, in turn, is linked by board members to radical allies including the CPUSA or Communist Party USA. Concerning OWS, a member of the CPUSA was greeted with cheers at one of the early OWS camps in Chicago as he rallied the participants with encouragement.

George Soros.  A keynote participant in the Financial Crisis was George Soros. Through his various funding organizations, phenomenal amounts of money have been channeled to the multiplicity of Progressive groups, of which MoveOn.org and the Center for American Progress (CAP) are two of the most important. It is well known that these Soros-funded Progressive groups were significant supporters and advisers to the Democrat Party as the Financial Crisis was developing. Recall also that Soros stated that the Financial Crisis was the culmination of his life’s work. Concerning OWS, MoveOn states on their own website that “MoveOn stands in solidarity with the brave protesters at Occupy Wall Street…” Concerning CAP, CAP representative Gadi Dechter writes that “…the protestors are correct in bringing much-needed attention to issues like a rigged tax code, rising inequality, and shrinking economic mobility.”

President Barack Obama. Last, but by no means the least important are the roles played by President Barack Obama. As an attorney and community organizer, he led a lawsuit against Bank of America to force the bank to lend to low income and minority homeowners. His actions were directly responsible for unqualified applicants being accepted which subsequently led to painful foreclosures for those who became victims of Obama’s “hope.” Later, as a first term senator, he was mute and voted absent on the last bill (2005) that could have realistically improved regulations for mortgage lending in time to have avoided the 2008 collapse of Freddie, Fannie, Lehman Brothers and AIG. In addition, his Wall Street buddies were his largest contributors supporting his election campaign and are now willing scapegoats to cover his participation in the crisis that elevated him to the presidency. Concerning OWS, he has literally endorsed them and has made statements such as the following: OWS “expresses the frustrations that the American people feel” and “So yes, I think people are frustrated and the protesters are giving voice to a more broad-based frustration about how our financial system works.”

Once more referencing the book Masters of Audacity and Deceit (Page 244 of the Tate Publishing edition), the quest to understand why the events of 2008 occurred led to the following statement: “…with few exceptions, all dots eventually connected to Barack Obama, typically through George Soros or groups and individuals supported by George Soros and his allies.” While the Progressives and their leftist allies try to liken the TEA Parties to the OWS, the TEA Party charter was and is clearly targeting Washington and Big Government intrusions while the OWS appears to be nebulously targeting Wall Street and the wealthy 1% in the exact same manner as the Democrat Party and Barack Obama. Indeed, similarities do exist to the OWS. But, the similarities are not to the TEA Party movement. Instead, the similarities to those who created and perpetuated the Housing Crisis, Financial Crisis, Great Recession and the resulting election of Barack Obama IS ABSOLUTELY REMARKABLE! In both cases, the groups and individuals discussed in this article were deeply involved to an extent that must not be ignored by the American people as they observe the degenerate behavior of the OWS and experience the destructive policies of Barack Obama and his administration.     

December 1, 2011

UNIONS, PROGRESSIVISM, AND THE AMERICAN EDUCATION DILEMMA

By

William E. Been

Information recently became available documenting disastrous financial conditions in school districts located throughout Pennsylvania. In many respects, the situation is not only indicative of the problems being experienced in many school districts across the country, but it is also a microcosm of the financial crises occurring at both the state and federal government levels. Perhaps even more critical is the relationship of the problems being experienced in Pennsylvania with the modern-day Progressive Movement, which is actively seeking control of elected offices, including school boards, throughout the state.

Like other school districts across the country, Pennsylvania districts have been pressured by unions, liberal political leaders, and liberal media to establish the illusion, while maintaining the status quo, that the more money that is spent in the name of education the better the education will be. The “spend more” approach in Pennsylvania has resulted in spending increases of 133%, adjusted for inflation, which is a real spending increase of over $8 billion between 1980 and 2009. More recently, public school enrollment decreased by 26,960 students between 2000 and 2009 while staff employees, dominated by union teachers and administrative employees, have actually increased by 32, 927. Further adding to the dysfunctional nature of the current Pennsylvania situation is the fact that the average compensation of each school employee has increased through progressive union contracts to $52,913 which is higher than neighboring states Ohio and West Virginia. Even worse, the Pennsylvania  SAT scores rank 43^rd in the USA and have not improved during this irresponsible spending spree.  These relationships alone should spur immediate remedial action from all groups and individuals who have any interest in the education and future of the Pennsylvania children.

Having witnessed the behavior of teachers in Wisconsin, Indiana, and other states with budget shortfalls driven by out-of-control government employee unions, it should be of no surprise that Pennsylvania teachers refuse to accept co-pay of health insurance costs while demanding additional wage increases with some exceeding  3.0% per year over three years. However, it is still difficult to imagine how greed and/or political ideology can drive the mindset of those who were historically dedicated to the children to so blatantly display their disregard for their community, their neighbors, and the future of the children.

Complicating constructive action is another force standing behind the unions from both a political and ideological perspective, being the Progressive Movement.  Pennsylvania is one of ten states that the Progressives have targeted with the intent of filling all local, state, and federal elected offices with those who share their Progressive Socialist agenda. The Progressive Movement in Pennsylvania is personified by Education Voters Pennsylvania, which is led by Susan Gobreski and shares the exact same address as the Center for Progressive Leadership in Philadelphia. Ms Gobreski  is listed as a past faculty member  of the Center for Progressive Leadership which, in turn, is directly associated with the Progressive Majority of Pennsylvania which is heavily funded by the George Soros elite leftist funding group known as the Democracy Alliance. Over 20 members of the Democracy Alliance have contributed at least $25,000, up to as much as $1,575,000, to the Progressive Majority. Educators should also know that the National Education Association (NEA) has contributed $116,625 to the Progressive Majority. These funding structures are a serious threat! This threat is amplified by the fact that the Pennsylvania Teacher’s Union requests that teachers have the voluntary choice to have funds withheld from their paychecks to fund political PACs such as the NEA Fund for Children and Public Education .

Ms Gobreski describes Governor Corbett’s education cuts of $1.1 billion as “staggering” while ignoring the fact that the teachers and administrative costs in Pennsylvania consume about 70% of the total education budget. With an increase of $8 billion, as noted previously, this would indicate that the cost associated with unionized school employees accounts for $5.6 billion of the total increase. It is this number that Ms Gobreski and her Progressive allies should find to be “staggering.”  Even if SAT scores were increasing, the irresponsible increases in salary expenditures for all Pennsylvania teachers and administrative employees would be excessive and unsustainable.

It is clear that Ms Gobreski’s assertion concerning the proposed $1.1 billion reduction is just another example of the Progressives pushing spending as a means to “spread the wealth around” consistent with the Progressive agenda in support of national unions such as the NEA that, in turn, contribute huge sums of money collected as union dues to the Progressive Movement. While groups like Education Voters Pennsylvania ignore the long term needs of the children, they also show absolute disdain for the taxpayers who must fund the greed of the unions. Many of these taxpayers are seniors who have watched Pennsylvania property taxes continue to increase making home ownership a burden for many.    

To further illustrate the Progressive Movement threat to Pennsylvania children, consider the fact that approximately half of the $8 billion increase from 1980-2009 occurred during the Rendell Administration under the leadership of the Secretary of Policy and Planning, Donna Cooper. This is significant in that Donna Cooper is directly linked to the most ideologically challenged Progressives being those at the Center For American Progress (CAP) where she is employed as a Fellow. This group proudly declares their Progressive agenda on their website while accepting funding from individuals such as George Soros and his associates Herb and Marion Sandler. It is indeed frightening that people being supported by the leading national Progressives are making policy decisions for the children of Pennsylvania while being compensated by the leading Progressive “think tank”  with money from those who openly declare that the bubble of “American supremacy” must be broken.  Donna Cooper’s employment at CAP should indeed be a wake-up call to all Pennsylvanians.

In closing, the role of those working to return sanity to the spending levels in school districts across Pennsylvania is critical to the future success of each district and the young people enrolled in the district. At another level, it is critical that all Pennsylvanians recognize the negative influence of those associated with and funded by the Progressive Movement. Politically, it is important to know that these Progressives not only target Republican candidates but also moderate Democrats who do not accept their anti-American and spending ideologies. Intrusion by the Progressive Majority, funded with out-of-state money, into local politics is a direct threat to financial sanity at all levels of local government. The education needs of Pennsylvania children are secondary to their ideological objectives. The school districts and government leaders in Pennsylvania that are working to reduce the out-of-control spending need to be duplicated across the country as a part of the total effort to restore and preserve America and the education system that has supported the greatest country known throughout world history.

http://www.campaignmoney.com/political/527/progressive_majority.asp?rpg=5

http://www.campaignmoney.com/political/527/progressive_majority.asp?spg=3

http://www.progressiveleaders.org/states/pennsylvania/faculty/gobreski_bio.html

http://www.educationvoterspa.org/index.php/site/about/

October 16, 2011

WHO ARE YOU WITH?!

by

WILLIAM E. BEEN

The above question was asked by someone who was clearly in Vice-President Biden’s entourage after a reporter from Human Events had asked questions related to Biden’s declaration that Republicans are causing rapes and murders to increase by failing to approve the so-called Obama “JOBS” bill. The tone of the questioner was clearly intended to be intimidating as if to say that you will be remembered for your impertinent questions.  

Earlier, Biden had said that “they” won’t let us vote on the bill so we will pass it piece by piece. He forgot to add that “they” are the Democrats in the Democrat-controlled U.S. Senate! He also had said that it was his wish that the opponents “stare down a gun.” The hypocrisy, dishonesty, and blatant lack of civility demonstrated by this supposed “leader” of the Democrat Party clearly indicate that the Progressives are not only in control of the Democrat Party but are the only remaining target audience for the failed Obama Administration.

Adding to the demise of the national Democrats are recent remarks made by Barack Obama when he literally insulted half of the American citizens by declaring that Republicans want dirtier water, Republicans want dirtier air, and Republicans are willing to generate pollution while we want to clean the environment. Then, he condoned the Occupy Wall Street group by adopting their 99% posture while an individual in Chicago greeted the Chicago OWS  by declaring that he was representing the communist party and was there to support the movement and would stay until success is attained.

Then, the hypocrisy of all hypocrisies used throughout the Obama Administration years surfaces in the form of Mainstream Media attempts to cast the Republicans as being the candidates of Wall Street. An article written by Eamon Javers, CNBC.com, is titled “Wall Street Donates Twice  As Much To Romney as Obama.” This article was, in turn picked up by USA Today and published with the same title. Minimal research revealed that Mr. Javers had chosen to use FIRE numbers while calling them indicative of Wall Street. FIRE is defined as the finance, insurance, and real estate sector. Also, Mr. Javers ignored the fact that the Wall Street firms have donated huge sums to the Democratic National Committee and related leftist groups such as ActBlue. Even the Washington Post reported the following on October 19, 2011:

“Obama has brought in more money from employees of banks, hedge funds and other financial  service companies than all of the GOP candidates combined…” “The numbers show that Obama retains a persistent reservoir of support among Democratic financiers who have backed him since he was an underdog presidential candidate four years ago.”

In my book, Masters of Audacity and Deceit, the relationship between Wall Street, the Mainstream Media, and the Democrat Party is clearly documented as one of the primary factors leading to Obama’s election in 2008 and to the Great Recession. Yet, for nearly three years, Barack Obama has blindly followed his Alinsky principles by repetitively attempting to deceive the American public by falsely and dishonestly declaring that the Wall Street firms are in bed with the nasty Republicans. The fact that this deception continues today shows what little regard that the president has for traditional Democrats who still believe that national leaders can be trusted. Only the Progressive Movement with all of its radical allies benefit from this Obama/Alinsky behavior; however, it must never be forgotten that the Congressional Progressive Caucus and other Congressional Democrats who support the Progressive Movement now constitute 67% of the Democrats in the House of Representatives.

Knowing nothing but the preceding content, the question “Who Are You With” takes on a much more important meaning as we approach the crossroads on November 6, 2012. The attacks of the multiple anti-American groups working within the Progressive Movement make the question asked by a Biden assistant of a reporter practicing his First Amendment rights a question that all Americans who want to restore and preserve our great country must answer. The political warfare, the class warfare, and the lack of truthful civil discourse has now degenerated into a fight for the basic values and principles upon which America was founded and has prospered. We all have a choice to make as we decide “who we are with.”    

September 12, 2011 

WHO ARE THE DEMOCRATS OF TODAY?

While attempting to hide their true intent, the fact that the Democrat Party of Kennedy ("ASK NOT....") and Truman ("THE BUCK STOPS HERE.") no longer exists became crystal clear through actions and words of Party leaders. 

• Following Pelosi's statement that "we must pass the bill so we can see what's in it" came the Joe Biden statement that the Democrats would like to run on their accomplishments but they are too hard to explain.
• On September 28, 2010, Obama calls Fox News "ultimately destructive" as he attacks one of our most important Amendments and traditions being Free Speech. Democrats cannot withstand a "fair and balanced" venue while misleading the American people with propaganda and political rhetoric!
• On October 2, 2010, the new Democrat Party was in full parade on the mall in front of the Lincoln Memorial. The CPUSA proudly displayed their Communist banners and posters, the DSA proudly displayed their Socialism banners and posters, and the unions bused in leftist operatives who joined the anti-American Communists and Socialists.
• George Soros validated the research contained in my book by joining his Trophy President in the fight against Free Speech and Fox News by giving $1 million to the leftist group Media Matters and $1.8 million to NPR to hire reporters in an all out attack on Fox.
• Within hours of this Soros intrusion into our Free Speech, Juan Williams was fired by NPR as the Obama puppet master pulled the strings with the same approach used to intrude and control elections at the state and local level around the country. (Think CODA and SOS Project-Al Franken) 

AUGUST 8, 2011

PROGRESSIVISM IN ACTION

History has clearly shown that Progressivism and Socialism have always failed. Our Founders knew this and tried to protect America with a Constitution. Winston Churchill perhaps 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."

When will the Progressive Democrats and Mr. Obama wake up? The Obama Administration now is blaming Standard & Poors after having blocked any attempt to slow spending during the Debt Debacle. They are now blaming the TEA Party, they are still blaming Bush, and still blaming the GOP for daring to present a bill that would slow spending. It is now obvious that the only objectives Mr. Obama had during the Debacle were his re-election and his continued spending spree as he immediately spoke of more "investments" being possible as a result of the $2.4 trillion increase in the debt ceiling. Yes, while pretending to support the need for debt reduction the Democrats and their president increased the debt ceiling by $2.4 trillion to almost $17 trillion. Do you realize that the debt was just over $8 trillion when Nancy Pelosi and the Progressive Democrats took over the funding body for our national finances, being the US House of Representatives?

Then there is the continuous misrepresentation of the economic condition. For instance, while bragging about the Auto Industry recovery, auto sales in 2011 are averaging (in millions) an anemic 1055 versus sales of 1390 and 1220 in the last two years of the Bush Administration.

Even worse is the fact that inflation adjusted GDP has been flat at essentially the same level as the high level reached in June of 2008. The disaster associated with these numbers is that it shows that the debt generated through the various Treasury and Fed stimulus programs has done nothing to revive the real economy. The GDP has been propped up by runaway spending such that we now have phenomenal debt and no real growth other than government programs.

Last, the acid test is Employment, or lack thereof. You have to go back to 2003 before you find lower levels of Employment than what we are currently experiencing. After hearing Mr. Obama and the former Speaker of the House Pelosi tell the American people that they are focusing on "jobs," all we see is spending. Employment in June and July, 2011 decreased to the lowest levels experienced since last December, while also being over 4 million less than the last month of the Bush presidency. In addition, over 1 million additional workers had given up looking for a job in July, 2011 which is over twice the number during the last month of the Bush Administration.

This is not written to defend the Bush Administration, but rather is written to hopefully alert all Americans to the deception that is being used so that you can reinforce that which is working and change that which is now such a disaster that the US rating has been decreased here and around the world. Even China is now lecturing us on how to manage financial affairs. Please wake up and recognize the need to change in the spirit of what made us the greatest country on earth-being the spirit of our Founders and limited constitutional government. No more of the "We just make it up as we go" coming from a member of the Congressional Progressive Caucus.

William E. Been

Author: Masters of Audacity and Deceit

Webpatrioticservices.com

AUGUST 6, 2011

LARGEST THEFT IN HISTORY

While watching the Debt Ceiling increase by $2.4 trillion just to cover spending until the next presidential election, the scam perpetrated on the American people could not have been any more obvious. While the GOP House of Representatives negotiated with itself for weeks attempting to propose something that might save our great nation from financial disaster, neither the U.S. Senate nor the White House proposed anything. Even worse, while listening to the rhetoric of Mr. Obama about the need for a bipartisan solution, the Majority Leader of the Democrat-controlled Senate announced that bills coming from the House were “dead on arrival.” In fact, nothing coming from the GOP House was even allowed to be debated by the totally partisan Senate leadership. This resulted in another crisis not to be wasted. As the Administration-imposed deadline of August 2 approached, the Democrat rhetoric followed a familiar pattern as they attempted to frighten the American public with false accusations that grandma won’t get her medical care, seniors will lose their Social Security, sick children will be turned away, and that a major calamity will occur if no increase in the debt ceiling is approved by August 2.

In attempting to understand how and why our government has become so blatantly irresponsible, I heard an interview with Orin Hatch on FOX News. Senator Hatch spoke of his past attempts at a Balanced Budget Amendment, specifically one in 1997 that failed to pass by a single vote. I could not help but wonder what that one vote would have meant to the current situation. With the debt being $5.4 trillion in 1997 and heading for $15 trillion in 2011, it is clear that holding at the 1997 levels would have assured that no crisis would have occurred and that the spending being generated by the Obama Administration would have been dramatically reduced. As a result, it is important to understand who those senators were that accounted for the missing vote that would have facilitated financial soundness.

A familiar pattern was again evident. The vote was 66-34 with a super majority of 67 votes required to pass the Amendment. Upon review of the vote by senator, it was once more aggravating to see the partisan politics that has ruled this country since the early 1990s. The “one vote” that killed the bill was cast by 34 Democrats who, as a block, killed the chance for financial sanity. Even more remarkable, every GOP senator voted for the bill along with eleven Democrats. Yet, the 34 Democrats blocked a bill that could have completely eliminated the debt ceiling crisis of 2011. Sadly, eighteen of these 34 senators are still in the US Senate blocking all attempts to reduce spending and debt. This Group of Eighteen has destroyed the financial stability/strength of the greatest nation in history. Every American needs to know these senators who will be listed as the “Dirty Dozen plus 6” at the end of this document.   

Having documented the Democrat destruction of mortgage lending standards during the 1990s, this irresponsible destruction of a bipartisan Balanced Budget bill in 1997 coupled with the mortgage lending debacle should be an indictment of the entire Democrat Party. No theft of wealth at any level can even begin to approach what the Democrats and their Progressive Movement allies have committed against our great country. The Democrats have literally destroyed our financial reputation, the reserve status of our dollar, and are continuing the reckless spending at the prodding of the current President who calls it “investment.” It is time to stop the Democrats, their Progressive masters, and their Socialist allies. THEY MUST BE STOPPED OR THE AMERICA THAT HAS BEEN THE ENVY OF THE WORLD WILL NO LONGER EXIST. REMEMBER TO VOTE AND GET-OUT-THE-VOTE ON NOVEMBER 6, 2012. GOD BLESS AMERICA!

Dirty Dozen Plus 6

Akaka (D-HI)                                     Feinstein (D-CA)                           Mikulski (D-MD)

Bingaman (D-NM)                              Inouye (D-HI)                                Murray (D-WA)  

Boxer (D-CA)                                     Kerry (D-MA)                                Reed (D-RI)

Conrad (D-ND)                                   Lautenberg (D-NJ)                         Reid (D-NV)

Durbin (D-IL)                                      Leahy (D-VT)                                Rockefeller (D-WV)

Feingold (D-WI)                                  Levin (D-MI)                                  Wyden (D-OR)   

webpatrioticservices.com

August 2, 2011

We Must Not Forget!

When a young man was asked by a talk radio commentator what he thought about the new security rules, he responded that it was just the way it was in today’s world. For a moment, my mind flashed back to the days when any American could run to the gates at the airport and board a plane with no security required. For a moment, I wondered how did this happen such that this young man accepts the need to screen him as the current normal. The real questions are: What has happened to our freedoms? Why can’t we go back?

Like the young man above, most of us would never think of going back after the morning of September 11, 2001. The report that a plane had flown into the World Trade Center disrupted a meeting that I was attending which was designed to improve the community. Like many Americans, it was difficult to understand how a plane could have been so far off of its flight path; however, when the second plane hit, it was even more stunning and difficult as the realization became undeniable that some individual(s) had intentionally flown those planes into the buildings. Few of us were prepared for such an attack on humanity. 

Unfortunately, the damage done to humankind on that morning cannot be undone and the memory of the event and of those who perpetrated the event must never be forgotten. However, if the events of September 11, 2001 are used to seek the answer to “why we cannot go back,” the lives of those lost on 911 and the many who lost their lives before 911 while protecting freedom and liberty will be memorialized as a demonstration of the good that still dominates our great society. Let us unite once more as a country Under God with the spirit of our Founders while seeking the answers as to how we can restore and preserve the freedoms lost when our culture is threatened by forces that would repeat the uncivilized behavior of fellow humans who would destroy life under the guise of religion or any ideological movement.   

July 28, 2011

The Politics of Progressivism

Introduction

Having watched the activities of the various groups within the Progressive Movement, it becomes clear that the leftists supporting the movement use the ambiguity of the word “progressive” to mask their agenda. Many of the pundits repetitively state that Progressivism is both a Democrat and Republican supported movement which effectively leaves no alternative for American voters. Upon further examination, it is clear that there are multiple types of behavior that are unfortunately lumped under the Progressivism banner. As a result, the most dangerous anti-American Progressives who desire to implement transformational change to American traditions and heritage are hidden within this broad definition.

Some of these pundits define humanitarian assistance programs as Progressive intrusion which provides more cover for the anti-American Progressives. As a result, the need to differentiate between appropriate human behavior and the Progressives who promote transformational change becomes critical for patriotic Americans who desire to restore and preserve America.

The purpose of this document is to clearly define the difference between Progressivism and humanitarian programs such that Progressivism strictly applies to only the destructive elements that threaten our traditions and heritage. This definition is mandatory to isolate the Progressive Movement that is a direct threat to individual freedom and liberty within our democratic republic. It is this threat that must be defeated. One cannot defeat one’s opponent until that opponent is clearly defined.  

The Word “Progress”

The use of the word “progress” to represent Marxism and Socialism is one of the most disgusting attempts to mislead the American public with a positive word that masks a movement that would destroy America and the quality of life enjoyed by the vast majority of the American people. Those who would comprise the Ruling Class have created their anti-American ideology and are casting their minority movement as being progress and marketing it as “change you can believe in.” While touting transparency, is it not the ultimate hypocrisy that Progressives seek their idealistic state of transformational change by using a word that typically means building on the successes of the past? Instead, through transformational change, Progressives seek to destroy our traditions and heritage while plundering our past success to create their ideologically utopian state based upon Marxist and Socialist.   

From another perspective, when the word “liberal” became uncomfortable for these same leftist ideologues, the use of “progressive” made a quick revival on the national scene. Although Progressivism has been a minor movement for over a century, it started to blossom with the Congressional Progressive Caucus in 1992 and became the major force behind the leftist movement when people such as Hillary Clinton declared that she would rather be known as a Progressive than a Liberal. The leftist “think tanks” are skilled at using words that deceive the American people, but the abuse of the word “progress” is one of the most dangerous to our constitutional republic.  

Make no mistake in believing that the Progressive Movement has anything to do with improving an already great country called America when the professed intent is exactly what Obama said prior to the 2008 election in the following words: “We are five days away from fundamentally transforming the United States of America.” This statement followed Michelle Obama stating “…we’re going to have to change our traditions, our history, and we’re going to have to move to a different place.” Both of the above statements by the Obamas mirror their mentor, George Soros, who stated the following: “…we must puncture the bubble of American supremacy.” These statements do not represent what patriotic Americans would consider as progress. These statements paint a portrait of how a minority of ideologues might dictate to the mass of American people by misusing words while promising undefined hope and change.

Failing to honestly communicate the intent of the Obama transformation is one of the most despicable examples of misconduct that has been committed by any American President throughout history. The end state expected from the hope and change promised by our Alinsky educated President has never been defined; however, it is clear that the Progressives and their radical socialist, communist and union allies have high expectations, including violent protests and revolution. This is not PROGRESS!     

Progressivism Confusion

As stated in the introduction, many different types of behavior are buried under the broad umbrella of Progressivism. These broad spectrums of behavior that media pundits throw into the Progressive Movement create definitional confusion thereby masking the most dangerous and radical elements of the Progressive Movement.

Many view Liberalism and Progressivism as being the same ideologies. Liberalism was the focus of conservative pundits until recent years when the development of the Progressive Movement became a very specific and documented reality. This confusion has served to mislead the American voter where many citizens view themselves as being liberal but have no idea what Progressivism represents. Although Liberalism may be essentially the same as Progressivism at the national political level, the voting public consists of many citizens with liberal agendas or liberal issues who have minimal awareness of the national Progressive Movement. The need to carve out the specific Progressive behavior within the Liberal agenda is mandatory but is ignored by the American media and unrecognized by the American people. Many individuals who refer to themselves as a Liberal are single issue advocates. There is nothing inappropriate about disagreement on issues while respecting opposing positions, which is one of the great byproducts of the individual freedoms provided by our republic. However, when the Liberal agenda becomes the agenda of Progressivism, the equation changes as the Progressives attempt to enforce their ideological viewpoints on all citizens through government intervention and intrusion. The result is the gradual destruction of the individual freedoms and liberty that have been the cornerstones of America.

Adding to the confusion is the view that both Democrats and Republicans are frequently cast as being Progressives. Democrats who neither profess to be Liberals or Progressives are frequently lumped into the Progressive category because of their support on social issues. In turn, Republicans who support selected humanitarian issues are also called Progressives. 

Anti-American Progressives

These are the Progressives who pose the greatest immediate threat to America. This Progressive group can be clearly defined and must be uniquely identified if America is to be restored and preserved to its historical traditions and heritage. Specifically, the core of this group consists of the professed members of the Congressional Progressive Caucus (CPC). All members of the CPC are elected as Democrats-not a single member is a Republican. The support groups for the CPC consist of multiple anti-American groups and individuals including the Institute For Policy Studies, ProgressiveCongress.org, Center for American Progress (CAP), ACORN, Communist Party USA (CPUSA), Democratic Socialists of America (DSA), Movement for a Democratic Society (MDS), and multiple leftist funding groups including George Soros and his Open Society Institute, his MoveOn.org, and his kingpin source of leftist funding being the Democracy Alliance.

Progressivism to this group consists of the total remaking of America through any means possible with the “rules” of Saul Alinsky being their sacred reference material. Many subscribe to the Cloward-Piven Strategy which would seek to destroy capitalism and free enterprise while following their redistribution of wealth objective seeking equality of outcome. This tier of Progressivism is a threat to every patriotic American and to the basis upon which our country was founded and has prospered. They must be stopped. They are a small minority but hold disproportionate power in both the Legislative and Executive branches of the federal government.

Social and Fiscal Progressivism

This group is also readily identifiable as it consists primarily of the citizens who are part of the national Democratic Party who are not anti-American and are not part of the fiscally conservative Democrats. This group shares the same ideological passion as the anti-American group while justifying any level of fiscal irresponsibility to provide “equality of outcome” without regard for individual initiative and the risks inherent with excessive spending for social programs. They tend to be Big Government advocates and support distribution of wealth objectives through multiple government programs. Those that blindly supported Obamacare to find out what it contains are prime examples of this group.

Many Unions and other Special Interest groups view privately held wealth as being the source for redistribution of funds to support their respective group objectives. Advocates of these groups are not satisfied that the federal treasury has been depleted as they seek various approaches to take any wealth that other Americans have worked for and saved. Many people who demonstrate and protest in favor of these Special Interest groups have no understanding of economics or even individual financial management requirements. These people provide the votes for the Alinsky trained politicians who promise them everything creating the expectation that a “stash” exists that can be readily given to those who perceive need. These politicians, in turn, feed these voters hope and change in the true Alinsky fashion.    

Humanitarianism

The fact that Progressivism claims ownership rights over Civil Rights, Health Care, Economic Justice and other social movements blurs the line between the vast majority of Americans who are Humanitarian but are not anti-American socialists and are fiscally conservative. It is critical that the American voters understand this difference. Therefore, it is mandatory that Humanitarians who are American patriots and fiscally responsible must not be referred to as Progressives. It is critical that the strictest limited government adherents recognize that the threat to our way of life comes from the anti-American leftists and those who do not subscribe to fiscal responsibility ala a Balanced Budget. In turn, strict adherence to these definitions will allow the American voters to differentiate between destructive Progressivism and beneficial, responsible Humanitarianism. It will also unmask the leftists, Marxists, and Socialists who now hide behind social justice programs while using the same programs in an attempt to destroy capitalism and the America that has provided its people more opportunity and success than any other country in history.   

From the perspective of an America First agenda, Humanitarians are a cornerstone in supporting the long held tradition of Americans being the most generous people in the world. From the perspective of defeating the Progressive threat to America, those who fall into the Humantarian group constitute a critical voting bloc consisting of Republicans, Independents, and many Moderate Democrats. Therefore, even if the reader does not like the above definitions, it is critical that the negativism that permeates the airwaves between the conservatives and moderates be tempered. The task of defeating the real enemies of our great country demands a united front sharing the objective to restore our country as intended in the Founding Documents. Only then can we once again establish and preserve individual freedom versus collective rule and preserve this great nation, under God.

So What Is Progressivism?

From the perspective of building on the great success story of America, the form of Progressivism that inevitably leads to either a socialistic or communist state is that which is of political concern. Therefore, it logically follows that a solid line must be drawn between the Humanitarians and the Progressives.  

Two groups, the Anti-American Progressives and Social and Fiscal Progressives are of considerable concern in that both can lead to socialism, communism, and various forms of dictatorial tyranny. Therefore, it is these two groups that deserve the title of Progressives and must be recognized as the threat to America’s future. We must isolate these people, focus on their destructive activities, and assure that their power structure is never again allowed to threaten America’s traditions and heritage. From a political perspective the Anti-American Progressives are clearly the most dangerous in terms of impact and urgency. Their roots are in Cloward-Piven,  Alinsky, Marx, Soros, and the multiplicity of leftist “think tanks” and organizations financed by wealthy leftists led by Soros.

Combating Progressivism

Without doubt, the most important step required to defeat Progressivism is the establishment of a clear definition of who is the opponent. It should be emphasized that you cannot defeat your opponent if you do not define who he is. That is the primary purpose of this document.  

There are only two choices in dealing with these threats. The American people can either work within the current governmental structure in Washington or work outside of that structure. It is virtually impossible to consider how any alternative outside of the current political structure can be effectively implemented before the 2012 election. Therefore, it is mandatory to work within the current structure that has served our country well for over 230 years.

It is strongly recommended that all Americans who want to restore and preserve America focus their efforts toward changing Washington in 2012 with a rebirth of patriotic spirit consistent with the Founding Fathers. The focus must be on the opponents to this government structure which is, first and foremost, the anti-American Progressive Movement. Secondly, the Social Justice Progressives must be included as an opponent because of their failure to follow fiscal restraints.

In closing, Progressives and their supporters must be identified, isolated, and defeated.

July 2, 2011

INTRODUCTION TO PROGRESSIVISM

Definition of Progressivism: Progressivism is a political approach that advocates “equality” as the ultimate goal. As a result, the redistribution and equal distribution of wealth across the society become tactics espoused by the Progressive movement. A corollary goal is to eliminate poverty by bringing the “top down” while bringing the “bottom up.” Progressivism touts New World Order ideologies while advocating equal distribution of wealth on a global basis. Progressivism also inserts “save the planet” objectives which are manifested in the “green” movement and support for global pollution regulations.

Progressivism as a Political Movement: Progressivism by its basic definition requires a Ruling Class to control and regulate individuals without regard for personal freedom. The objective is equality of outcome without regard for individual differences or aspirations. Equality of opportunity is no longer relevant. Individual initiative is suppressed in favor of the collective agenda as determined by the Ruling Class. Centralized control of major economic sectors such as Medical, Banking, and Media must be controlled within the regulations administered by Progressive leaders.

Accomplishments of Progressivism: Throughout recent history, Progressivism has become synonymous with Socialism and Communism. European-style socialism is currently a miserable failure throughout Europe as nations wallow in debt that is unsustainable. Other examples of the miserable failure that these political ideologies involving social justice have thrust upon mankind are readily seen in Cuba, North Korea, the defunct Soviet Union, China, and East Germany. In America, the Progressive Movement consists of multiple groups including the Communists and Socialists who have now openly joined with the Progressives as witnessed in the October 2, 2010 rally at the Lincoln Memorial. In addition, the legislative actions initiated by the Progressives since taking control of Congress in 2006 have resulted in a spending binge that has increased the national debt by $5 trillion with no apparent benefits while jeopardizing the financial health of the most successful nation on earth. To illustrate, from 1969 to 2009, the two states that dominate the Congressional Progressive Caucus (New York and California) added over 3 million people below the Census Bureau Poverty Line with the percentage below the Poverty Line worsening from 11.1% to 14.2% for both states. Further the Pennsylvania stronghold for Progressivism in Philadelphia reported 24.5% below the Poverty Line in 2009. The real effects of the Progressive Movement are clearly depicted by these statistics!  

History in America: The Progressive philosophy has existed behind closed doors in the United States for over 100 years. While implementing many Progressive programs through legislation, the Progressives have never accomplished the dictatorial control over the American people that is required to accomplish “their” utopian goals. The operative word is that these goals are “their” goals to be superimposed upon the American people with the underlying philosophy being that they know more about what is best for each individual than the individual does.    

America was founded on individual freedom under a governmental structure that promises liberty and justice for all. The Progressives offer hope rather than self-reliance. The Progressives promote dependency rather than independence. Of greatest concern is the intrusion of Progressivism into every aspect of American life thereby depriving individual citizens of personal privacy and individual choice. 

The most astounding aspect of the Progressive history in America is that the Progressives have watched the phenomenal success of America over the past 100 years. They have witnessed the development of the most successful nation in world history. Yet, they desire to destroy the roots of this great nation, being freedom, liberty, and individual rights. Instead, in their elitist mindset, they begrudge the accomplishments of millions of Americans and ignore the needs of those who are striving for self-improvement while seeking to create a dependent population that turns to them, the Progressive Ruling Class, for permission to have a McDonald’s Happy Meal.

Progressive Movement in 2010: Never in American history has the Progressive Movement been as powerful as it was in 2010 moving into the last two years of Obama’s first term as president. Using the results of the 2008 election, the Obama Administration and the Democrat super majority in Congress literally shoved Progressive legislation down the throat of the American people. Bipartisanship during the first two years of the Obama Administration is best epitomized by Obama’s own words while meeting with GOP congressional members when he responded to GOP suggestions as follows: “I won, you lost.”

However, it must be recognized that having a president who is steeped in the Progressive and Socialist ideologies was a result, rather than the beginning, of the Progressive Movement quest for power to transform America. A brief summary of the most significant Progressive support groups follows. It must be recognized that the following groups are only a small number of the hundreds of leftist groups at work supporting Progressivism, Socialism, and Communism within America.

• ·        Congressional Progressive Caucus (CPC). This is the most influential group of anti-American radicals simply because they reside within the federal power structure as members of the U.S. House of Representatives. The professed Progressives sitting in the House consist of 75 of the Democrat Minority. The power of this caucus cannot be underestimated as consistently proven under the leadership of Nancy Pelosi, the most influential congressional Progressive of recent years. Further solidifying the Progressive power base in the House are 45 additional House Democrats who cosponsored the Public Option legislation (H.B. 5808) and another 20 House Democrats who voted to raise the Debt Ceiling with No Spending Reductions.
• ·        Institute for Policy Studies (IPS). This is a group funded by various anti-Americans, such as George Soros, who work as a support group for the Congressional Progressive Caucus. Founded in 1963, this group serves as a “think tank” for the CPC while also serving as a conduit to the CPC for radical support groups such as the CPUSA, DSA, MDS, SDS, and the Cloward-Piven strategists.
• ·        Tides Foundation. This is another organization founded in the 1960s that works as a Progressive if not Socialist “think tank.” The Apollo Project that provides legislative support materials to the Democrats is a project of the Tides Foundation. This group is also funded by George Soros and his cronies. To demonstrate the power of these groups, the Director of the Apollo Project was named the Chairman of the Obama appointed investigative group called the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission which was charged with determining the causes for the Financial Crisis.
• ·        ProgressiveCongress.org. This is a new group, formerly known as the American Progressive Caucus Policy Foundation, founded in 2009 to implement the long-held vision of connecting Progressive leaders inside Congress with their allies on the outside for an inside-outside bridge to enable policymaking.  Once more, George Soros is behind this group. MoveOn.org is listed as  a Partner Organization along with other Soros-funded groups including the Huffington Post and the Institute for Policy Studies.
• ·        Center for American Progress (CAP). Founded in 2003 and headed by John Podesta from the Clinton Administration, CAP is also funded by George Soros. At a party celebrating the founding of CAP, Hillary Clinton urged other attendees to take up political arms in the “war that we’re engaged in with the other side.” Hillary has repeatedly stated that she views herself as a Progressive! This group provided much of the propaganda attacking the Bush Administration in an attempt to destroy the Bush presidency.
• ·        Open Society Institute and Democracy Alliance (OSI). Both of these groups were founded by George Soros with the OSI being another Progressive “think tank” designed to implement the Soros vision of an open global society. The Democracy Alliance was founded in 2005 to provide funding for organizations and political efforts that support Progressivism as well as groups such as the SOS (Secretary of State) Project, both of which are designed to elect a permanent Democrat government.

Who Are the Progressives? It is worthwhile to introduce several of the Progressive Caucus members to gain an understanding of these people and their actions, ideology, values, and competence.

Barney Frank, aka Mr. Subprime. While being the leading supporter of the Housing Bubble, Frank misled the American public and specifically the taxpayers by repetitively stating that concerns about Fannie and Freddie were exaggerated and that the federal government does not bail them out if they mismanage their assets. Then, in 2008, Barney Frank was instrumental in passing the bill, and brags about his success in doing so, that would allow the federal government to take over Freddie and Fannie in order to bail them out at a huge penalty to the American taxpayers.

Maxine Waters. She has been accused of misconduct with several banking deals involving her husband. She was incapable of recognizing any problem with Franklin Raines when he was held responsible for fixing the accounting books. In addition, Congresswoman Waters made the inane threat to the oil company executives during 2008 congressional hearings that she would advocate taking over their businesses and running them as a part of the federal government.

Nancy Pelosi. Speaker Pelosi was the creator of the new economic theory that increased unemployment is the best stimulus for the economy because of the unemployment benefits. She also stated emphatically that we need to pass the largest, most intrusive bill in American history so we can find out what is in it, referencing Obamacare.

Earl Blumenauer. This Congressional Progressive Caucus member urged supporters to be quiet about the regulation that reinstated the Death Panel provision which had been deleted from Obamacare when the bill was initially passed. This deletion supported a promise from the President that there was no such provision. Showing total disregard for the American people, Obama and the Democrats reinstated the Death Panel section. Blumenauer is on record stating that the Democrats had been lucky because “thus far, it seems that no press or blogs have discovered it…The longer this (regulation) goes unnoticed, the better our chances of keeping it.” So much for honesty and transparency!!!!  (Subsequent to this disclosure, the pressure caused the Death Panel section to be rescinded again.)   

Emanuel Cleaver. All you need to know about this man is that he is the one that claimed that someone spat upon him while he was walking with Nancy Pelosi and the oversize gavel from their office buildings to the capitol. Does anybody believe the Progressives who so ardently want to cast the TEA Party as demons would have quietly let this kind of inappropriate violation fade out of the news?

Progressives Threaten American Way of Life. Many citizens discount the significance of the threat posed by the Progressive Movement since the Movement has been around for over 100 years and has never been successful in transforming America. It is difficult for many people to understand that our great country could be vulnerable from within and that Progressivism will destroy incentive, motivation, and the individual rights that we have long taken for granted.

However, it is critical to communicate to as many of the citizenry who will listen that the evolution of the Progressive Movement has reached a level that can exert power and influence at a level never before achieved in America. Consider the following factors that make the Progressive Movement, as structured in 2008, a much more severe threat to the survival of America than at any previous time in our country’s great history.

• ·        The Progressives in the House of Representatives are now in a position to dominate the Democrats through the Progressive Caucus that was founded in 1992.
• ·        The election of a President who celebrated being in Wisconsin where the Progressive Movement first began, who was mentored by Socialists and Communists, and who was viewed by the Progressive “think tanks” as being a better Progressive than Hillary Clinton.
• ·        The entry of George Soros and his wealthy allies with the formation of Democracy Alliance in 2005 that provides apparently unlimited funding to support the Progressive Movement.
• ·        The passing of McCain-Feingold that opened the door for these wealthy leftists who provide funding for the Progressive support groups such as MoveOn.org, Media Matters, SOS Project, and ACORN.
• ·        The out of control spending that has been created by the dominant Democrats which is effectively a way to spread the wealth around. This spending on the heels of the Housing Crisis has created the perfect platform for the execution of the Cloward-Piven strategy that seeks to replace capitalism with socialism administered by a permanent Progressive Democrat government.

Much more could be written concerning the multiple groups and organizations that are receiving funding to support the Progressive Movement. Like the communists and socialists, their focus is to infiltrate groups and present their platform through the education system, the political system, the labor movement, and through religious groups with the emphasis being on organizing those who feel dispossessed. Unfortunately, the Progressive type of organizing does not stress individual rights and opportunity, but rather, stresses creating dependencies through government handouts. Nancy Pelosi said it all when she said unemployment was the best economic stimulus. She conveniently ignores JOB Creation which would put spendable dollars in the hands of the jobholder without taking it away from the taxpayer or, even worse, borrowing the money from China! Can you say anti-American any more clearly? No wonder the unemployment rate is 9.1% with another 8-10% who are underemployed or who have given up looking for a JOB!

April 3, 2011

PROGRESSIVE MAJORITY-SOROS INTRUDES IN LOCAL ELECTIONS

This article is a brief alert for those working to restore and preserve America. Although there are multiple organizations working in support of the anti-American Progressives and their allies such as George Soros and his Democracy Alliance group, the fact that ten states are being directly targeted by Soros and company with a group named Progressive Majority was a recent discovery. The professed objective of this group is to place Progressive officials in all levels of state and local government including school boards, mayors, county and state officials. When coupled with the SOS Project and community organizers, the Soros-led Progressives are in position to intrude into local government to control all political activity while grooming future leaders for high level state and federal positions.

Upon finding that this group is targeting my home state, the necessary research was completed to absolutely determine that Soros and his Democracy Alliance partners are providing the funding and leadership for this group. The contributors consist of the biggest names involved with the Democracy Alliance including Soros himself, Peter Lewis, the Sandlers, and other big names such as Pritzker, Stryker, Bowers, Silberstein, McKay, and organizations such as MoveOn.

Given the recent Progressive Summit in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvanians need to be aware of this group and their intent. Identifying their candidates and assuring they are defeated at the polls will be critical to stopping these people at the local level. The states targeted with the number of officials elected in 2010 that were supported by Progressive Majority are:

                                                                           Arizona-3

                                                                           California-1

                                                                           Colorado-5

                                                                           Michigan-5

                                                                           Minnesota-5

                                                                           Ohio-10

                                                                           Pennsylvania-2

                                                                           Virginia-0

                                                                           Washington-17

                                                                           Wisconsin-4

On their website, Progressive Majority claims to have helped elect 411 “progressive champions” since 2004. The timing supports the change in emphasis cited in their history where it states that the Directors, in 2003,  shifted focus to the states. This also coincides with the acceleration of George Soros’s efforts to dominate national politics with his involvement with MoveOn, Democracy Alliance, CAP, SOS Project, defeating George Bush, and supporting Barack Obama. All of these groups and actions were initiated by Soros during the 2003-2006 time period.

The mentality of this group is clearly depicted in their involvement with two Washington State House members in 2010. In District 38, their website describes their support for Nick Harper who challenged incumbent Democrat Senator Jean Berkey with the statement “The progressive community is united in their dissatisfaction with Senator Berkey.” This district “…should be home to one of the most progressive voices in the state and instead is represented by a Senator that has been a bad vote on a range of progressive issues…” In District 24, Steve Tharinger was elected and the website describes the retiring Democrat that Tharinger replaced as “…a moderate, making electing him (Steve) a key part of our strategy to flip four seats to a progressive Democrat. This is the exact same mentality that exists at the federal level prompting Nancy Pelosi to state that they did not lose the election in 2010 because the vast majority of the Progressives in the Congressional Progressive Caucus of the United States House of Representatives won re-election.

Of further interest is the situation in Washington involving the election of Nick Harper where an organization named Moxie Media is being investigated by the state Attorney General for campaign finance disclosure violations. (Source: The Olympian dated 3/10/11) Moxie Media was a sponsor for Progressive Majority fundraising efforts and is run by Lisa MacLean who is listed as a contributor to Progressive Majority. It appears that Moxie Media attempted to conceal its campaign activities by assembling multiple PACs and delaying reports that would list donors and recipients of funds. 

The two Pennsylvania officials listed on the American Majority website that were elected in 2010 are both from the Philadelphia, being Vanessa Lowery Brown from District 190 and Pam DeLissio from District 194.

 The website for this group is www.progressivemajority.org

March 17, 2011

Economic Welfare: Risks and Responses

And

Masters of Audacity and Deceit

During the first week of March, Glenn Beck discussed a document that he referred to as the Pentagon Report that had just been released. The title of this report is Financial Warfare: Risks and Responses, written by Kevin D. Freeman of Cross Consulting and Services, LLC and first published in June, 2009. The purpose of the report is clearly stated on the title page as being an “Analysis of Twenty-First Century Risks in Light of the Recent Market Collapse.”

When writing Masters of Audacity and Deceit, one of my greatest concerns was what appeared to be an absolute failure on the part of our federal government to investigate the root cause(s) that led to the Financial Crisis that exploded with the bankruptcy of Lehman Brothers on September 15, 2008. It is now widely accepted that the economy “sunk like a stone” after September 15, 2008 causing the Great Recession that is also widely accepted as being the most severe economic reversal since the Great Depression. Yet, as of this writing, no organizations or individuals have been held accountable for either inappropriate or criminal activity. Of course, there is the usual fluff thrown around by the politicos and a lot of blame cast without substantive evidence. Given the research conducted in the preparation of my book, it is probably safe to say that virtually everyone even remotely involved with the events that led to the economic collapse has been accused by someone of being responsible and yet none of the key governmental officials have accepted any responsibility for making mistakes, let alone accept responsibility for absolute failure in fulfilling their responsibility to the American people and, specifically, to the American taxpayers who have literally watched trillions of their dollars wasted while causing suffering and pain among a vast majority of the people. Foreclosures, retirement plan losses, job losses, broken homes, investment losses are all factors that should warrant an intensive investigation.

Upon reading the opening lines in the Economic Warfare report, several factors are of great importance. First, the realization that somewhere within the Washington bureaucracy resides an individual or some people who view the events of 2008 as serious and suspicious enough to warrant legitimate questioning to determine the root causes of the turmoil. The context of the 2008 events should, of itself, have led to an immediate and detailed investigation to specifically identify the causes and the perpetrators of the events that led to the Great Recession. However, all that has been officially completed is the “investigation” by the horribly biased and partisan Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission. Second, and of potentially great significance, is the fact that the content of the Economic Warfare report adds significant credibility to the connections of the dots that is instrumental in my book Masters of Audacity and Deceit. I have promoted my book from the first date published as being a book that every American voter needs to read. After seeing the content of Mr. Freeman’s report, there is no doubt that both the Economic Warfare report and my book should be mandatory reading for every American voter. The risks that the economic turmoil of 2008 could have been terrorism, economic warfare by an enemy of the state, or even economic warfare to further individual or group ideologies are too great to leave any stone unturned. It is time to put America First as our objective and hold the perpetrators of the 2008 disaster accountable.  

POSTED 2/24/2011 

PROGRESSIVE MOVEMENT SUPPORTS “RELIGION OF PEACE”

One of the most powerful political movements, if not the most powerful, is the Progressive Movement consisting of multiple anti-American groups that desire to destroy freedom and liberty through the transformation of America to a socialistic totalitarian style society. That this powerful movement is directly linked to the encroachment of Islamic radicals accentuates the threat that both of these movements pose to America and patriots who support the ideals vested in our Constitution and the words of our Founders. Over the past few years, it has become painfully clear that many Americans have no awareness of the Progressive Movement objectives and are unable or unwilling to recognize that the nation building objectives of Islam are threatening our way of life.

The purpose of this document is to show the direct linkages of the Islamic movement to the politically powerful Progressives. Although there are many Progressive groups, this document will focus on those that possess political power either within or directly supporting the federal government. By far the most significant of these groups is the Congressional Progressive Caucus which currently dominates the Democrat Caucus in the House of Representatives. In a supporting role, one of the most influential Progressive “think tanks” is the Institute for Policy Studies which works directly with the Congressional Progressive Caucus. That neither of these groups have respect for the American Constitution has been clearly demonstrated in recent years with Speaker Pelosi’s response to a question concerning the constitutionality of the Health Insurance Act accentuating their desire to ignore our history and traditions.

The most direct physical linkage is provided by the fact that two Muslims now sit in the House of Representatives and are both members of the Congressional Progressive Caucus. Andre Carson, from Indiana, is the 7^th District Representative which includes Indianapolis. Keith Ellison, from Minnesota, is the 5^th District Representative which includes Minneapolis. Congressman Ellison was elected to one of the two Co-Chair positions of the Congressional Progressive Caucus in January, 2011.  This former supporter of Louis Farrakhan and the Nation of Islam is now sitting at the top of this large, influential caucus within the U.S. House of Representatives. (dicoverthenetworks.org)

Although Congressman Ellison promotes himself as being a unifying agent, the Huffington Post reports his reaction to the opposition to the Park51 mosque as follows: “The real drivers of it are people who openly proclaim that Barack Obama is not a citizen. The real organizers of this thing are people who are just proponents of religious bigotry. Nothing more, nothing less.”

Another indication of the relationship between the Congressional Progressive Caucus and the Muslim movement involves a letter dated April 6, 2010 sent to the House leadership of the House Committee on the Budget. The Progressives are writing in support of at least $58.5 billion for the International Affairs Budget and make a specific reference to the President’s request to “…create a new initiative to forge better and new relations with Muslim communities globally…” This sounds innocent enough except that no other specific communities are mentioned except for a reference to Haiti and Chili as special needs due to devastating earthquakes.

Founded in 1963, the Institute for Policy Studies has long been a source for Marxist, Socialist, and Communist propaganda. That it remains such in 2011 is well documented in my book Masters of Audacity and Deceit.

From their website, an article written by John Feffer dated November 7, 2010 is validation in itself for the linkage of the Muslims with the Progressive Movement. Feffer is listed as a Staff member of the Institute for Policy Studies in their annual report for 2009. The title of the article is The Lies of Islamophobia and the article portrays the Muslims as having been misunderstood throughout the centuries as he uses an eleventh century poem, The Song of Roland, to start this argument.

Feffer’s objective is very clear in that he is presenting a revision of history covering ten centuries. He casts the Crusaders as being marauders attacking many enemies while replacing these enemies with a Muslim adversary in his revision of history. He calls the Muslim violence throughout 14 centuries a myth and also calls global Muslim ambitions a myth. His last myth of Islam that he presents is the view of Islam as a “religion of the sword” which he attributes to the Crusaders who he implies slaughtered many more people than the Muslims.

Feffer ends his diatribe and name calling by declaring that the elections on November 2, 2010 suggest that we will be living with Islamophobia for some time due to the Tea Party Movement and the increased power of Republican militants in Congress. He calls the current wars the “West against the Rest,” and concludes by calling Western behavior Crusade 2.0 which he describes as the new dark age we find ourselves in.

Solidifying the relationship between the two Movements is an article published by The Muslim Observer on December 24, 2008 where one of the two debriefers at a nationwide conference call concerning the “Israeli Occupation of Palestine” was another Institute for Policy Studies Staff member named Phyllis Bennis. Similar to the approach of John Feffer, she accuses America’s ally of Occupation and violating international law. Demonstrating the audacity of this group of people, she declares that “We try to change the U.S. policy.”

The research to write this article indicates that there are many other connections between the various Progressive Movement groups and the Muslim threat to America. However, the linkages reported in this document should be sufficient to raise considerable concern within all Americans who desire to have a future without the oppression of a corrupted government that no longer respects American values and traditions. The transformation of America is well underway lead by the Progressives and supporters such as George Soros, New World Order ideologues, and President Obama himself. The Muslims find sanctuary within the related movements which clearly means that the Muslim aggression to our way of life cannot be stopped without the continuation of the change in Washington that hopefully started on November 2, 2010. The American people must awaken with daily vigilance to restore and preserve our country by returning to the founding principles. The next critical milestone is November 6, 2012!!!

February 11, 2011

FINANCIAL CRISIS INQUIRY COMMISSION REPORT

The final report of the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission was published during the last week of January and was available at Barnes & Noble the following week. As expected, the four Commission members representing the Republicans did not endorse the report which was then officially published by the six Democrat members under the leadership of Apollo Project Chairman Phil Angiledes.

While an in-depth analysis of the 500+ page report will take about 60 days, a cursory review indicates that the role of Democrat Legislators, ACORN, President Clinton, President Obama, Fannie Mae, and Freddie Mac are minimized or non-existent. There is no mystery as to why the four Republican members took exception to the use of certain words and phrases which will be clearly documented when the in-depth analysis is complete and documented with appropriate citations.

It is also worth noting at this point that the four Republican members did not agree upon a position paper resulting in three members preparing a report that presents the causes as being more globally oriented while the fourth member focused more on the forces and practices that drove the push for affordable housing for low- and moderate-income families.

My final report will include commentary concerning all three of the above reports with the basis for much of the analysis being the root cause analysis presented in my book Masters of Audacity and Deceit.

JANUARY 6, 2011

Response to Kathleen Parker Editorial

 Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission

The “debate” that she speaks about involves the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission which was created by the Obama Administration as a bipartisan group to determine the causes of the current financial and economic crises. The basis for her accusation involves key words such as “Wall Street” and “deregulation” which she claims the Republicans on the Commission have requested be deleted from the final report. These words have been at the core of Democrat talking points since the Obama campaign of 2008. As a result, the Progressives and Democrats have used these same words to “slant” any “debate” concerning the root causes of the Financial Crisis and the Great Recession.

In addition, Democrats use these words to cast blame even though it was the Democrats who initiated deregulatory legislation and it was, and still is, the Democrats who were working in partnership with Wall Street. Consider the following:

• The Democrats and their Mainstream Media allies link “Wall Street” to Republicans while professing to be the Party looking out for Main Street. While spreading this propaganda, Obama and the Democrats were taking huge campaign contributions from Wall Street firms. These huge corporations are the same ones that have been seen at the White House on multiple occasions since Obama’s election. Published reports covering these occasions describe a rather cozy relationship and indicate that most CEOs of the largest Wall Street firms voted for Obama. Further validating the hypocrisy of the Democrats with Wall Street is the following quote taken from the Progressives For Obama website: “The Clintons ushered in the Wall Street Democrats whose deregulation ethos has widened inequality while leaving millions of Americans without their rightful protections against market shocks.”    
• In spite of the above statement concerning Wall Street Democrats and their deregulation ethos, the Progressives, Democrats and Media use the word “deregulation” as a means to attack Free Enterprise, Capitalism, Free Markets, and ultimately the Republicans who believe in these fundamental American principles. Although the Democrats try to ignore the Housing Crisis as a root cause of the Financial Crisis, the Housing Bubble was created by lowering mortgage lending requirements and was the catalyst for the Financial Crisis and the most significant link in any objective root cause analysis. In fact, every piece of legislation passed that involved deregulation of the Housing Industry was initiated by Democrats, sponsored by Democrats, approved by Democrats, and protected by Democrats from any and all attempts by Republicans to tighten regulatory control. (Even Bill Clinton recognized the obstructionist role of the Democrats.) The amendment to the 1992 Housing Act is a prime example of how the Democrats deregulated mortgage lending. The Bush Administration attempted to mitigate the risks associated with Fannie and Freddie by creating a regulating body known as the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight (OFHEO). Late in the approval process for this bill and shortly before the November presidential election of 1992, the Senate Democrats added an amendment titled Removal of Regulatory Barriers to Affordable Housing which dramatically loosened mortgage lending standards working in conjunction with ACORN on the outside. While the Republicans were trying to assure regulations were properly administered, the Democrats were “deregulating” by removing regulations. This pattern repeated itself throughout the 1990s as regulations to protect safety and soundness were weakened and regulations forcing lower mortgage lending requirements were forced through congressional legislation.

Given the above, is it any wonder that the Republican members of the Commission would object to the use of the words “deregulation” and “Wall Street” by the Democrats on the Commission? The answer to that question becomes more evident when one analyzes the 10-member “bipartisan” commission. Six of the members were chosen by the most partisan of Democrats being Pelosi and Reid while only four of the members were chosen by Republicans. After spending three years defining “deregulation” and “Wall Street” in a dishonest manner to pass blame to Republicans, it is inconceivable that the Democrats on this Commission would recognize the reality of a legitimate root cause analysis that would clearly incriminate Democrat operatives, legislators, and their radical allies. Will the Democrats admit that they were the sole initiators of legislation that allowed people with no money down and no income to attain mortgages? Will the Democrats on the Commission recognize the role that ACORN, Project Vote, and legal actions against banks played to insure compliance to Democrat legislation? Will the Democrats even mention that the ACORN lawyer in the case against Citigroup was Barack Obama?

Ms Parker could have described the background of the Chairman of the Commission, Mr. Angelides. He was California state treasurer which should have resulted in automatic disqualification given the disastrous California financial condition. Even more important is his role as a far left Progressive heading the Apollo Project which was created by the Tides Foundation. The funding of Tides and the relationship with Tides founder Drummond Pike is a Red Flag of the brightest proportion. Funding for Tides comes from none other than George Soros. Is it any wonder that Commissioner Keith Hennessey said the Democrat majority on the Commission voted “to limit the minority’s opportunity to express our views in the commercial book version of the upcoming report?”  

What kind of objectivity would anyone expect from a group where the leadership is beholden to both George Soros and our current president? Perhaps Ms Parker should interview Mr. Hennessey and seek the reasons why four lone Republicans on a committee of ten might take exception to Democrats led by Progressive leftists who use words exactly as she professes to dislike in her article Word Choice Can Distort, Slant Debate.