Left-wingers have been running away from the adjective liberal for years.

“The liberal brand is tarnished,” said Democracy Alliance member Rob Glaser, who heads the online multimedia company RealNetworks. He wants to “change the political paradigm” and treat the word “progressive” as a thing “that’s nurtured and managed just like any other brand.”

To test his theory, Glaser teamed up with John Podesta’s Center for American Progress and spent $600,000 on TV ads in the Midwest over a three-week period. He proudly claims liberals in the test areas subsequently re-categorized themselves as progressives. However, CAP research shows that as much as 40% of the public has no clue what “progressive” means. (Politico, Dec. 6, 2007)

Thomas Frank, Wall Street Journal columnist and author of the influential tract, What’s The Matter With Kansas: How Conservatives Won The Heart of America, resents the stereotyping of liberals as shallow, materialistic, arrogant urban elitists. This “latte libel” is one of conservatives’ “dearest rhetorical maneuvers.” It holds that “liberals are identifiable by their tastes
and consumer preferences and that these tastes and preferences reveal the essential arrogance and foreignness of liberalism.”

Astonishingly, Frank even dismisses the idea that America has a liberal elite, calling the notion “not intellectually robust.” The idea “has been refuted countless times, and it falls apart under any sort of systematic scrutiny.”

Yeah, right.

Strangely, left-of-center Americans have rechristened themselves progressives, borrowing a label from mid-century and FDR-era America often associated with radical politics.

As David Horowitz told Glenn Beck on his TV show yesterday:

You have to understand this modern left, what you call the progressives, which is, my parents were card carrying Communists, they always called themselves progressives. They belonged to the progressive party. It’s the same battle. These people are totalitarians. They think they know what’s good for you and they’re going to control you to make you do what they think is good for you even if you don’t want to do it.

Liberal may not be a political winner, but is progessive any better?

Below is the Executive Summary from the report filed today by the House Committee investigating the activities of ACORN, followed by their Key Findings. The full report outlines the details behind each finding, and provides examples of the evidence supporting the findings.  Download the full report here.

Regarding findings #3  and #4 below, you may want to check out some of my old posts that reference specific examples of such activity. More specifically, some of the same reports and documents referenced in the House report footnotes have been available on my ACORN Money Trail page, where I’ve been posting supporting documents for all my ACORN related research and posts over the last several months.  (Refer specifically to reports on this page from USAspending.gov, referenced on page 63 of the House report)

U.S. House of Representatives, Committee on Oversight and Government Reform
Darrell Issa (CA-49), Ranking Member

Staff Report
U.S. House of Representatives
111th Congress
Committee on Oversight and Government Reform
July 23, 2009

“The Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN) has repeatedly
and deliberately engaged in systemic fraud. Both structurally and operationally, ACORN
hides behind a paper wall of nonprofit corporate protections to conceal a criminal
conspiracy on the part of its directors, to launder federal money in order to pursue a
partisan political agenda and to manipulate the American electorate.

Emerging accounts of widespread deceit and corruption raise the need for a criminal
investigation of ACORN. By intentionally blurring the legal distinctions between 361
tax-exempt and non-exempt entities, ACORN diverts taxpayer and tax-exempt monies
into partisan political activities. Since 1994, more than $53 million in federal funds have
been pumped into ACORN, and under the Obama administration, ACORN stands to
receive a whopping $8.5 billion in available stimulus funds.

Operationally, ACORN is a shell game played in 120 cities, 43 states and the District of
Columbia through a complex structure designed to conceal illegal activities, to use
taxpayer and tax-exempt dollars for partisan political purposes, and to distract
investigators. Structurally, ACORN is a chess game in which senior management is
shielded from accountability by multiple layers of volunteers and compensated
employees who serve as pawns to take the fall for every bad act.”

The report that follows presents evidence obtained from former ACORN insiders that
completes the picture of a criminal enterprise.

1. First, ACORN has evaded taxes, obstructed justice, engaged in self dealing, and aided and abetted a cover-up of embezzlement by Dale Rathke, the brother of
   ACORN founder Wade Rathke.
2. Second, ACORN has committed investment fraud, deprived the public of its right to
   honest services, and engaged in a racketeering enterprise affecting interstate
   commerce.
3. Third, ACORN has committed a conspiracy to defraud the United States by using
   taxpayer funds for partisan political activities.
4. Fourth, ACORN has submitted false filings to the Internal Revenue Service (IRS)
   and the Department of Labor, in addition to violating the Fair Labor Standards Act
   (FLSA).
5. Fifth, ACORN falsified and concealed facts concerning an illegal transaction
   between related parties in violation of the Employee Retirement Income Security
   Act of 1974 (ERISA).

Download the full report here.

Republican Norm Coleman has conceded the bitterly disputed contest over the second U.S. Senate seat for Minnesota.

This does not change the fact that as a senator Al Franken is not legitimate. The election was stolen at the precinct level, during the recount, and during the post-election litigation.

ACORN, the infamous vote-fraud factory, played a role in this.

As ACORN-aligned Secretary of State Mark Ritchie, a former community organizer, presided over the vote-counting process, Coleman’s original lead dwindled. There were mountains of other irregularities and somehow in the end Franken prevailed.

Ritchie defeated a two-term incumbent Republican in 2006 after being endorsed and assisted financially by a ”527″ group called the Secretary of State Project (SoS).

The founders of the project religiously believe that right-leaning secretaries of state helped the GOP steal the presidential elections in Florida in 2000 and Ohio in 2004.

The candidates it endorses agree on electoral integrity issues: Voter fraud is largely a myth, vote suppression is used widely by Republicans, cleansing the dead and fictional characters from voter rolls should be avoided until embarrassing media reports emerge, and anyone who demands that a voter produce photo identification before pulling the lever is a racist.

In 2006, Minnesota ACORN’s political action committee endorsed and funded Ritchie. Contributors to Ritchie’s campaign included leftwing philanthropists George Soros (the billionaire who once made the effort to defeat George Bush “the central focus of my life”), Drummond Pike (whose political objectives are virtually in full agreement with those of the Democratic Party), and Deborah Rappaport. Also donating to Ritchie’s campaign was the longtime hard-left activist Heather Booth, a Saul Alinsky disciple who co-founded the Midwest Academy, a radical ACORN clone.

It was revealed during a panel discussion at the Democratic Party’s convention last summer that the Democracy Alliance, a financial clearinghouse created by Soros and insurance magnate Peter B. Lewis, had approved SoS as a grantee. The Democracy Alliance aspires to create a permanent political infrastructure of nonprofits, think tanks, media outlets, leadership schools, and activist groups — a kind of “vast left-wing conspiracy” to compete with the conservative movement. It has brokered more than $100 million in grants to liberal nonprofits including ACORN.

IRS records show SoS received donations from Democracy Alliance members including Soros, Rob Stein, Gail Furman, and Susie Tompkins Buell.

Meanwhile, it hardly needs to be pointed out that this Frankenstein is a fundamentally unserious and untested figure worthy of ridicule. After being isolated in the entertainment-media-academia complex where he got nothing but praise for decades, Franken is unsuited for the world outside. He cannot tolerate criticism and characteristically responds with over-the-top vitriolic attacks.

He is the living embodiment of the horrible things that conservatives fairly or unfairly impute to DailyKos bloggers.

Matt Bai chronicles the Democrats' return to political dominance in The Argument.

Life is good for the Democratic Party these days.

In firm control of all three branches of government for the first time in more than a generation, the Democrats have seen their ranks swell with the recent defection of U.S. Sen. Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania.

Specter’s switch gave the Democrats a near filibuster-proof majority of 59 senators-something that may come in handy during the upcoming nomination process of Sonia Sotomayor, who President Barack Obama recently put forward to be the next U.S. Supreme Court Justice and the first Latina in the nation’s history to serve on the court. 

The Democrats have had a string of successes since Obama’s inauguration in January, overseeing the passage of a $787 billion stimulus plan, starting to implement a withdrawal time line and process for the war in Iraq and moving both to close Guantanamo prison camp and repudiating the Bush Administration’s interrogation policies that many described as torture.

Meanwhile, the Republicans are struggling.  Mightily.

Each week seems to bring new headlines that suggest a party in disarray,  with an unclear voice, hierarchy or direction.  One week it’s Rush Limbaugh saying that Colin Powell is not actually a Republican. Another it’s Meghan McCain, daughter of the defeated presidential candidate, slamming conservative pundit Ann Coulter.  

In this climate, it can be easy to forget that the political scene was completely reversed less than five years ago.

After Bush soundly defeated John Kerry in the November 2004 presidential election, the Democrats seemed to some to be poised on the brink of irrelevance, or, even worse, obscurity.  Bush’s victory,  which gave him the opportunity to later appoint two Supreme Court justices, was the seventh by a Republican in the previous 10 presidential contests.  Continued majorities in both the House and Senate accompanied his triumph.  

New York Times Magazine political reporter Matt Bai remembers this dry period in the Democrats’ history.

He traces the party’s path back from the political netherlands to reclaiming the House, the Senate and the majority of governorships, in The Argument: Inside the Battle to Remake Democratic Politics.

The road to political redemption was a twisted one, with many engaging characters and twists along the way.

Bai begins the book with Kerry’s crushing, and apparently surprising defeat in 2004 (I had had a strong feeling about the race’s outcome from the point that he did not respond forcefully to the Swift Boat attacks in August and thus did not share the surprise of some of the sources Bai interviewed.  If anything, Kerry’s lack of response reminded me strongly of Michael Dukakis‘ failure to counter the Lee Atwater-conceived Willie Horton ads that had such a devastating effect on his candidacy.).

From the loss, Bai moves to explore the different level of change in party operation and vision that Democratic strategists and members felt were necessary.  Democracy Alliance founder Rob Stein is shown as playing a key role in raising party awareness about the degree of organization the Republicans had fostered, thereby helping people understand what they confronted. 

Bai spends a lot of time in the book talking about the ascending role of technology-a development that led to the surprisingly successful candidacy of Howard Dean and his later selection as party chairman, the emerging power of organizations like Eli Pariser’s MoveOn.org and the potency of bloggers like Markos Zuniga, creator of the wildly popular DailyKos.

Technology also is a lense through which one sees some of the major conflicts between, on the one hand, the 1990s, Clinton-era establishment, who modernized and moved the party toward the political center and who fashioned two presidential victories by traditional methods of fundraising and politicking, and, on the other hand, the more progressive and technologically oriented new guard embodied by Zuniga and Pariser.   

The resulting conflicts are often messy. 

At one party gathering, the former president loses his temper when questioned about his wife Hillary’s vote to go to war in Iraq, and proceeds to rant about all kinds of right-leaning policies and directions he says were ascribed to him.  Bai also shows the ongoing and occasionally public struggles between current White House majorduomo Rahm Emanuel and then-party chairman about Dean’s 50-state strategy-an approach, which Emanuel felt diverted valuable resources from battleground states. 

In the end, the Democrats swept to victory, and each of the groups and people listed above, and a host of others could claim some share of the triumph, if not the spoils. 

The question about the argument was less clearly answered.  Bai ends the book with a lion in winter-like address from former New York Governor Mario Cuomo, who reminds the exultant Democrats that, despite their smashing electoral victories, they still “have no big idea.” 

The Argument has a number of the strengths and weaknesses that characterize much of his work that appears in The New York Times magazine.  His intelligence, writing skills and thorough reporting are apparent throughout the work, and yet one often leaves his pieces, and, in this case, the book, feeling like you’ve not actually learned much new or different. 

The Democrats’ need to articulate a vision greater than “We are not the Republicans” has been known for a long time. So, too, has the Republicans’ superior ground level organizational capacity, forged during the late 70s and 80s by people like Richard Viguerie, strategist Grover Norquist and strengthened in the 90s by Christian Coalition leader Ralph Reed.  His explanation of the rise of blogging is engaging and not particularly informative to the tens of millions of people who have clicked onto DailyKos during the past decade.   

Bai does not explore the mixed legacy of the Clinton presidency as fully as he could, and Ned Lamont’s primary victory over Joe Lieberman, which Bai seems to herald, as the triumph of the new way, seems a bit hollow given Lieberman’s ultimate triumph.  

One gets the sense while reading The Argument that Bai’s is writing for those people who were among Rob Stein’s target audience-Democrats who did not get why their party was being consistently clobbered in elections, yet did not think that drastic action or rethinking needed to be taken to stop the slide.  

Which brings us back to Obama and the Democrats’ current strong position. 

Obama appears in The Argument as a skilled writer who unsurprisingly adopts a both/and position toward traditional party stalwarts and the emerging online progressive movement.  He contributes a spirited articulation of his position in a lengthy blog which he urges people not to demonize Republican, affirms the establishment’s importance and uses available technology to share his views.  

Bai writes the afterword during the throes of Obama and Clinton’s fight for the Democratic nomination. The section includes the following somewhat prescient thought: 

“Should Obama win the nomination, though, and perhaps even the White House, he will face a choice where the powerful progressives in his party are concerned: whether to attempt, through the power of his personality and argument, to lead the new movement away from the limited politics of hostility and toward some modern vision of liberalism, or whether to become, like so many political leaders before him, a reflection of the movement he inherits.  If Obama can’t change the trajectory of the new progressive movement, then the movement will very likely change him.” 

Obama has not been president long enough to definitively answer the questions Bai or Cuomo pose, and the answers to those questions may go a long toward predicting whether his victory is a blip on the screen of Republican dominance or augurs a new era in liberal thinking. 

For posing those questions, and for providing an enjoyable read along the way, Bai deserves credit, even if The Argument does have a number of flaws.

Are the Republicans on the verge of obscurity?

Have the Democrats made a compelling new argument?

Is Obama moving the country away from hostility and polarization?

Dave Vincent - photo: Tom Bimpson

Dave Vincent warns that the right is close to regaining control after a poor turnout in the PCSU elections

UPDATE:  I originally made this post in May 2009.  But with the recent coverage on the APOLLO Alliance this August, I thought I’d also point my readers to this 2007 press release, headlined “Business, Environmental, Labor Leaders Join Senators, Governors At Apollo Alliance Summit – Urge Congress To Invest In Clean Energy Initiatives”.   Read Anna Burger’s statement in that release…then read the post below…and then, be sure to follow it up with my post titled “Whose Agenda Is It, Really?”.  I’ll allow you to connect your own dots.

As I left off with Part I of my last post, “Rathke, ACORN, SEIU, Tides Foundation, Oh My…“, the trail that begins with the Rathkes quickly intersects with groups and individuals like ACORN, SEIU, Drummond Pike, the Tides Foundation, Citizen’s Consulting Inc. (aka Citizens Services Inc.), George Wiley, Democracy Alliance, George Soros, They Work for Us, Change to Win and Anna Burger. (Seriously, look them all up with a map from Muckety.com, or look at the maps I created in my last post)

I want to pick up Part II beginning with Anna Burger.
In February of 2009, Ms. Burger was appointed by President Obama to his Economic Recovery Advisory Board.  Announced on November 26, 2008, the President’s Economic Recovery Advisory Board (PERAB) is a new panel of non-governmental experts from business, labor, academia and elsewhere that President Obama instituted on February 6, 2009. The board reports regularly to Obama and his economic team on the current economic crisis and develops proposals that are then recommended to President Obama.

Anna Burger is a key member of this Board, also having been active in the Progressive Labor Movement for over 30 years, with leadership roles in organizations such as SEIU (and ACORN), They Work for Us, and Change to Win.  She campaigned heavily for Obama, and invested millions in advertising, campaigning, canvassing and organizing in support of Obama. In fact, through SEIU, she filed almost $28 Million worth of expenses with the FEC (see report below) in support of Obama during the election (and another $3.5 Million in ads against John McCain).  Given that she has aggressively pushed the Economic Recovery Act from her position as economic adviser to Obama, as well as a progressive agenda that includes the same Health Care initiatives as the president’s, I’d say this seems like quite a big conflict of interest. But I’ll address that in more detail later.

Click to open full report in PDF. Support expenses on pg. 6.

According to her own “Change to Win” website, Anna Burger

“is both a top ranking officer at SEIU, the nation’s largest and fastest growing union, and the first chair of America’s newest labor federation, Change to Win.

Founded in September 2005 by SEIU and six other major unions representing six million workers, Change to Win is developing joint industry-based organizing campaigns aimed at ensuring that workers, not just CEOs, benefit from today’s global economy.”

Change to Win is a well-known organization with a history in labor union organizing founded upon the the social movement unionism/community unionism models.  They have been active with member groups such as The Teamsters union, SEIU, the Laborers’ International Union of North America, and Unite Here, among others. With over 6 million members, they organize worker uprising events such as the “End Corporate Excess” campaigns, which included the March 19th Take Back the Economy rally, aimed at (their words, not mine) “the greedy CEOs who use taxpayers’ money to feather their own nests and restrict your right to organize”.

The odd parallel to this story is that several of these very same organizations, most notably “Change to Win” and SEIU, are referenced in the current federal complaint against forrmer IL governor Rod Blagojevich. While some of the story has been released in bits and pieces by US Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald and other sources, the ongoing legal investigation calls for the majority of it to be kept under wraps while legal proceedings progress.

Therefore, it’s no surprise that we hear very little on this subject from Anna Burger, Andy Stern, SEIU, Change to Win or any of the Good Ol’ Boys Club from the shining city on the Hill. Further, since so much of Change to Win’s money is funneled into ACORN and many of its hundreds of affiliates, there’s no shortage of places to stash the Stimulus cash that continues to pour into these groups to fund their very progressive agenda, which is an assault on Capitalism and free markets, and often resorts to very intimidating tactics. And many of these are organizations that have been around a long time.

Here’s just a sampling of a report from a query of the Office of Labor Management Standards Public Disclosure database, the system that records payment activity to and from organized unions and union PACs.  It’s interesting to note the various organizations that Change to Win deals with, and the amount of money that goes into and comes out of some specific organizations, such as ACORN and SEIU, among many others.  In 2008 alone, nearly $18 Million changed hands between the triangulation of the federal government, Change to Win, and other organizations. Perhaps it’s all 100% legitimate; I’m simply pointing it out. Whether it’s legit or not, with that much money involved, it creates the opportunity for abuse, which is a concern in and of itself.

ChangeToWin-2008-pymts

CLICK HERE TO VIEW MORE OF THE MONEY TRAIL – FINANCIAL RECORDS, REPORTS, COURT FILINGS

Going back to the Blagojevich case, here’s where some of the alleged connections come into play:

The Hill reported on  12/9/2008 :

In a taped phone conversation with Chief of Staff John Harris and an unnamed Washington, D.C.-based adviser on Nov. 7, Blagojevich allegedly plotted out a three-way deal to acquire a job as head of Change to Win, with a desired salary of $250,000 to $300,000 per year. Blagojevich would then have appointed Jarrett–allegedly identified as the president-elect’s favorite for the spot–thereby currying favor with Obama. He would then have spent that favor by arranging for the president-elect to help push Change to Win’s legislative agenda, which includes health care reform, a broad economic stimulus package, and the controversial Employee Free Choice Act.

Jarrett, a close adviser to Obama, was not named in the report but has been identified based on other information the report contained.

According to the Department of Justice’s account of the taped conversation, Harris suggested that Blagojevich could be crowned as head of Change to Win by an unnamed Service Employees International Union (SEIU) official. SEIU is one of the largest unions under the Change to Win umbrella; it is currently headed by Andy Stern, who led the creation of Change to Win. SEIU Secretary-Treasurer Anna Burger serves as its chair.

Both SEIU and Change to Win have denied such allegations.

See the Chicago Fox News affiliate report on the Blago-SEIU union contract allegations from U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald (posted by the National Right to Work):

The connection between Blago, SEIU, and “Change to Win” becomes even more evident when reading the affidavit that was filed as part of “United States vs. Rod R. Blagojevich and John Harris”:

Later on November 5, Blagojevich said to Advisor A, “I’ve got this thing and it’s [expletive] golden, and, uh, uh, I’m just not giving it up for [expletive] nothing. I’m not gonna do it. And, and I can always use it. I can parachute me there,” the affidavit states.

Two days later, in a three-way call with Harris and Advisor B, a consultant in Washington, Blagojevich and the others allegedly discussed the prospect of a three-way deal for the Senate appointment involving an organization called “Change to Win,” which is affiliated with various unions including the Service Employees International Union (SEIU).

On November 10, Blagojevich, his wife, Harris, Governor General Counsel, Advisor B and other Washington-based advisors participated at different times in a two-hour phone call in which they allegedly discussed, among other things, a deal involving the SEIU. Harris said they could work out a deal with the union and the President-elect where SEIU could help the President-elect with Blagojevich’s appointment of Senate Candidate 1, while Blagojevich would obtain a position as the National Director of the Change to Win campaign and SEIU would get something favorable from the President-elect in the future. Also during that call, Blagojevich agreed it was unlikely that the President-elect would name him Secretary of Health and Human Services or give him an ambassadorship because of all of the negative publicity surrounding him.

I may just be your average layperson, but this really does not seem to be entirely on the up and up. I’m not accusing….just sayin’, that’s all.  At the very least, it warrants some public explanation from either Anna Burger from “Change to Win” (and member of Obama’s Economic Recovery Advisory Board),  or from President Obama himself. I just don’t feel very good about the fact that since as far back as 2005, possibly even 2003, this ginormous coalition of big, powerful labor unions now in “Change to Win” has been very active in the Chicago machine…and now, many of the very same players are in some of the highest positions in the country, with immediate access to our President, advising the President of the United States on how and where to spend the emergency Stimulus money during a time of economic crisis.

These are all also the very same unions that are hired to rally against private corporations, the same ones that receive funds from Congress for a multitude of programs, like mortgage subsidies, and many will even be involved in conducting the 2010 Census.

After reading and listening to Anna Burger’s remarks in 2008 about her organizations’ agendas, which were again reinforced in the federal complaint where even Blago allegedly promised “to push Change to Win’s legislative agenda, which includes healthcare reform, a broad economic stimulus package, and the controversial Employee Free Choice Act”, it just seems literally impossible that it’s all just a coincidence.

How would it be coincidence that Obama selected Burger as a key member of his Economic Recovery Advisory Board, despite this ongoing investigation into these allegations?

And more importantly, just look at the key agenda items again:
healthcare reform, a broad economic stimulus package, and the Employee Free Choice Act (aka Card Check bill).

Sure, she is a legitimate, well-known figure in the labor movement, and has been for a long time.  I’m not necessarily accusing anyone of anything illegal.  But I am pointing out what to me seems an obvious conflict of interest; to me, potentially unethical.

Is it really just coincidence that now, 7 months later, this President has focused aggressively on precisely those key agenda items, among others I’ve not even mentioned yet?

Just listen to this speech given by Ms. Burger in 2008 at the 2008 SEIU Convention, in her roles as Secretary of the SEIU and Chair of Change to Win, prior to the Presidential election. It’s also followed by other videos that outline her agenda for America under the Obama administration.

Anna Burger Talks About SEIU’s support for Barack Obama

Anna Burger Lays Out Service Workers’ Agenda at the 2008 Democratic National Convention in Denver, CO

Big Moment for Labor Movement
Anna Burger on the employee free choice act and other priorities.
http://abcnews.go.com/video/playerIndex?id=7068521

CLICK HERE TO VIEW MORE OF THE MONEY TRAIL – FINANCIAL RECORDS, REPORTS, COURT FILINGS

Now I know I may sound as though I’m anti-union.  And maybe to some extent, I am. But I’m only against unions that abuse their powers, that use their cause as a front for something else, that purposely keep their members down and hold them back for their own selfish purposes, and those that use bully tactics to push an agenda that might be TOO progressive – to the point that the agenda might conflict with the very ideals upon which this country was founded. But I do support unions that serve a necessary purpose – those that truly protect workers from harm and provide them with fair wages that never would have been won otherwise. Those that help their members succeed by giving them access to true opportunity in a fair, competitive, free market system where their talents will shine and they will thrive.

As an aside, I myself was once forced to be in a union while I worked for AT&T for several years.  I do know what the environment is like. I did not want to be in a union, but as an employee, we were forced to belong. We were not given any choice.  I never once received any benefit from such membership. Hundreds of dollars were taken from my paycheck annually. In fact, the only thing union membership did was hold back my career terribly – I was actually promoted early on for my very hard work, long hours, dedication, and especially for the special skills I’d developed in Internet strategy. But during the promotion review process, it was deferred by the managers who are responsible for checking such transactions with all union regulations. During that process, it was determined that there were several union members who had more seniority than I did that were eligible for being promoted in my division before me – this was despite the fact that none of those members had any Internet skills whatsoever in a time when the Internet was just entering the corporate scene.  I literally had to wait 18 months for two of those members to be promoted, to completely unrelated positions mind you (one was promoted to an executive secretary, the other to a project manager). Meanwhile, I pretty much did two jobs for those 18 months – my job, and the job of the promotion I was supposed to get, since no one else had the skills to fill it while I waited out my time.  And all around me, layoffs occurred by the hundreds of thousands (think AT&T in the 90’s, trivestiture from Ma Bell…). Believe it or not, I wanted those layoffs – the company needed it – it was overgrown with slackers and it was behind the times. It needed to reinvent itself. The unions only prolonged that, stifling the much needed innovation that was necessary to save that company. The days of wired telephones and long distance phone service would have died in the early 90’s instead of dragging into the 21st century, had it not been for the “protection” of the unions.

But, I digress. Getting back to the point of this research…
Again, maybe all of this is 100% on the up and up. Maybe there isn’t a single fraudulent activity or questionable person involved in any of these relationships.  (I doubt it, but I’m going to offer the complete benefit of the doubt to make my next point).

My immediate concern is with PERCEPTION.  It’s in good judgment to, at every possible opportunity, avoid creating any circumstance that would even create the appearance of anything that could be a conflict of interest. It’s what we expect from our nation’s leadership.

Just the appearance of a conflict of interest makes me, as an American citizen, and a hard-working taxpayer, very uncomfortable. It bothers me that so much of today’s policies are so focused and so driven by hard-core union organizers, with very little diversified feedback from others to counter-balance those views. And many of these (not all) are the very types of unions that are abusive, and corrupt, and that are not exactly in the best interest of their members. Look at the others on the PERBA; the majority are also progressive union organizers too, or are heavily affiliated with such voices.  I’m middle class, a hard worker. I’m one of the very people that union organizers always claim to be fighting for, but as I mentioned earlier, being unionized did nothing for me but pay me less money and hold back my career simply because of seniority (years served) at that company. That is not what I want for my country. But THAT is what is advising our President and our Congress from all angles right now in that shining city on the Hill.

I for one think that President Obama should ask anyone involved with any organization mentioned in the Blago complaint to step down. I don’t care if that means Anna Burger and half of his Economic Recovery Board would have to step down. That’s what’s right for this country right now.

Someone in Congress with the courage to stand up for The REAL Middle Class needs to demand the investigation into ACORN until it cannot be denied any longer. Cracking that one open will shed the light on the “Change to Win” stories, and the Soros connections, and the links to the causes of the economic crisis, and so, so much more. THAT is the Truth Commission we need. There are TRILLIONS of dollars at stake.

Wake up America, this little ACORN story is about so much more than Voter Registration fraud. It’s bigger than just the current or the last administration. This is a story with twists and turns, of epic proportion that we need to make sure STAYS in the news. It must be investigated once and for all.

Be sure to read Part III .

Additional references of interest:

National Right to Work Legal Defense Fund, List of Complaints Against SEIU

Democracy Alliance, the George Soros-led left-wing donors’ collaborative that aims to turn America into a European-style socialist state, has welcomed a new board member from Colorado named Ted Trimpa.

According to Rob Witwer, a Republican former member of the Colorado house of representatives, Trimpa played a significant role in helping to convert Colorado from a solid Republican state to a solid Democratic state in a few short years.

An Atlantic article from 2007 describes Trimpa as “an acerbic lawyer and former tobacco lobbyist.” It also describes the gay activist as “Colorado’s answer to Karl Rove.” Trimpa was also mentioned in a Time article in the fall. The article bore the tongue-in-cheek title, “The Gay Mafia That’s Redefining Liberal Politics.” Trimpa also understands Republicans and how they think: he used to work as an aide to former U.S. Sen. Nancy Kassebaum (R-Kansas).

Trimpa’s bio at the Democracy Alliance website describes him as

…a sought-after advocate resulting from his deep understanding of the national and multistate political and nonprofit landscape. He has been recognized in national publications, including The Atlantic Monthly, National Review, The Advocate, and The Weekly Standard for his central role in designing cutting edge public policy strategies.

Trimpa’s approach to politics bears a resemblance to the in-your-face approach advocated by radical leftist Saul Alinsky.

“You have to create an environment of fear and respect,” Trimpa told the Bay Area Reporter. “The only way to do that is to get aggressive and go out and actually beat them up [politically]. Sitting there crying and whining about being victims isn’t going to get us equality. What is going to get us equality is fighting for it.”

This article talks about the Shadow Party that operates within the Democratic Party that was started by George Soros, Hillary Clinton and Harold Ickes.  This article is from 2004, but has information that most Americans do not know.

The Shadow Party: Part II

 By David Horowitz and Richard Poe
FrontPageMagazine.com | Thursday, October 07, 2004  

Launched September 22, 1998

2.      Center for American Progress (CAP)

Launched July 7, 2003

3.      America Votes

Launched July 15, 2003

4.      America Coming Together (ACT)

Launched July 17, 2003

5.      The Media Fund

Launched November 5, 2003

6.      Joint Victory Campaign 2004

Launched November 5, 2003

7.      The Thunder Road Group LLC

Launched early 2004

 With the exception of MoveOn.org – based in Berkeley, California – all Seven Sisters maintain headquarters in Washington DC. Testifying to the close links between these groups are their interlocking finances, Boards of Directors and corporate officers. In some cases, they even share office space.

For example, two of the Seven Sisters – The Media Fund and Joint Victory Campaign 2004 – share an office in Suite #1100 at 1120 Connecticut Avenue, NW. Three other groups – America Coming Together (ACT), America Votes and The Thunder Road Group – lease offices in the Motion Picture Association Building at 888 16^th Street, NW.

It is tempting to consider that the clustering of these three groups in a building owned by the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) may not be coincidental. The MPAA has long enjoyed a cozy relationship with the Democratic  Party; many high-ranking Democrats have slipped comfortably from government jobs into glamorous posts in the MPAA’s upper management.

 In March 2004, for instance, Dan Glickman succeeded Jack Valenti as MPAA president. Valenti was a Democrat lobbyist and former aide to President Lyndon Johnson. Glickman was formerly a Democratic  Congressman from Kansas, who later served as Secretary of Agriculture in the Clinton White House. Now, as MPAA president, Glickman holds what is arguably the most powerful position in Hollywood.

The Shadow Party draws much of its funding from the entertainment world. According to the Center for Public Integrity, Jane Fonda is the fourth largest donor to Democrat 527 groups and Hollywood producer Stephen L. Bing takes third place. The top four Shadow Party donors are as follows: 

Contributions to Democrat 527s

 Top Four Shadow Party Contributors                     (August 2000 – August 2004)

=====================================================

George and Susan W. Soros                   $24,170,000.00

Peter B. Lewis                                       $23,147,220.00

Stephen L. Bing                                     $15,382,555.00

Jane Fonda                                            $13,085,750.00

                       Courtesy The Center for Public Integrity

_______________________________________________________________

The last “Sister” to join the group is the Thunder Group LLC:

Thunder Road Group

]]> http://romanticpoet.wordpress.com/2009/02/26/radical-democrats-chipping-away-at-united-states-sovereignty-americans-beware/ Thu, 26 Feb 2009 11:19:55 +0000 romanticpoet http://romanticpoet.wordpress.com/2009/02/26/radical-democrats-chipping-away-at-united-states-sovereignty-americans-beware/

United Nations Millenium Development Goals
http://www.un.org/millenniumgoals/

United Nations Sovereignty of the Seas Treaty
Another way the New International Economic Order has been described is “redistributionist.”

The Law of the Sea Treaty calls for technology transfers and wealth transfers from developed to undeveloped nations. It also requires parties to the treaty to adopt regulations and laws to control pollution of the marine environment. Such provisions were among the reasons President Ronald Reagan rejected the treaty in 1982. As Edwin Meese, U.S. Attorney General under President Reagan, explained recently, “…it was out of step with the concepts of economic liberty and free enterprise that Ronald Reagan was to inspire throughout the world.”

In additional to the economic provisions, the treaty also establishes specific jurisdictional limits on the ocean area that countries may claim, including a 12-mile territorial sea limit and a 200-mile exclusive economic zone limit.
http://www.unlawoftheseatreaty.org/

United Nations Global Poverty Act [Obama's own bill S.2433]

A nice-sounding bill called the “Global Poverty Act,” sponsored by Democratic presidential candidate and Senator Barack Obama, is up for a Senate vote on Thursday and could result in the imposition of a global tax on the United States. The bill, which has the support of many liberal religious groups, makes levels of U.S. foreign aid spending subservient to the dictates of the United Nations.   

Senator Joe Biden, chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, has not endorsed either Senator Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton in the presidential race. But on Thursday, February 14, he is trying to rush Obama’s “Global Poverty Act” (S.2433) through his committee. The legislation would commit the U.S. to spending 0.7 percent of gross national product on foreign aid, which amounts to a phenomenal 13-year total of $845 billion over and above what the U.S. already spends.   

The bill, which is item number four on the committee’s business meeting agenda, passed the House by a voice vote last year because most members didn’t realize what was in it. Congressional sponsors have been careful not to calculate the amount of foreign aid spending that it would require. According to the website of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, no hearings have been held on the Obama bill in that body.   

A release from the Obama Senate office about the bill declares, “In 2000, the U.S. joined more than 180 countries at the United Nations Millennium Summit and vowed to reduce global poverty by 2015. We are halfway towards this deadline, and it is time the United States makes it a priority of our foreign policy to meet this goal and help those who are struggling day to day.”

http://www.aim.org/aim-column/obamas-global-tax-proposal-up-for-senate-vote/

NOW THIS:

Boxer Seeks to Ratify U.N. Treaty That May Erode U.S. Rights

Sen. Barbara Boxer is pushing the Obama administration to move forward with ratification of the U.N. Convention on the Rights of the Child, a controversial treaty that has never gained much support in the U.S.

Sen. Barbara Boxer is urging the U.S. to ratify a United Nations measure meant to expand the rights of children, a move critics are calling a gross assault on parental rights that could rob the U.S. of sovereignty.

The California Democrat is pushing the Obama administration to review the U.N. Convention on the Rights of the Child, a nearly 20-year-old international agreement that has been foundering on American shores since it was signed by the Clinton administration in 1995 but never ratified.

Critics say the treaty, which creates “the right of the child to freedom of thought, conscience and religion” and outlaws the “arbitrary or unlawful interference with his or her privacy,” intrudes on the family and strips parents of the power to raise their children without government interference.

Nearly every country in the world is party to it — only the U.S. and Somalia are not — but the convention has gained little support in the U.S. and never been sent to the Senate for ratification.

That could change soon.

Boxer has made clear her intent to revive the ratification process under the Obama administration, which may be amenable to the move. During a Senate confirmation hearing last month, Boxer said she considers it “a humiliation” that the U.S. is “standing with Somalia” in refusing to become party to the agreement, while 193 other nations have led the way.

The U.S. is already party to two optional pieces of the treaty regarding child soldiers and child prostitution and pornography, but has refused to sign on to the full agreement, something which has rankled members of Congress, including Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders.[An "open" Socialist in Congress and part of the Congressional Progressive Caucus]

“Children deserve basic human rights … and the convention protects children’s rights by setting some standards here so that the most vulnerable people of society will be protected,” Boxer said.

The convention has established a Committee on the Rights of the Child, an 18-member panel in Geneva composed of “persons of high moral character” who review the rights of children in nations that are party to the convention.

But legal experts say the convention does nothing to protect human rights abroad — and that acceding to the convention would erode U.S. sovereignty.

Because of the Supremacy Clause in Article VI of the Constitution, all treaties are rendered “the supreme law of the land,” superseding preexisting state and federal statutes. Any rights or laws established by the U.N. convention could then be argued to hold sway in the United States.

“To the extent that an outside body, a group of unaccountable so-called experts in Switzerland have a say over how children in America should be raised, educated and disciplined — that is an erosion of American sovereignty,” said Steven Groves, a fellow at the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank.

Parental rights groups are similarly stirred; they see in the U.N. convention a threat that the government will meddle with even the simplest freedoms to raise their children as they see fit.

“Whether you ground your kids for smoking marijuana, whether you take them to church, whether you let them go to junior prom, all of those things . . . will be the government’s decision,” said Michael Farris, president of ParentalRights.org. “It will affect every parent who’s told their children to do the dishes.”

Groves said that erosion has already begun, as the Supreme Court has referred to the wide acceptance of the child-rights law in conferring legal protections on minors in the U.S.

Justice Anthony Kennedy, writing the majority opinion in the 2005 decision banning the death penalty for minors, noted that “every country in the world has ratified [the convention] save for the United States and Somalia.”

Proponents of the convention in the U.S. stress that it will help secure human rights abroad.

“Now, all you have to do is look around the world and see these girls that are having acid thrown in their face,” Boxer said in January, implying that the U.S. refusal to come aboard has led to abuses elsewhere.

But when acceding to the convention, countries are able to sign so-called RUDs — reservations, understandings and declarations — that can hinder or negate responsibilities they would otherwise be bound to follow.

Most majority Muslim nations express reservations on all provisions of the convention that are incompatible with Islamic Sharia law, which takes much of the teeth out of the treaty. Acid attacks on girls continue in Afghanistan, which is already party to the convention.

The U.N. itself admits that there is no way for it to enforce its own laws and protect children.

“When it comes to signatories who violate the convention and/or its optional protocols — there is no means to oblige states to fulfill their legal obligations,” said Giorgia Passarelli, a spokeswoman for the U.N. High Commission on Human Rights, which oversees the child-rights body.

Passarelli said that the committee has kept a constant spotlight on rights violators and fed into decisions made by the Security Council, especially involving child soldiers. But even then, she added, such pressure does not always prevail.

Despite these obstacles, Boxer has made clear that she intends to ramp up pressure to get the treaty ratified, a passion that may be shared by the Obama administration.

During the Oct. 22, 2008, presidential youth debate, Obama promised to “review this and other treaties to ensure the United States resumes its global leadership in human rights.”

During U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice’s January confirmation hearing, Rice called the convention “a very important treaty and a noble cause,” and said it was “a shame” for the U.S. to be in company with Somalia, which has no real government.
Rice told Boxer that “there can be no doubt that [President Obama] and Secretary Clinton and I share a commitment to the objectives of this treaty and will take it up as an early question,” promising to review the treaty “to ensure that the United States is playing and resumes its global leadership role in human rights.”

Boxer, who sits on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, pushed for a 60-day timetable to review the convention and report back to the Senate — which would have left the Obama administration a March 23 deadline to move toward ratification.

Rice politely sidestepped and refused to agree to the timeline.

“This is a complicated treaty, in many respects more than some others, given our system of federalism, and so we need to take a close look at how we manage the challenges of domestic implementation and what reservations and understandings might be appropriate in the context of ratification,” she said.

Boxer’s office, which ignored repeated calls and e-mails seeking comment, has not spelled out what if any reservations the senator would like to assert in ratifying the treaty. The State Department also refused to comment on timetables.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/02/25/boxer-seeks-ratify-treaty-erode-rights/

Founder and Chairman
Open Society Institute

A global financier and philanthropist, George Soros is the founder and chairman of a network of foundations that promote, among other things, the creation of open, democratic societies based upon the rule of law, market economies, transparent and accountable governance, freedom of the press, and respect for human rights.

Philosophy

At the London School of Economics, Soros became acquainted with the work of the philosopher Karl Popper, whose ideas on open society had a profound influence on his intellectual development.

 Specifically, Soros’s experience of Nazi and Communist rule attracted him to Popper’s critique of totalitarianism, The Open Society and Its Enemies, in which he maintained that societies can only flourish when they allow democratic governance, freedom of expression, a diverse range of opinion, and respect for individual rights.

Philanthropy

As his financial success mounted, Soros applied his wealth to help foster the development of open societies.

The magnitude and geographical scope of his philanthropic commitments, coupled with the core principle of fostering open societies, has allowed Soros to transcend the limitations of many national governments and international institutions.

In 1993, Soros created the Open Society Institute, which supports the Soros foundations working to develop democratic institutions throughout Central and Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union. His network of philanthropic organizations dedicated to building open societies has expanded to include more than 60 countries in the Middle East, Central Asia, Africa, and Latin America. Despite the breadth of his endeavors, Soros is personally involved in planning and implementing many of the foundation network’s projects.

http://www.soros.org/about/bios/a_soros

A speech introduction given by George Soros:

 The following talk was delivered at the European Policy Centre in Brussels. George Soros is founder and chairman of the Open Society Institute.

Europe is in search of its identity. I don’t think one needs to look very far. To my mind, the European Union embodies the principles of an open society and it ought to serve as a model and motive force for a global open society. 

http://www.soros.org/resources/articles_publications/articles/europe_20061120

Is this what Al Gore was talking about at the Environmental speech to children recently when he said basically don’t listen to your parents; they don’t know anything?

Are we headed head first into the likes of China? They “pick” children at an early age that show promise in athletics, math, science, etc. and take them away from the parents to be raise in government institutes?

Obama has only been in office for just over 30 days and he has created a “whirlpool” in Washington and it has only gained momentum. The Cloward -Piven strategy has begun and if America does not wake up and STAND UP, we will be at a precipice of governmental “conversion”……

The United States Consitution is being challenged……our sovereignty is being challenged.

Where the HECK is our Supreme Court? Are they being bound and gagged by their own fears? They are supposed to be the protectors of our Constitution!

America! YOU are being herded into a “National stockyard” of sorts!

And you silly people thought that former President George Bush was trying to build a North American Union!

How about someone changing the sovereignty of the United States to belong to a GLOBAL “one state” world?

Could GEORGE SOROS be behind this?….I have said this ALL ALONG! He bought the Obama presidency through his financial slight of hand.

The OPEN SOCIETY that George Soros is involved with dreams of a world with NO BORDERS, free love, free drugs, etc.

Beware America. Is the “beast” in the book of Revelations upon us?

Is George Soros the Anti-Christ?

Read About the Democracy Alliance I blogged about recently about pulling the financial strings behind the Democratic Party…..the “Shadow Party” (created by George Soros, Hillary Clinton and Harold Ickes) within the Democratic Party.

Is George Soros the Puppetmaster? Is Obama his puppet? Hillary Clinton in the position of Secreatary of State is EXACTLY where George Soros wants her to be……a PRO-UNITED NATIONS Secretary of State…..how convenient!

So today I had another phone interview — probably my 40th since I started this process oh so long ago (what was it — late 2007?).

You learn something new every time (at least that’s the theory, right?).  Today I learned that sometimes interviewers are nervous too.  Maybe they aren’t as comfortable talking for a long time on the phone, or maybe they just aren’t a good speaker.  I mean don’t get me wrong — there were no real fuck-up moments on the other end, but my interviewer’s voice sounded a bit pinched (although maybe it was the pain she felt from being 8 months pregnant).   Knowing that actually helped me relax.  Although, in the end, I did fuck up one of the questions a bit.

But phone interviewing for me is the easiest type of interview I come across.  Which is strange, because I consider myself a face-to-face type of person.  

Phone Etiquette

I guess my phone bullshit mode is easier to fake than my RL bullshit mode.  I just make my voice sing and dance.  Besides, I’ve made about 150 calls already this week at this new temp job (not to mention all the calls I made during the campaign) – I’m getting better and better at it.  Its amazing the little things that can affect people’s moods on the phone – a well-placed polite chuckle here, a “mm-hmm” there — those inane comments that I used to so despise really go a long way towards making people feel like you care. 

The secret when listening to someone else talk is to let them know you’re listening without overbearing on their conversation.   As an aggressive individual, my problem has always been cutting people off, or trying to speak before they are finished.  I seem to be getting better at this, but still struggle with it occassionally.  You come across as overbearing and know-it-all-ish , which in my case, is the truth, but they don’t have to know that until later!  Patience, which is probably one of my weaknesses, is really key.  Even if you want to say something, its best to let the other person go on until they run out of steam.  Then they’ll be ready to listen to your bs for at least 2-3 minutes.

Small Talk

“Ohh you’re pregnant?  So is my sister, bla bla bla!” 

Does that really help?  I think it does to a certain extent — any kind of personalized relationship or rapport you can build with the interviewer is of course going to be a point in your favor, no matter how minor — as long as its not forced.  The thing to remember is that you’re not competing against yourself, but against other candidates.  You have to be more memorable and more impressive than they are. 

In the End…

Don’t follow too much of my advice… it hasn’t gotten me a job so far!

Writing in the Weekly Worker Dave Vincent calls for joint action with other unions

Michelle Malkin

Systemic corruption of our election process continues. Barack Obama and his old friends at ACORN and Project Vote are leading the way. This radical revolution is taking place in your backyard. And as I’ve reported before, this voter-fraud racket is on your dime.

On Monday, the two liberal groups announced the wrap-up of a 21-state voter registration drive targeting low-income people and minorities in battleground states including Ohio, Pennsylvania, Colorado, Florida, New Mexico and Wisconsin.

What’s wrong with that? For starters, these two groups are militant partisan outfits purporting to engage in nonpartisan civic activity. And their campaign comes amid an avalanche of fresh voter-fraud allegations involving ACORN in many of those same key states.

On Tuesday, Nevada state officials raided ACORN’s Las Vegas office after election authorities accused the group of submitting multiple voter registrations with fake and duplicate names.

ACORN, which receives 40 percent of its revenues from American taxpayers to pursue an aggressive welfare-state agenda, has already helped register over 1.27 million people nationwide. The rest of their funding comes from left-wing heavyweights like billionaire George Soros and the Democracy Alliance.

Project Vote, a 501(c)(3) organization, was founded by left-wing lawyer Sandy Newman to register voters in welfare offices and unemployment lines with the explicit goal of turning back the Reagan revolution.

The two groups are inextricably linked — and at their nexus is Barack Obama.

In 1992, Newman hired Obama to lead Project Vote efforts in Illinois. The Illinois drive’s motto: “It’s a Power Thing.”

As previously noted in this column (“The ACORN Obama Knows,” June 25, 2008), Obama also trained ACORN members in Chicago. In turn, ACORN volunteers worked on his Illinois campaigns and ACORN’s PAC endorsed his primary bid with full backing and muscle.

Despite his adamant denials of any association with the group (his Fight the Smears website now claims “Barack Obama never organized with ACORN”), Obama’s political DNA is encoded with the ACORN agenda.

The Obama campaign’s “Vote for Change” registration drive, running parallel to ACORN/Project Vote, is an all-out scramble to scrape up every last unregistered voter sympathetic to Obama’s big-government vision. “Our volume,” Obama campaign manager David Plouffe bragged of the voter-registration program, “will be enormous.”

Quantity over quality. It’s the ACORN way.

In addition to the Las Vegas raid, fraud allegations keep piling up:

– Lake County, Ind., election officials this month rejected a large portion of the 5,000 registration forms ACORN turned in after conducting registration drives in the area all summer. Some vote canvassers had pulled names and addresses from telephone books and forged signatures. According to local reports, “large numbers of voter registration forms bore signatures all in the same apparent handwriting style” and “apparently the organization’s canvassers broke rules to meet ACORN-set voter registration quotas to get paid.” The fake registrants included dead people and underage kids.

On a conference call yesterday, GOP officials noted that up to 11,000 voter applications were no good — tying up election officials and jeopardizing the voting rights of untold victims whose identities may have been stolen.

– Last month, Milwaukee, Wis., officials discovered at least seven felons employed as voter registration workers for ACORN and another affiliated group. They also uncovered a raft of problematic voter registration cards. The state GOP accused ACORN of attempting to enroll dead, imprisoned or imaginary people to voter rolls. Fraud has plagued ACORN’s Milwaukee chapter since the last election cycle.

– In Florida, in Orange County alone, ACORN workers turned in multiple copycat forms for six separate voters over the summer. According to the Miami Herald, “One individual had 21 duplicate applications.”

Election officials had flagged ACORN’s negligent practices several months ago, but it may be too late: In Orange, Broward and Miami-Dade counties, ACORN has signed up 135,000 new voters, nearly 60 percent of them registered as Democrats that constitute a fifth of all new voters in that region.

– In Ohio, large numbers of homeless people received free van and bus rides to register. Shelby Holliday, a reporter for Palestra.net, filmed ACORN shuttling prospects to the polls. She told me she spoke with one homeless woman who told her ACORN “told her who to vote for if she wanted a ‘better life,’ and told her not to worry about jury duty (one of the reasons this homeless woman didn’t want to register) because the government probably wouldn’t be able to track her down. She was registering with a temporary address.”

Holliday interviewed another homeless man targeted by the registration drive who exulted that he was voting for Obama because “I want him to do his thang. You know, do his thug thizzle.”

“Thug thizzle” is street slang for performing your trademark move. Obama and ACORN have practiced their thug thizzle together for years: organizing an ever-expanding community of ineligible and marginal voters to expand the Democratic power base. Rules be damned.

FamilySecurityMatters.org Contributing Editor Michelle Malkin is the author of “Unhinged: Exposing Liberals Gone Wild.

Read more excellent articles from Family Security Matters

Rather than being the tip of the iceberg, a well-bankrolled underground movement began more than four years ago when George Soros — via his hatred of George Bush and conservatism — funded a plethora of radical, activist groups to garner the vote of the “idiot” classes (their words — not mine) in America:  “minorities, drop outs and GED’s.”  

And now Soros’ Democracy Alliance has a prime candidate to bear his mantle of socialism:  Barack Obama – the consummate “community organizer” who personally trained and provided legal counsel to the minions (ACORN) who forge the swords of class warfare, dissent and the destruction of the American economic base — who has more than his “fair share” of questionable associations,  stealth with anti-American and socialist underground movements and “mysterious“ domestic and foreign campaign donations. 

Obama Formerly Represented ACORN, Taught Classes For Future Leaders Of ACORN, And They Endorsed His 2008 Presidential Campaign:

Obama Directed Project Vote And Later Taught Classes For “Future Leaders Identified By ACORN And The Centers For New Horizons.” “He [Obama] says he is drawn to politics, despite its superficialities, as a means to advance his real passion and calling: community organization. … In 1992 Obama took time off to direct Project Vote, the most successful grass-roots voter- registration campaign in recent city history. Credited with helping elect Carol Moseley-Braun to the U.S. Senate, the registration drive, aimed primarily at African-Americans, added an estimated 125,000 voters to the voter rolls — even more than were registered during Harold Washington’s mayoral campaigns. ‘It’s a power thing,’ said the brochures and radio commercials. … Obama continues his organizing work largely through classes for future leaders identified by ACORN and the Centers for New Horizons on the south side.” (Hank De Zutter, Op-Ed, “What Makes Obama Run?” ChicagoReader, 12/8/95)

Obama Was Part Of Team Of Lawyers Who Represented ACORN In A Suit Against The State Of Illinois. “Obama was part of a team of attorneys who represented the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN) in a lawsuit against the state of Illinois in 1995 for failing to implement a federal law designed to make it easier for the poor and others to register as voters.” (Mike Robinson, “Obama Got Start In Civil Rights Practice,” The Associated Press, 2/20/07)

ACORN’s Political Action Committee Endorsed Obama. “[A]CORN’s political action committee endorsed Barack Obama for President. … The endorsement reflects a belief that Obama — who worked as a community organizer on the South Side of Chicago — understands that change must come from the ground-up, as part of a working coalition, rather than from position papers.” (Katrina Vanden Heuvel, Op-Ed, “ACORN: Obama Gets It,” The Nation, 2/23/08)

Obama’s Campaign Paid Over $800,000 To ACORN For Get-Out-The-Vote Efforts, But “Mistakenly Misrepresented” Their Work To The FEC:

Obama’s Campaign “Paid More Than $800,000″ To ACORN For Get-Out-The Vote Efforts; The Campaign Originally “Misrepresented” The Group’s Work To The FEC. “U.S. Sen. Barack Obama’s presidential campaign paid more than $800,000 to an offshoot of the liberal Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now for services the Democrat’s campaign says it mistakenly misrepresented in federal reports. An Obama spokesman said Federal Election Commission reports would be amended to show Citizens Services Inc. — a subsidiary of ACORN — worked in ‘get-out-the-vote’ projects, instead of activities such as polling, advance work and staging major events as stated in FEC finance reports filed during the primary.” (David M. Brown, “Obama To Amend Report On $800,000 In Spending,” Pittsburgh Tribune Review, 8/22/08)

While Serving On The Board Of Directors Of The Woods Fund, ACORN Received Thousands Of Dollars Of Grants From The Organization:

The Chicago ACORN Received Grants Of $45,000 (2000), $30,000 (2001), $45,000 (2001), $30,000 (2002), And $40,000 (2002) From The Woods Fund. (Donors Forum Website, ifs.donorsforum.org, Accessed 6/10/08)  — MarketWatch

There are those who want to “blame Bush” and subsequently, Republicans, but the reality is, George Bush attempted to rein in housing horses, but was repelled by Democrats (as was John McCain on two separate occasions).   President Clinton aptly pointed this out last week:

PRESIDENT BILL CLINTON: “I think the responsibility that the Democrats have may rest more in resisting any efforts by Republicans in the Congress or by me when I was President to put some standards and tighten up a little on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.”

It’s not that we weren’t forewarned about the dangers of government-subsidized mortgages. 

And the road to this financial hell has not been paved with good intentions ….

Take, for example, Barack Obama’s ACORN group, rift with its intimidation tactics against the lending industry, the middle class and its abuse of election law and fraud in voter registration.  Enter their targets, the “idiots” who are locked at the bottom of the socialist caste system: the “minorities, drop outs, GED’s.” 

ACORN was the leader in “protesting” social agencies and later intimidating banks:

ACORN is a group of community organizers, probably the most militant group of community organizers. ACORN grew out of something called the National Welfare Rights League which was another militant group in the Sixties. They used to flood into welfare offices, kind of shut them down with protests and demand a great expansion of welfare coverage. And in recent decades that has morphed into ACORN. And ACORN leaders see themselves as unreconstructed far leftist, unafraid to use radical and militant tactics. They follow Saul Alinsky’s direct action, which is another name for these intimidation tactics.

For example, if ACORN wants a bank to start making these high-risk loans, they might break into the office of a banker and flood it with protestors and basically scare the heck out of the guy trying to get him to change the bank’s loan policy. They will even go and protest at the homes of bankers, scare their families. They’ll flood protestors into the lobby of a bank, scare the customers away and, of course, in that way intimidate the banks into doing what they want. And so ACORN uses these Alinsky-ite intimidation tactics. Of course, those are tactics that were studied by Obama, and Obama has had a very close relationship with ACORN for many, many years.

….

Back in the late Eighties when Obama was doing his initial organizing work in Chicago, well, he worked for another group called the developing communities project which was part of the Gamma Leo Foundation, which is yet another radical Alinsky-ite group which used very similar tactics and also deployed them against banks. But in the course of his work for that group, he ran into a woman named Madeline Talbott. Madeline Talbott at that time was a high official of ACORN and eventually became the head of Chicago ACORN, and Madeline Talbott had first viewed Obama as sort of a competitor from another community organizer group, but as she got to know him, she became impressed. She saw him as a partner and she invited him to train her personal staff. So then Obama went away, went to law school and he came back from law school to Chicago. And at that time Talbott remembered him, remembered the good work he had done training her staff and that is why ACORN approached Obama to start doing some of its legal work. Not only the case you were mentioning but the work for ACORN on the motor voter bill that Obama did and –

… an ACORN organizer put out an article in a journal called Social Policy. Her name was Tony Foulkes. And she — the whole article described how ACORN was able to register voters and get them to the polls to elect Barack Obama as state senator and then senator, but she had to frame the whole article very carefully because technically that would all be illegal. ACORN’s not supposed to be supporting any particular politician and, in fact, it’s very shaky because when Obama was on some of these foundation boards, he was channeling money to ACORN. So it would have been quite illegal for ACORN to become his precinct workers. So they pretend they are acting as individuals rather than as representatives of ACORN. But what you have here is kind of very shady nexus that even if it ends up being just the edge of what’s legal verges on conflict of interest for Obama when he was on his foundation boards channeling money to ACORN which would then go out and register voters that they thought would vote for Obama, pass out literature.

Take, as another example, the men (and women) who currently advise Obama — Frank Raines and Jim Johnson — who cooked the books and walked away with millions of dollars as CEO’s of federally subsidized Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae agencies.

And take, as a third example, the Congressional perps, Chris Dodd, Barney Frank, Barack Obama, et al, who accepted money from both Freddie Mac, Fannie Mae and affiliates – then turned their collective heads when others questioned the oversight of federal housing agencies. 

The fourth example includes our supposedly objective media.  Their latest whitewash for Obama is this scamp about his “non-relationship” with terrorist Bill Ayers — an anonymously collected “recall” to refute this documented article from the Wall Street Journal. 

The debacle we now face is frequently defined as beginning in the 1990’s with Carter’s Community Re-Investment Act, which expanded affirmative action housing and under Clinton, who enacted an easing of credit markets to further promote home-ownership among lower-income Americans …..

In a move that could help increase home ownership rates among minorities and low-income consumers, the Fannie Mae Corporation is easing the credit requirements on loans that it will purchase from banks and other lenders.

The action, which will begin as a pilot program involving 24 banks in 15 markets — including the New York metropolitan region — will encourage those banks to extend home mortgages to individuals whose credit is generally not good enough to qualify for conventional loans. Fannie Mae officials say they hope to make it a nationwide program by next spring.

Biden addressed the authority of Bankruptcy courts to adjust interest rates and principal owed on homes:  -”Number two, with regard to bankruptcy now, Gwen, what we should be doing now — and Barack Obama and I support it — we should be allowing bankruptcy courts to be able to re-adjust not just the interest rate you’re paying on your mortgage to be able to stay in your home, but be able to adjust the principal that you owe, the principal that you owe.”

Tip of the iceberg indeed …. one “idiot” at a time ….

Obama’s autobiography contains the initial hints of his socialist leanings, as he describes the Dreams from My Father …. Obama wants to almost double the capital gains tax.  He wants to strip the FICA tax cap off every worker making more than $97,500. He wants to increase the dividend tax. He wants to let the Bush tax cuts expire – giving almost every American family an automatic tax increase.  And there is more to illustrate Obama’s socialist leanings ….  Obama’s One World philosophy ….

In spite of our nation’s current financial debacle, Obama has called for more than $800 billion in new spending programs.  In addition, he has projected additional programs to be administered by the U.N. using taxpayer monies for a Global Poverty Fund,  Global Climate Fund and Global Economic Development funds …. He backed driver’s licenses for illegal aliens – even though such a move would allow potential terrorists to move freely inside the United States.  He has defined himself (without evidence) as an initiator and leader in every facet of global affairs and national security … from running Hezbollah out of Lebanon to invading Pakistan to find Bin Laden to being the first to suggest a troop surge in a war he does not support.

…. one “idiot” at a time ….

He is one of the most outspoken pro-abortion candidate in the history of the country. Two of his closest pro-abortion allies are Joe Biden and Nancy Pelosi — both Catholics — whose stances have prompted a Vatican office to label the Democrat party as ”the party of death.”   In 2001, as a state legislator in Illinois, he opposed a bill to protect-live born children.  He was the only Illinois senator to speak against the bill opposing infanticide.

He opposes gun rights. He has long history, beginning as a state legislator, of trying to deny ordinary citizens access to guns — even within their homes.  He originally backed Washington D.C.’s total ban on private handguns – a ban he knew would be overturned. The NRA rated him an “F” on gun positions and says he is one of the most dangerous anti-gun politicians in the nation.

Though he has never released his college transcripts or identified the source of his (non)scholarship funds (which Michelle stated were only “recently repaid” — though not reported on their income tax declarations), Obama is a Harvard-educated elitist, considered by a recent British envoy as “aloof and insensitive.”   To Obama, we Americans are simply “bitter” – he has mocked us saying “[they] cling to their guns and their religion.”  

if Barack Obama were to be elected, all “idiot” Americans might consider replacing that “chicken in every pot” mantra with an “idiot’s delight” nut-dependent ACORN diet ….  one “idiot” at a time ….

And this is one ”idiot” who is mad as hell.

George Soros

George Soros is one of Barack Obama’s primary financial backers and agenda puppeter.

Senator Obama and George Soros

Much of Barack Obama’s socialist agenda and ideas for the United States comes directly from Soros and in turn through his network of leftist funded organizations. This includes the funding of organizations that advocate abortion, open borders, amnesty for illegal aliens, a cap and trade tax, to prevent man-made global warming, huge cuts in defense spending, increasing the minimum wage and the world poverty tax just to name a few.

Soros likes to be considered a “stateless stateman”.

In fact he is more accurately described as the Godfather of World Socialism.

Too bad Soros has not apparently read or understood the works of Friedrick Hayek, Karl Popper’s good friend and author of the Open Society and Its Enemies for which Soros’ Open Society Institute (OSI) is named.

http://www.soros.org/

http://www.soros.org/about/overview

I find Soros ideas interesting but his dismissal of capitalism as market fundamentalism both revealing and mistaken.

Milton Friedman was right, the road to hell is paved with good intentions.  

Rumors on talk radio are that Soros and his financial currency trader group are planning an October surprise such as either a run on the U.S dollar or bidding up of oil future contract prices.

If this happens and they are successful, U.S. gasoline prices would significantly increase above $4 a gallon as the US dollar declines in value and the cost of oil increases.

This is turn would throw the economy into a recession or at less increased fear of a recession in 2009.

The theory is this would help Obama.

I think not.

Such a move would backfire for the simple reason, it is the Democratic Party that is stopping oil and gas exploration off the U.S. coasts and in ANWR.

Furthermore, the Democratic Party is largely responsible through Federal government intervention in the mortage markets insisting on home loans for people that would not normally qualify.

This resulted in the financial collapse of both Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and the need for its bailout and the collapse or buyout of a number of mortage bankers, investment banks, and broker dealers.

One of Senator’s Obama’s financial and housing advisor just so happens to be Franklin Raines, the man who collected over $90 million in compensation for mismanaging Fannie Mae (see videos below on Fannie Mae, Raines, and the bailout).

I think there will be two October surprises that will appear in the last week of the campaign.

Just in case a Soros instigated surprise materializes, you better fill up your gas tank in the last week on October.

Make sure you have enough gas in your vehicle’s gas tank to get to the place you vote.

If you want a recession and socialism vote Obama.

If you want a job and capitalism vote McCain. 

Only you can prevent socialism in America.

Soros on the Economy

Davos Annual Meeting 2008 – CNBC Debate: Who is in charge?

Davos Annual Meeting 2009 – World Economic Brainstorming

George Soros and Acorn in the 2008 Elections

Background Articles and Videos

Leadership Speaker Series: George Soros (Part 1 of 2)

“…CPL director David Gergen interviews George Soros, Chairman of Soros Fund Management and the Open Society Institute. …”

 

Leadership Speaker Series: George Soros (Part 2 of 2)

“..CPL director David Gergen interviews George Soros, Chairman of Soros Fund Management and the Open Society Institute. …”

 

Neil Cavuto’s interview of George Soros Part 1

Neil Cavuto’s interview of George Soros Part 2

Charlie Rose – George Soros / Arianna Huffington

“…Segment 1: Billionaire philanthropist George Soros talks about his new book, The Age of Fallibility.

Segment 2: We conclude with Arianna Huffington, editor of the blog The Huffington Post. Her new… “

George Soros

“George Soros (pronounced /ˈsɔroʊs/ or /ˈsɔrəs/,^[2] Hungarian IPA: [ˈʃoroʃ]) (born August 12, 1930, in Budapest, Hungary, as György Schwartz) is a Hungarian-born American financial speculator, stock investor, philanthropist, and political activist.^[3]

Currently, he is the chairman of Soros Fund Management and the Open Society Institute and is also a former member of the Board of Directors of the Council on Foreign Relations. …”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Soros 

George Soros Web Site

http://www.georgesoros.com/

George Soros says more banks will go under; speaks of a “meltdown” and the 1930s
By Newsnight interviews George Soros
Sep 17, 2008, 08:33

“…Soros: “Well I’m afraid we are not through it at all. In some ways we are heading into the storm rather than coming out of it. And right at this minute we are at the very precarious moment because the bankruptcy of Lehman Brothers has thrown the financial markets into turmoil.” 

Newsnight: What do you think will happen? More banks go under?

Soros: Well, certainly more banks but maybe not the size of Lehman. But right now an even larger company, American International which is an insurance company is under pressure and a rescue is being prepared and the question is whether it will be successfully put together.

Newsnight: So was it right then to step in? Do you think AIG should be rescued? Do you think Lehman should have been rescued?

Soros: Whether Lehman should have been rescued depends on whether the financial system survives it or not. If the financial system survives it, then it was the right thing to do to let them go bust. If there is a meltdown, then it wasn’t because one thing is clear that you musn’t allow the financial system to collapse as it did in the 1930s. They’ve been reluctant to put taxpayers money at risk but if necessary, I’m sure they will do it.

http://axisoflogic.com/artman/publish/article_28248.shtml

GUIDE TO THE GEORGE SOROS NETWORK

“George Soros is one of the most powerful men on earth. A New York hedge fund manager, he has amassed a personal fortune estimated at about $7.2 billion. His management company controls billions more in investor assets. Since 1979, his foundation network – whose flagship is the Open Society Institute (OSI) — has dispensed an estimated $5 billion to a multitude of organizations whose objectives are consistent with those of Soros. (The President of OSI and the Soros Foundation Network is Aryeh Neier, who, as Director of the socialist League for Industrial Democracy, personally created the radical group Students for a Democratic Society in 1959.) With assets of $859 million as of 2005, OSI alone donates scores of millions of dollars annually to these various groups, whose major agendas can be summarized as follows:  

• promoting the view that America is institutionally an oppressive nation
• promoting the election of leftist political candidates throughout the United States
• opposing virtually all post-9/11 national security measures enacted by U.S. government, particularly the Patriot Act
• depicting American military actions as unjust, unwarranted, and immoral
• promoting open borders, mass immigration, and a watering down of current immigration laws
• promoting a dramatic expansion of social welfare programs funded by ever-escalating taxes
• promoting social welfare benefits and amnesty for illegal aliens
• defending suspected anti-American terrorists and their abetters
• financing the recruitment and training of future activist leaders of the political Left
• advocating America’s unilateral disarmament and/or a steep reduction in its military spending
• opposing the death penalty in all circumstances
• promoting socialized medicine in the United States
• promoting the tenets of radical environmentalism, whose ultimate goal, as writer Michael Berliner has explained, is “not clean air and clean water, [but] rather … the demolition of technological/industrial civilization”
• bringing American foreign policy under the control of the United Nations
• promoting racial and ethnic preferences in academia and the business world alike …”

http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/viewSubCategory.asp?id=589

Organizations Funded Directly by George Soros and his Open Society Institute

“…Organizations that, in recent years, have received direct funding and assistance from George Soros and his Open Society Institute (OSI) include the following. (Comprehensive profiles of each are available in the “Groups” section of DiscoverTheNetworks.org): …”

http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/Articles/Organizations%20Funded%20Directly5.htm

From the great editors at the Investor Business Daily:

The Soros Threat To Democracy

“…George Soros is known for funding groups such as http://MoveOn.org that seek to manipulate public opinion. So why is the billionaire’s backing of what he believes in problematic? In a word: transparency.

How many people, for instance, know that James Hansen, a man billed as a lonely “NASA whistleblower” standing up to the mighty U.S. government, was really funded by Soros’ Open Society Institute, which gave him “legal and media advice”?

That’s right, Hansen was packaged for the media by Soros’ flagship “philanthropy,” by as much as $720,000, most likely under the OSI’s “politicization of science” program.

That may have meant that Hansen had media flacks help him get on the evening news to push his agenda and lawyers pressuring officials to let him spout his supposedly “censored” spiel for weeks in the name of advancing the global warming agenda.

Hansen even succeeded, with public pressure from his nightly news performances, in forcing NASA to change its media policies to his advantage. Had Hansen’s OSI-funding been known, the public might have viewed the whole production differently. The outcome could have been different.

That’s not the only case. Didn’t the mainstream media report that 2006’s vast immigration rallies across the country began as a spontaneous uprising of 2 million angry Mexican-flag waving illegal immigrants demanding U.S. citizenship in Los Angeles, egged on only by a local Spanish-language radio announcer?

Turns out that wasn’t what happened, either. Soros’ OSI had money-muscle there, too, through its $17 million Justice Fund. The fund lists 19 projects in 2006. One was vaguely described involvement in the immigration rallies. Another project funded illegal immigrant activist groups for subsequent court cases.

So what looked like a wildfire grassroots movement really was a manipulation from OSI’s glassy Manhattan offices. The public had no way of knowing until the release of OSI’s 2006 annual report.

Meanwhile, OSI cash backed terrorist-friendly court rulings, too.

Do people know last year’s Supreme Court ruling abolishing special military commissions for terrorists at Guantanamo was a Soros project? OSI gave support to Georgetown lawyers in 2006 to win Hamdan v. Rumsfeld — for the terrorists.

OSI also gave cash to other radicals who pressured the Transportation Security Administration to scrap a program called “Secure Flight,” which matched flight passenger lists with terrorist names. It gave more cash to other left-wing lawyers who persuaded a Texas judge to block cell phone tracking of terrorists.

They trumpeted this as a victory for civil liberties. Feel safer? …”

http://sweetness-light.com/archive/ibd-the-george-soros-threat-to-democracy

IBD Editorials

George Soros & MoveOn.org

In this exclusive series, IBD takes a look at George Soros, MoveOn.org and the impact they’re having on the Democratic Party and American politics.

The Soros Threat To Democracy

Democracy: George Soros is known for funding groups such as MoveOn.org that seek to manipulate public opinion. So why is the billionaire’s backing of what he believes in problematic? In a word: transparency.

George Soros: The Man, The Mind And The Money Behind MoveOn

The Left: The smear ad published against Gen. Petraeus has drawn attention to its sponsor, MoveOn.org. But the fingerprints of the group’s chief financial backer, George Soros, were all over it. Who is this man and what is he up to?

A Party Bought And Paid For

Election 2008: MoveOn.org once crowed that it had bought and owned the Democratic Party. With the Senate now blasting its tactics, that’s an open question. But not, apparently, for Democrats running for president.

http://ibdeditorials.com/series4.aspx

The Evolving Agenda of George Soros’s Democracy Alliance

“…The Democracy Alliance, as we observed in the January 2008 issue of Foundation Watch (”Billionaires for Big Government: What’s Next for George Soros’s Democracy Alliance?”), is slowly maturing and becoming more focused in its objectives.

Could it be that the Democracy Alliance has finally adopted a firm business plan?

Since its founding in 2005, the DA, a liberal donors’ collaborative that aims to create a permanent political infrastructure of nonprofits, think tanks, media outlets, leadership schools, and activist groups–a kind of “vast left-wing conspiracy” to compete with the conservative movement, has focused on fairly well-established pressure groups, watchdogs and think tanks, get-out-the-vote (GOTV) operations, and political action committees (PACs). These bread-and-butter liberal groups have included:

Media Matters for America
Center for American Progress
People for the American Way
New Democratic Network
Progressive Majority
Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW)
Center for Progressive Leadership
Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN)
EMILY’s List
America Votes
Sierra Club
Center on Budget and Policy …”

“…The Democracy Alliance’s “Letter of Interest” invited applications for the 2009/2010 giving cycle from all nonprofit groups on the left, but expressed special interest in organizations that do the following types of work:

* Building power and capacity in key constituencies: engagement and issue advocacy work with key constituencies, primarily Latinos and young people, as well as African Americans and unmarried women.
* New media and technology: content generators, aggregators and distributors that disseminate and amplify progressive messages.
* Law and legal systems: working to advance and protect progressive values and policies at all levels of the legal system.
* Early stage idea generators: focusing on progressive idea generation and development at the early and middle stages of the idea cycle including journals, academic networks, books, and non-traditional think tanks..
* Content generation: focusing on traditional and new media vehicles that are capable of developing and effectively promoting progressive ideas.
* Civic engagement coordination: achieving greater efficiency and effectiveness in mobilization and participation work through collaboration and coordination and creating economies of scale.
* Civic engagement tools: increasing capacity and availability of data services, including online organizing services for civic engagement groups.
* Election reform: focusing on structural reforms of our democratic process that will increase voter participation among progressive constituencies.
* Youth leadership development: building on the youth development part of the leadership pipeline that includes looking for organizations targeting young people that work at scale.
* Mid-career nonprofit leadership development: building on the mid-career development part of the leadership pipeline that includes looking for organizations working at scale. …”

http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/4920

George Soros’ Social Agenda for America

Drug Legalization, Euthanasia, Immigrant Entitlements and Feminism

“Summary: The February issue of Foundation Watch examined the philanthropy of the billionaire financier George Soros. It found that Soros-funded groups supported increased government spending and tax increases, and opposed the death penalty and President Bush’s judicial nominees. In this article author Neil Hrab looks at Soros grants in four other policy areas: drug legalization, euthanasia, immigrant entitlements, and feminist organizing. …”

http://www.capitalresearch.org/pubs/pdf/x3770435801.pdf 

Is Global Warming Alarmist James Hansen a Shill for George Soros?

By Jake Gontesky

“…The claims against anthropogenic global warming skeptics are often the same: they’re all shills for big oil or other industry wishing to poke holes in the ‘consensus theory’ of global warming (which isn’t a consensus at all). Under the so-called “politicization of science” program, George Soros’ (the favorite fundraiser of many democrats) has reportedly given as much as $720,000 to Hansen to help package his alarmist claims and get them pushed by the mainstream media (The Soros Threat to Democracy):

How many people, for instance, know that James Hansen, a man billed as a lonely “NASA whistleblower” standing up to the mighty U.S. government, was really funded by Soros’ Open Society Institute , which gave him “legal and media advice”?

That’s right, Hansen was packaged for the media by Soros’ flagship “philanthropy,” by as much as $720,000, most likely under the OSI’s “politicization of science” program. 

So he got some big paychecks from Soros – but was there a quid pro quo? The evidence certainly indicates as much:

That may have meant that Hansen had media flacks help him get on the evening news to push his agenda and lawyers pressuring officials to let him spout his supposedly “censored” spiel for weeks in the name of advancing the global warming agenda.

Hansen even succeeded, with public pressure from his nightly news performances, in forcing NASA to change its media policies to his advantage. Had Hansen’s OSI-funding been known, the public might have viewed the whole production differently. The outcome could have been different. 

Did Soros’ funding pay off? You be the judge. Do a quick google search on James Hansen to read any of the thousands of mainstream media stories touting Hansen’s claims of censorship by the Bush administration. This wouldn’t be the first time credibility questions have been raised regarding Hansen and his alarmist claims [see "When does 1,400 Media Interviews = Muzzled" (03/20/07)].

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/jake-gontesky/2007/09/26/global-warming-alarmist-james-hansen-shill-george-soros

Friedrich Hayek

“Friedrich August von Hayek, CH (May 8, 1899 – March 23, 1992) was an Austrian-British economist and political philosopher known for his defence of classical liberalism and free-market capitalism against socialist and collectivist thought in the mid-20th century. He is considered to be one of the most important economists and political philosophers of the twentieth century.^[1] One of the most influential members of the Austrian School of economics, he also made significant contributions in the fields of jurisprudence and cognitive science. He shared the 1974 Nobel Prize in Economics with ideological rival Gunnar Myrdal “for their pioneering work in the theory of money and economic fluctuations and for their penetrating analysis of the interdependence of economic, social and institutional phenomena.”^[2] He also received the U.S. Presidential Medal of Freedom in 1991.^[3] He is considered to be one of the major forces of change from the dominant interventionist and Keynesian policies of the first part of the 20th century back to towards classical liberalism after the 1980s. …”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friedrich_Hayek

Karl Popper

“Sir Karl Raimund Popper (July 28, 1902 – September 17, 1994) was an Austrian and British^[1] philosopher and a professor at the London School of Economics. He is counted among the most influential philosophers of science of the 20th century, and also wrote extensively on social and political philosophy. Popper is known for repudiating the classical observationalist/inductivist account of scientific method by advancing empirical falsification instead; for his opposition to the classical justificationist account of knowledge which he replaced with critical rationalism, “the first non justificational philosophy of criticism in the history of philosophy”^[2] and for his vigorous defense of liberal democracy and the principles of social criticism which he took to make the flourishing of the “open society” possible. …”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_Popper

Capitalism Doesn’t Work, Mr. Gates?
I just have to smile when billionaires turn cold shoulders to the blessings capitalism bestows.

By Larry Kudlow

“…

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=YzMyNDA1MWQyMWMwOTQ3YTk4NDM1ZDNlZWU0MTlkMWU=  

McCain and Leadership in a Time of Financial Crisis

By Ed Lasky

Gloves off: Now, Obama calls for prosecuting GOP donor; Update: AIP responds

By Michelle Malkin 

“…I noted this morning that the Obama campaign’s Chicago-style thug effort to shut down the independent ad on Bill Ayers is part of the larger effort to intimidate conservative donors and curtail the free speech of The One’s critics.

It’s getting uglier, people.

Obama’s lawyer has sent a second letter to the Justice Department calling for the head of Dallas billionare Harold Simmons, who funded the Ayers ad that the Obama campaign doesn’t want the public to see.

Feel the chill:

Obama general counsel Bob Bauer today sent a second, sharper letter to the Justice Department, directly attacking the Dallas billionaire funding a harsh attack ad, Harold Simmons.

“We reiterate our request that the Department of Justice fulfill its commitment to take prompt action to investigate and to prosecute the American issues Project, and we further request that the Department of Justice investigate and prosecute Howard (sic) Simmons for a knowing and willful violation of the individual aggregate contribution limits,” he wrote.

He called the group’s activities “patently illegal.”

Bauer made the case that Simmons’ group [is not] fulfilling its [...] nonprofit charter because it hasn’t spent any money on anything other than attacking Obama. Simmons’ spokesman, Christian Pinkston, told me yesterday that plans to, and dismissed the complaints as an effort to lawyer away charges the campaign can’t rebut.

I posted AIP’s rebuttal here yesterday. And as I’ve noted today and will note again: Obama has some nerve whining about campaign finance integrity after getting caught hiding $800,000 in ACORN payments.

What’s going on? Simple: The Left has its George Soros sugar daddy and can’t stand that conservatives have their own committed benefactors. They’ve got a massive non-profit infrastructure funded with taxpayers and operating flagrantly in an illegal, partisan manner (hello, ACORN Watch!). They want the playing field all to themselves. And they are fighting for that turf by any means necessary.

Can they do it?

No, they can’t. Not if you don’t let them. …”

http://michellemalkin.com/2008/08/26/gloves-off-now-obama-calls-for-prosecuting-gop-donor/

Charlie Rose: February 23, 2001

“…A conversation with George Soros, the international philanthropist and chairman of Soros Fund Management, about his new book, “Open Society: Reforming Global Capitalism”. Soros discusses… “

Charlie Rose: August 2, 1994

“…First, philanthropist George Soros, founder of the world’s most successful hedge fund, shares some of his ideas for revitalizing America’s inner cities. Then, Hugh Price talks about what he hopes …

Authors@Google: George Soros

“…George Soros appears in conversation with Google CEO Eric Schmidt discussing his new book “The Age of Fallibility: Consequence of the War on Terror” as part of the Authors@Google series. … “

Soros Compares President Bush To Nazis

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_DuafAqAHrc&feature=related

George Soros Part 1

“…George Soros Part 1 Interview on April 8, 2008…”

George Soros Part 2

“…George Soros Part 2 Interview on April 8, 2008…”

George Soros Part 3

“…George Soros Part 3 Interview on April 8, 2008…”

George Soros on Housing Prices June 2006

O’Reilly: George Soros is funding Media Matters,John Edwards

O’Reilly calls Democratic support group dangerous, evil

“…George Soros, Paul Begala, and David Brock are O’Reilly’s “American Axis of Evil” for planning to spend money against Republican John McCain. Does anyone recall him in this high dudgeon over the Swift Boat ads?…”

Liberals & big business falsified Iraq war casualty figures 

Ron Paul on Mortgage Bailout & Financial Armageddon

Jerry Bowyer on Kudlow & Company – March 17th – Segment 1 

Jeremy Siegel on Bear Stearns, the Rate Cuts and Inflation

Deconstructing the Subprime Crisis

Susan Wachter on Securitizations and Deregulation

Wall Street’s Day of Reckoning: The Fannie & Freddie Bailout

Part 1 – Exposing Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac: Origins

New York Investing meetup organizer Daryl Montgomery discusses the origins of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac in the first episode of a multi-part series. The New York Investing meetup is an organization of 1800 independent traders and investors that provides unbiased stock market education and analysis. We also have a blog,”The Helicopter Economics Investing Guide” which can be found at: http://nyinvestingmeetup.blogspot.com

Part 2 – Exposing Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac: Origins

Part 3 – Exposing Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac: Origins

Part 4 – Exposing Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac: Origins

Part 5 – Exposing Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac: Origins

Rush On Franklin Raines

Hey Barack, Who’s Franklin Raines

Advice

Jim Johnson

Crisis

Enough Is Enough

Related Posts On Pronk Palisades

Voters Beware: The Radical Rules of Saul Alinsky and Leftist Democrats

Creature from Jekyll Island: The Federal Reserve System–Videos

2008 Presidential Choice: Leader or Diletant–McCain or Obama

Conservative Turnout Will Determine the Outcome of The Presidential 2008 Race Between McCain vs. Obama

Slugger McCain Hits a Grand Slam Homerun: Selects Alaskian Governor Sarah Palin as Vice-President Running Mate!

Knight of Faith Sarah Palin vs. Knight of Infinity Barack Obama

The 2008 U.S. Presidential Election–Wedge Issues Now (WIN)?

The American People: Start Drilling and Control The Border. When? Now!

The Issue of The United States 2008 Presidential Election–Criminal Alien Removal (CAR) and A Border Security Fence (BSF)

Clear, Hold, Build– Strategy for Victory In Iraq–Now Ready for Prime Time in America– Operation Criminal Alien Removal (CAR)!

Appeasers and Oath Breakers All: Bush, Clinton, Bush, McCain, Clinton, Obama…Who is next?

Why immigration will be the number 1 political issue in the 2008 Presidential Election! — Gum Balls

Presidential Candidates on Illegal Immigration, Criminal Alien Removal and Social Service Benefits

The Cost of Comprehensive Immigration Reform–McCain and Obama Are Hopeless–It is the Economy Stupid!

Presidential Election 2008: American Elites Vs. American People

Alan Keyes on Immigration

US Immigration Videos   

Unconstrained Obama vs. Constrained McCain: A Conflict of Vision

McCain/Romney vs. Obama/Biden: Landslide McCain Wins in November!

Let Them Eat Cake Act: American Elites Killing and Starving The

Obama and McCain–Socialism and Appeasement!

Senator Obama: The Experience Challenged Candidate of Change

Barrack Obama’s Kansas Values–Killing Babies in Cold Blood?

Comrade Barack Obama–Arrogant Elitist Socialist–US Job Destroyer and Economy Wrecker

The Movement Conservatives Will Rock You Obama!

Obama: Pump Up Your Tires–Main Stream Media: Pumps Up Obama

Identity Politics: Blacks, Lesbians, Gays, Bisexuals and Transsexuals for Obama?

Barack Obama: The First Previable Puppet Presidential Candidate!

Barack Obama–A Reader Not A Leader!

Barack Obama: A Watermelon Man–Green on The Outside–Red on The Inside

Barack Obama–Damaged Goods–Birds of A Feather Flock Together

Clinton’s Cap and Trade Tax on The American People for Consuming Electricity and Driving Cars, SUVs and Trucks!

Facing Fundamental Facts

Presidential Election 2008: American Elites Vs. American People

Let Them Eat Cake Act: American Elites Killing and Starving The American People