Showing posts with label karl rove. Show all posts
Showing posts with label karl rove. Show all posts

Wednesday, September 26, 2012

Exposed: "Small Business" Group Just a Front for "Big Business" Interests

Wednesday, September 26, 2012 by PRWatch.org
New watchdog website shows how secretly funded NFIB exploits sympathy for small business owners to push corporate-friendly agenda

by PRWatch.org


As the National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB), a little-examined business lobbying group, floods millions of dollars into this year’s elections, the Center for Media and Democracy is launching a new website (www.NFIBexposed.org) to shine a light on the group’s secret funding and partisan efforts. NFIB, the leading plaintiff in the lawsuit against the Affordable Care Act nicknamed “Obamacare,” has received $3.7 million from Karl Rove’s Crossroads GPS, and as disclosed on this new website, NFIB's legal arm received $1.15 million in 2010 from Donors Trust, a major donor to the Koch brothers’ Americans for Prosperity Foundation.

NFIB failed to disclose the sources of these and other large donations amounting to over $10 million in undisclosed six-figure donations from 2010-2011. This raises serious questions about how NFIB is representing small businesses and the true nature of the group’s agenda. www.NFIBexposed.org will be a growing resource for reporters and the public. It will include regularly updated information about NFIB's state and federal lobbying activities, its financial disclosures and political spending, and its candidate endorsements.

“Small business owners deserve to have a voice, but NFIB doesn’t speak for me or other small business owners I know,” said Rick Poore, owner of a custom screen-printing business in Lincoln, Nebraska with 33 employees. “NFIB uses the name of small business to advance an agenda that helps big corporate interests, but actually hurts the interests of real small businesses like mine.”

“With dark money exerting extraordinary influence on elections and policy, it’s crucial to pull back the curtain on groups like NFIB and help reveal what interests are pulling the strings behind the scenes,” said Lisa Graves, Executive Director of Center for Media and Democracy. “What we know about NFIB’s funding and structure shows how it serves the agenda of global corporations over the interests of the small businesses it claims to represent. We also believe an IRS investigation of NFIB’s partisan political activities is warranted.” (Last summer, CMD launched a similar transparency initiative about the American Legislative Exchange Council, connecting the dots between its corporate bankrollers and extreme agenda via ALECexposed.org.)

In the last few years, NFIB gained national recognition as the lead litigant of the multi-million dollar lawsuit against Obamacare, despite the fact that many small businesses have welcomed the new law. As disclosed on the new website, a leading Americans for Prosperity Foundation funder, Donors Trust, funneled $1.15 million to NFIB's legal arm in 2010, more than covering its reported payments for outside legal services in the ACA lawsuit and casting doubt on NFIB’s claim that the legal challenge was fueled by thousands of small donors.

“NFIB has been advancing the interests of the health insurance lobby for years, plotting against health reform under Clinton and then challenging the Affordable Care Act in the courts," said Wendell Potter, former insurance company executive and author of Deadly Spin, An Insurance Company Insider Speaks Out on How Corporate PR Is Killing Health Care and Deceiving Americans. "It makes you wonder, who's paying the bills for this work and whose interests are really being served?"

“Secrecy is not a small business value, nor is it in the interest of political integrity,”Congressman Raul Grijalva (D-AZ-7) wrote in a recent letter to the IRS requesting an investigation into NFIB’s tax-exempt status because of the partisan nature of the group’s work. “If NFIB is determined not to say where its money comes from or who its members are, we must ask what the group is hiding.” While the IRS will not confirm nor deny the existence of an investigation, facts indicate that NFIB is the focus of an inquiry.

Recent reports show that 98 percent of NFIB's PAC contributions to federal candidates in the 2012 election cycle have gone to Republicans and that the organization is spending millions of dollars this year in political advertising. This includes a $2 million ad campaign supporting eight Republican Congressional candidates in competitive races. Despite the group’s “non-partisan” claims, NFIB’s endorsements and financial backing overwhelmingly support Republican candidates, even though polling shows small businesses remain firmly divided in their political affiliations.

In nine of the last ten election cycles, NFIB has given 90 percent or more of its political contributions to Republican candidates. Furthermore, according to the Center for Responsive Politics’ “Heavy Hitters” donor list, NFIB is ranked third highest among all groups in the percentage of its contributions (93 percent) going to Republican candidates – a higher percentage even than Koch Industries (90 percent), Exxon Mobil (86 percent), and the National Rifle Association (82 percent).

More information about NFIB is available at www.NFIBexposed.org.

Sunday, December 18, 2011

Walker Enlists Karl Rove Protégé to Promote New Protest Policy


by Brendan Fischer
 
As Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker’s new policies restricting protest in the Wisconsin capitol take effect in advance of the anniversary of 2011's historic labor uprisings, the controversial governor has enlisted a new spokesperson to sell the rules, a 28-year old protégé of Karl Rove and new political appointee of the governor. 

Madison blogger Joe Vittie broke the story on WisconsinReporters.com about Jocelyn Webster, the person Walker hired as the public face defending the rules. Webster cut her teeth with Rove’s notorious Office of Political Affairs in the George W. Bush Administration. A congressional investigation of the activities of that office yielded allegations -- including specific allegations against Webster -- that Rove’s team was involved in partisan campaigning on the public dime, a claim also leveled at aides of her newest boss during his tenure as Milwaukee County Executive.

Webster’s Eye-Rolling Lead Some to Discover Her Karl Rove Roots 
 
On December 1, Walker's Department of Administration (DOA) released a twenty-three page policy announcing new limits on demonstrations in and around the state capitol, the site of massive protests earlier this year. The policy was clearly drafted with an eye towards landmark federal First Amendment cases, but legal observers have criticized the new rules, and the ACLU of Wisconsin is considering legal action. Walker opponents view the new rules as an effort to suppress dissent. For example, the definition of a "rally" as four people appears aimed at the Solidarity Singers, a group who gather every day at noon to sing popular songs altered with political lyrics criticizing the Walker administration.

DOA unveiled the policy December 1, but announced a two-week "educational period" (which some perceived as a public relations blitz) to help the public understand the new restrictions. The rules take effect December 16.

Just before the policy was announced, the Walker administration selected a new political appointee to serve as DOA Communications Director. The name of the appointee, Jocelyn Webster, was at the top of the December 1 press release announcing the new restrictions on capitol protests. Webster was also quoted in the press claiming that the “updated policy is meant to remove confusion and create consistency” for law enforcement officers and the public.

Webster caught the eye of citizens attending a recent public "information session" about the new restrictions on rallies in the capitol. Based on what some described as her petulant eye-rolling in response to citizens expressing concerns about restrictions on their freedom of speech, Vittie took a closer look at her experience and background.

From Washington to Wisconsin 
 
Webster is no local. She was most recently in Dallas, Texas, working government relations for the global convenience store chain 7-Eleven. Previously, she worked four months for New Jersey Governor Chris Christie’s PR shop. For nine months before that she pushed press inside the beltway on education policy in the 2008 election year. She also worked PR for New Yorker Rudy Giuliani’s presidential campaign.

But before those experiences, Webster worked for the federal government in Washington, D.C., and was cited in a major congressional investigation.

After graduating from college in California, Webster got a gig at the new Department of Homeland Security as a liaison to the George W. Bush White House. After six months, she moved to the White House and became a staffer in the Office of Political Affairs (OPA) in February, 2006.

OPA was overseen by Karl Rove and was reportedly tasked with tracking the political environment. A three-year investigation into Rove's OPA concluded in January of this year with a report showing the office routinely violated the Hatch Act, a federal law that prohibits the use of taxpayer dollars on partisan political activities.

The report by the Office of Special Counsel found that the taxpayer-funded activities of OPA employees "were directed at the electoral success of Republican candidates and the Republican Party as a whole," and that "U.S. Treasury funds were unlawfully used to finance efforts to pursue Republican victories at the polls.”

"OPA was essentially an extension of the RNC in the White House,” the report stated.
Rove's OPA violated the Hatch Act throughout the Bush presidency, said the report, but particularly in the run-up to the 2006 mid-term elections, when Webster joined the OPA.

Webster's Ties to Bush White House Email Controversy 
 
The controversial role of the office in which Webster worked did not end after the 2006 mid-term elections.

In 2007, it was revealed that OPA staffers had been using partisan Republican National Committee (RNC) email accounts for official business, such as the controversial firings of federal prosecutors. This practice circumvented the requirements of federal sunshine and ethics laws, such as the Presidential Records Act, which required that employees preserve a record of all communications taking place at work. The National Journal wrote that Karl Rove sent ninety-five percent of his emails on his RNC account.

Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) sent a letter to House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chairman Henry A. Waxman requesting an investigation. As a result of that congressional investigation, the Bush Administration claimed that 5 million emails had been lost or deleted. After a lawsuit, computer technicians were able to reconstruct some of the deleted messages and found that up to 22 million emails had been deleted.

Chairman Waxman rejected demands by the RNC that the searches of the emails be limited. In an April 2007 letter (pdf), Waxman notes that accepting the RNC's request to limit the email search terms "would not have located a January 19, 2007, e-mail from an official in Karl Rove's office to an official at the General Services Administration transmitting a copy of Powerpoint slides prepared by the White House that list the top 20 Democratic targets in 2008. That e-mail read: 'Please do not email this out or let people see it. It is a close hold and we're not supposed to be emailing it around.'"

Waxman's citation?

"E-mail from Jocelyn Webster (pdf), Staff Assistant, Office of Political Affairs, White House,
to Tessa Truesdell, Confidential Assistant to the Administrator, General Services Administration (Jan. 19,2007)." Webster was not charged with any crime for her activities in Rove’s operations during her work for him from early 2006 until early 2007.

Webster Role in "Pentagon Pundits" Operation, which CMD Helped Expose 

In early 2007, with public support for the Iraq war declining, Webster moved to the Pentagon's public affairs division.

In 2008, David Barstow broke a story in the New York Times about the depth and breadth of the Defense Department’s public affairs operation using "surrogates" to promote Bush administration policies in the press, without disclosing the Pentagon's hidden hand. The Center for Media and Democracy’s founder John Stauber called the scandal “the Pentagon Papers of this war” in Iraq. CMD, which publishes PRWatch, made the documents Barstow obtained available to the public through its SourceWatch electronic library. Barstow and the Times won a Pulitzer for its investigation.

One part of that program was described in an earlier Harpers Magazine article by Ken Silverstein, who specifically identified Webster as working on the project. The so-called "Surrogates Program," according to Silverstein, "arrange[d] regular conference calls during which senior Pentagon officials brief retired military officials, civilian defense and national security analysts, pundits, and bloggers. A few moderates are invited to take part, but the list of participants skews far, far to the right. The Pentagon essentially feeds participants the talking points, bullet points, and stories it wants told."

Silverstein wrote, "it’s quite clear that the Pentagon views it as a propaganda program."
Neither Webster nor others involved were charged with any crime, even though watchdog groups like CMD noted how the so-called "surrogate operation" violated long-standing federal appropriations rules and other laws against military propaganda in the United States.

Webster Joins the Walker Administration, and Makes a Splash 
 
Throughout the 2011 Wisconsin protests, Governor Walker falsely claimed that most of the demonstrators were from out-of-state. But some are now questioning whether he recruited his own out-of-state agitator in Webster.

During last week's public information sessions on Wisconsin's new capitol access rules, citizens concerned about the policy's impact on their First Amendment rights were dismayed by Webster's dismissive attitude towards them, which she reportedly expressed by rolling her eyes and shaking her head at their comments. Many were also put off by Webster's misleading press release that had asserted the new rules, which require permits for groups as small as four persons, were simply restatements of existing policies.

Her first real public performance in her new taxpayer-funded job caused some, like bloggers at WisconsinReporters.com, to look into her actual track record. At a hearing this week, Paul Schmid of that website expressed concern about the background of the Department of Administration's new communications director.

"This is the state of Robert LaFollette, open government, transparent government," said Schmid, noting that citizens were unlikely to trust the administration considering Webster's past involvement in taxpayer-funded political activity.

In response to Schmidt's comments, Chris Schoenherr, DOA Deputy Secretary, replied:
"You'll decide whether, or not, you decide to trust the administration. Or not."

Saturday, April 30, 2011

Feingold compares new Obama fundraising group to Karl Rove

By Sahil Kapur - RAW Story
Friday, April 29th, 2011

WASHINGTON – Former Sen. Russ Feingold (D-WI) on Friday tore into Democrats for launching a new outside group to aid President Barack Obama's re-election efforts in part by raising undisclosed funds.

"Democrats who mirror the right-wing tactics of Karl Rove and David Koch do our nation no favors," said Feingold, a longtime opponent of industry-funded elections who now helms Progressives United, according to Politico's Ben Smith. "Our democracy is best served by rejecting the fundamentally corrupt strategy of embracing unlimited corporate influence."

The group, Priorities USA, is poised to receive the kinds of unlimited, undisclosed donations that Obama has spoken out against. It's similar in some respects to Karl Rove's Crossroads GPS, which spent millions in anonymous money trying to defeat Democratic candidates last year.

"It has everything to do with Karl Rove and the Koch Brothers," former Obama White House spokesman Bill Burton told The Associated Press. "As long as they play by one set of rules, we're not going to be boxed in by a double standard."

The creation of the group suggests that the White House and Democrats have -- at least for now -- thrown in the towel on campaign finance reform and chosen to fight fire with fire. They'd be trounced in election spending by Republicans if they didn't adopt similar fundraising tactics.
Raising unlimited campaign funds from anonymous donors was made possible last year by the Supreme Court in the Citizens United v. FEC ruling.

Wednesday, November 10, 2010

Evangelicals: Voting for a Corporate Agenda

The evangelical white underclass have given a big boost to the corporate bottom line.
By Frank Schaeffer, AlterNet
Posted on November 10, 2010

Tens of millions of American voters got duped badly in the 2010 election. The bible-thumping white underclass thought they hit back at what they regarded as the nefarious forces trying to “take our country away.”

They were bought, paid for, sold, traded and manipulated by the most powerful in the US election: a Billionaire Lynch Mob led by Rupert Murdoch, Karl Rove, the Koch brothers, and hundreds of millions in organize corporate cash. They peddled a fear agenda: fear of immigrants, fear of government control of our lives, fear that their country would become irrevocably changed.

Here's how it happened:

Where the fear and loathing began

A bedrock article of faith among many of the anti-Obama white voters is that America had “Christian origins,” and that today America must be “restored” to “our religious heritage.” The “Puritan heritage” of America is constantly cited as evidence for our need to return to our “biblical roots.” The Constitution is also waved around as if it too is some sort of Bible to be religiously believed in. Of course the Billionaire Lynch Mob doesn’t care about such quaint ideas as individual liberties, let alone “biblical absolutes,” but many of the people who believed the anti-Obama lies did care.

The earnest, mostly Evangelical dupes have a point: by calling for a “return to our roots” (be they biblical and/or constitutional) they are actually maintaining a grand old American tradition: religious delusion as the basis for conquest. The Puritans believed that they were importing “authentic Christianity” to America, especially as written in the Old Testament. They said that they were on a divine mission, even calling themselves “The New Israel” and a “city set upon a hill.” John Winthrop (governor of Massachusetts Bay) transferred the idea of “nationhood” in biblical Israel to the Massachusetts Bay Company. And the Puritans claimed they were God’s “Chosen People.” They said that they had the right to grab land from the “heathen.” These were the American Indians whom the Puritans thought of as the “new Canaanites,” to be slaughtered with God’s blessing and in the case of the Pequot Indians burned alive.

There are many threads in the anti-Obama tapestry but three are ignored at our peril: 1) The End Times fantasies of the Evangelicals; 2) The rise of so-called Reconstructionist theology and 3) the culture war launched over the legalization of abortion.

These “threads,” not the economy alone, are also the source of the vote where white lower class and white middle class Americans voted in droves against their own self-interest. Let’s unpick these fraying threads one at a time.

1. “End Times” Fantasies

The evangelical/fundamentalists/Republican far right is in the grip of an apocalyptic “Rapture” cult centered on revenge and vindication. This “End Times” death wish is built on a literalist interpretation of the Book of Revelation. This fantasy has many followers. For instance to take one of many examples, Jerry Jenkins and Tim LaHaye’s “Left Behind” series of sixteen novels represents both a “reason” and a symptom of the hysteria that grips so many voters.

The “Left Behind” novels have sold tens of millions of copies while spawning an “End Times” cult, or rather egging it on. Such products as Left Behind video games have become part of the ubiquitous American background noise. Less innocuous symptoms of End Times paranoia include people stocking up on assault rifles and ammunition, freeze dried food (pitched to them, by the way, by Billionaire Lynch Mob-handmaid Glenn Beck), gold (also sold to them by Glenn Beck), adopting "Christ-centered" home school curricula, fear of higher education (“we’ll lose our children to secularism”), embracing rumor as fact (“Obama isn’t an American”) and fighting against Middle East peace iniatives, lest they delay the “return of Jesus,” for instance through Houston mega church pastor John Hagee’s Christian Zionist-centered “ministry.”

A disclosure: My late father, Francis Schaeffer, was a key founder and leader of the American Religious Right. For a time in the 1970s and early 80s I joined him in pioneering the Evangelical anti-abortion Religious Right movement. I changed my mind. I explain why I quit the movement in my book CRAZY FOR GOD -- How I Grew Up As One Of The Elect, Helped Found The Religious Right, And Lived To Take All - Or Almost All - Of It Back.

John Hagee, mega church pastor and founder of Christians United for Israel said: “For 25 almost 26 years now, I have been pounding the Evangelical community over television. The Bible is a very pro-Israel book. If a Christian admits ‘I believe the Bible,’ I can make him a pro-Israel supporter or they will have to denounce their faith. So I have Christians over a barrel you might say.” The assumption Hagee makes -- that “Bible-believing Christians” will be pro-Israel -- is the dominant view among American Evangelical Christians. These are the people who goad us to make perpetual war worldwide. And these are the people who supposedly follow a teacher who said, “Blessed are the peacemakers.”

Few within the Evangelical community have dared to publically question such Haggee’s approach. The Christian Zionists led by Hagee et al even went after their very own George W Bush for backing peace talks between Palestinians and the Israeli government. So can you imagine the hatred the Christian Zionists have for President Obama, who also wants peace in the Middle East?

The momentum for building a subculture that’s seceding from mainstream society (in order to await "The End Times" has irrevocably pried loose a chunk of the American population from both sanity and from their fellow citizens. The Christian Zionist franchise holds out hope for the self-disenfranchised that -- at last -- everyone will know "We born-again Christians" were right and "They" were wrong. But here’s the political significance of the Christian Zionist dominance: the evangelical/fundamentalists’ imagined victimhood.

I say imagined victimhood, because the born-agains are hardly outsiders let alone victims. They’re very own George W Bush was in the White House for eight long, ruinous years and Evangelicals also dominated American politics for the better part of thirty years before that by enforcing a series of “moral” litmus tests that transformed the Republican Party into their very own culture wars lickspittle.

Nevertheless, the white evangelical/conservative Roman Catholic sense of being a victimized minority only grew with their successes. “You are not alone!” said Glenn Beck, playing to these “disenfranchised” “victims,” who – as the midterm results once again proved -- turn out to look more like a majority of white voters who had the power to turn Sarah Palin into a multimillionaire overnight and send the likes of Rand Paul to the Senate.

2. The Rise of Reconstructionist Theology

Where did the “victims” on the Far Right get their “theology” of perpetual damn-the-facts victimhood from? The history of theology (Christian or otherwise) is the history of people desperately trying to fit the way things actually are into the way their “holy” books say they should be. And since the facts don’t fit and never will, religious believers can either change their minds, embrace paradox, or find someone else to blame for their never-ending loss of face and self-esteem.

Most Americans have never heard of the Reconstructionists. But they have felt their impact through the Reconstructionists’ (often indirect) influence over the wider Evangelical community. In turn, the Evangelicals shaped the politics of a secular culture that barely understood the Religious Right let alone the forces within that movement that gave it its rage.

If you feel victimized by modernity (let alone humiliated by reality) then the Reconstructionists have The Answer to your angst: apply the full scope of the Biblical Law to modern America and to the larger world! Coerce “non-believers” to live in your imaginary universe! In other words Reconstructionists wanted to replace the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights with their interpretation of the Bible.

Most Evangelicals are positively moderate by comparison to the Reconstructionist “thinkers.” Most libertarians, who formed the backbone of the Tea Party (at least until the Far Right Evangelicals began to take the Tea Party over) would hate them. But the Reconstructionist movement is a distilled version of the more mainstream evangelical version of exclusionary theology that nonetheless divides America into the “Real America” (as the Far Right claim only they are) and the rest of us “sinners.”

The Reconstructionist worldview is ultra Calvinist, but like all Calvinism has its origins in ancient Israel/Palestine, when vengeful and ignorant tribal lore was written down by frightened men (the nastier authors of the Bible) trying to defend their prerogatives to bully women, murder rival tribes and steal land. These justifications probably reflect later thinking: origin myths used as propaganda to justify political and military actions after the fact—i.e., to justify their brutality the Hebrews said that God made them inflict on others and/or that they were “chosen.”

In its modern American incarnation, which hardened into a twentieth century movement in the 1960s and became widespread in the 1970s, Reconstructionism was propagated by people I knew personally and worked with closely when I too was a Religious Right activist claiming God’s special favor. The leaders of the Reconstructionist movement included the late Rousas Rushdoony (Calvinist theologian, father of modern-era Christian Reconstructionism, patron saint to gold-hoarding Federal Reserve-haters, and creator of the modern Evangelical home-school movement), his son-in-law Gary North (an economist, gold-buff, publisher and leading conspiracy theorist), and David Chilton (ultra-Calvinist pastor and author.)

Reconstructionism, also called Theonomism, seeks to reconstruct “our fallen society.” Its worldview is best represented by the publications of the Chalcedon Foundation, which has been classified as an anti-gay hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center. According to the Chalcedon Foundation website, the mission of the movement is to apply “the whole Word of God” to all aspects of human life: “It is not only our duty as individuals, families and churches to be Christian, but it is also the duty of the state, the school, the arts and sciences, law, economics, and every other sphere to be under Christ the King. Nothing is exempt from His dominion. We must live by His Word, not our own.

It’s no coincidence that the rise of the Islamic Brotherhoods in Egypt and Syria and the rise of Reconstructionism took place in more or less the same twentieth-century time frame—as modernism, science and “permissiveness” collided with a frightened conservatism rooted in religion. The writings of people such as Muslim Brotherhood founder Hassan al-Banna and those of Rushdoony are virtually interchangeable when it comes to their goals of “restoring God” to his “rightful place” as he presides over law and morals. Or as the late Reconstructionist/Calvinist theologian David Chilton, writing in PARADISE RESTORED--A Biblical Theology of Dominion (and sounding startlingly al-Banna-like) explained:

Our goal is a Christian world, made up of explicitly Christian nations. How could a Christian desire anything else? Our Lord Himself taught us to pray: “Thy Kingdom come; Thy will be done on earth, as it is in heaven” (Matt. 6: 10)… The Lord’s Prayer is a prayer for the worldwide dominion of God’s Kingdom… a world of decentralized theocratic republics.... That is the only choice: pagan law or Christian law. God specifically forbids “pluralism.” God is not the least bit interested in sharing world dominion with Satan.

The message of Rushdoony’s work is best summed up in one of his innumerable Chalcedon Foundation position papers, “The Increase of His Government and Peace.” He writes: “[T]he ultimate and absolute government of all things shall belong to Christ.” In his book Thy Kingdom Come -- using words that are similar to those the leaders of al Qaida would use decades later in reference to “true Islam” -- Rushdoony argues that democracy and Christianity are incompatible: “Democracy is the great love of the failures and cowards of life,” he writes. “One [biblical] faith, one law and one standard of justice did not mean democracy. The heresy of democracy has since then worked havoc in church and state… Christianity and democracy are inevitably enemies.”

3. The Culture Wars Launched over the Abortion Debate

The significance and rise of the Reconstructionists and their (often indirect) impact on the wider evangelical subculture can only be understood in the context of the January 22, 1973 Supreme Court ruling on Roe v. Wade.

Roe energized the culture war like nothing else before or since. This war has even fed the passion that burned within the so-called Tea Party movement’s reaction to Obama’s moderate legislative health care reform predicting “Death Panels.” Roe also indirectly energized even those members of the Far Right – for instance the Tea Party’s pro-choice libertarians -- who didn’t care about abortion per se. Roe had such far-reaching effects because reactions to Roe defined the scorched-earth, winner-take-all and rabidly anti-government tone of the culture war fights since 1973.

Fast forward thirty years to the first decade of the twenty-first century: The messengers and day-to-day “issues” changed but the volume of the anti-government “debate” and anger originated with the anti-abortion movement. “Death Panels!”, “Government Takeover!”, “Obama is Hitler!” and all such “comments” were simply updated versions of “pro-life” rhetoric. And ironically, at the very same time as the Evangelicals who began the anti-abortion crusade (along with conservative Roman Catholics) had thrust themselves into bare knuckle politics over Roe, they also (I should say we also) retreated to what amounted to virtual walled compounds.

Evangelicals created a parallel “Christian America,” our very own private world, as it were, posted with “No Trespassing” signs. Our new “world” was about creating a Puritan/Reconstructionist-style holy-nation-within-our-fallen-nation.

This went far beyond mere alternative schools and home schools. Thousands of new Christian bookstores opened, countless Evangelical radio programs flourished in the 1970s and 80s, and new TV stations went on the air. Even a “Christian Yellow Pages” (a guide to Evangelical tradesmen) was published advertising “Christ-centered plumbers,” accountants and the like who “honor Jesus.” New Evangelical universities and even new law schools appeared, seemingly overnight with a clearly defined mission to “take back” each and every profession – including law and politics – “for Christ.” For instance, Liberty University’s Law School was the creation of the late Jerry Falwell, who told me in 1983 of his vision for Liberty’s programs: “Frank, we’re going train a new generation of judges and world leaders in the law from a Christian worldview to change America.” This was the same Jerry Falwell who wrote in America Can Be Saved: “I hope I live to see the day when, as in the early days of our country, we won’t have any public schools.”

To the old-fashioned Goldwater-type conservative mantra of “big government doesn’t work,” in the 1970s the newly-radicalized Evangelicals added “the US Government is Evil!” Our swap of spiritual faith for the illusion of political power – I say “illusion” since even in the 70s and 80s the real power was in the hands of the Billionaire Lynch Mob -- meant that we would tell people how to vote, but that we didn’t want our kids going to school with theirs. We’d wind up defending not just private schools and home schooling to “protect” our children from the world, but also private oil companies and private gas-guzzling polluting cars, private insurance conglomerates and so forth.

The price for the Religious Right’s wholesale idolatry of private everything was that Christ’s reputation was tied to a cynical political party owned by billionaires from the fast-food industry, raping the earth (not to mention our health), to the oil companies destroying our climate. It only remained for a Far Right Republican-appointed majority on the Supreme Court to rule in 2010 (Citizens United V. The Federal Election Commission), that unlimited corporate money could pour into political campaigns – anonymously -- in a way that clearly favored corporate America and the super wealthy who long since were the only entities served by the Republican Party’s defense of the individual against the government. The “individuals” turned out to be Exxon, the Koch brothers, Rupert Murdoch, McDonald’s and Goldman Sachs et al.

Conclusion

It’s a question of legitimacy and illegitimacy. What the Religious Right, including the Religious Right’s Roman Catholic and Protestant “intellectuals” (like my father) did, was contribute to a climate where the very legitimacy of our government, even any government, is up for grabs. Then the internet came along and Fox News came along and Rush Limbaugh, Michele Bachmann et all came along and no fiction was too fantastical to be believed as fact. We passed into a high tech stone age, myth superstition and outright lies gained a new currency.

Following the election of our first black President, the “politics” of the Evangelical, Roman Catholic and Mormon Far Right was not the politics of a loyal opposition, but the instigation of race-tinged revolution first and best expressed by Rush Limbaugh when he said, “I hope Obama fails.” All that happened in the midterm election of 2010 was that the corporate interests (unleashed by the Supreme Court), the Republican Party leadership and the Tea Party built on and/or cashed in on, the “biblically-based” antigovernment passion.

This was the politics that won in the Republican gains in the 2010 midterm elections. This was the logical conclusion of the process of delegitimizing the Federal Government that was launched by the Reconstructionists, the anti-abortion movement and of course is fed by the “Left Behind”/Christian Zionist apocalyptic revenge fantasy.

The Billionaire Lynch Mob’s only sacrament is fear. Their reward for cashing in on white religiously-believing middle class American’s addiction to Bronze Age biblical mythology is to walk away with our country. And fear-filled white Americans don’t get anything in return, unless you count their fleeting visceral pleasure of putting “that uppity black man” in the White House in his place.

Sunday, November 7, 2010

Obama Cuddles Up to Karl Rove & His Gas Drilling Friends

Rove pronounced the movement for clean energy dead at a natural gas drilling conference. But a massive protest outside reveals just the opposite. 
By Nora Eisenberg


In the days following Tuesday's election, President Obama's first peace offering to hardliners across the aisle was telling: "We've got, I think, broad agreement that we've got terrific natural gas resources in this country," he said. At the same time he was giving the thumbs-up for natural gas drilling, Karl Rove was doing the same, appearing as the keynote speaker at Pittsburgh's David Lawrence Convention Center for the DUG (Developing Unconventional Gas) East Coast conference on hydraulic fracturing for natural gas in the Marcellus Shale.

The Marcellus Shale is a rock formation with natural gas reserves that lies under parts of New York, West Virginia, Ohio and Pennsylvania, where energy gas companies have been using a controversial technique called hydraulic fracturing (or fracking) to extract gas. The practice has come under intense scrutiny recently after reports of water contamination and other environmental violations by gas drilling companies. This didn't stop some 2,200 energy executives gathered at the three-day conference focused on the technology, finances, and legal challenges of fracking in the largest of the nation's methane-rich shale formations. DUG, a conference developed by Hart Energy, an information and publishing arm of the energy industry, runs yearly conferences, last year adding DUG East as the controversial technology moved eastward from Texas and the Rockies to Appalachia's Marcellus Shale.

Another major industry meeting on the Marcellus, the "landmark summit" sponsored by the Marcellus Shale Coalition, a group of major industry players, was to take place on October 1, but was canceled. In August, a few days after Tom Ridge came on board as MSC's public face and adviser, Marcellus Protest, a Western Pennsylvania grassroots organizing and information sharing forum, had planned to protest the meeting where Ridge, in his first high-profile appearance for MSC, was to be the keynote speaker. An MSC spokesperson told AlterNet at the time that protests had nothing "whatsoever" to do with the cancellation, citing "scheduling issues," in particular, the upcoming DUG. But Marcellus Protest's Mel Packer told AlterNet he suspected the politically savvy Ridge had advised canceling the summit to stem the bad publicity for MSC of a bunch of "really angry people." In August Packer told AlterNet that his Marcellus Protest would bring even more angry people to DUG. And by November, after months of well and pipeline catastrophes, and more reports of contaminated water and air, and leases signed within the Pittsburgh city limits, he made good on his promise.

On Wednesday, November 3, the main day of DUG programming, an estimated 500-800 people marched across the Rachel Carson bridge through downtown Pittsburgh, surrounding the convention center for a rally. As they crossed the historic bridge, they shouted "No fracking way," "Clean air, clean water," and "It used to be Frick and now it's Frack," (referring to Pennsylvania's coal and steel robber baron Henry Clay Frick). They played trombones and drums, carried 7-foot-high puppets, and held homemade signs, the most dramatic being a 12-foot-square banner reading, "The people have a constitutional right to clean air, pure water, and the preservation of the natural, scenic, historic and esthetic values of the environment -- Article 1, Section 27 PA Constitution."

Interestingly enough, Ridge himself had quoted Article 1 in August at his first talk as the voice of MSC. His informal, conciliatory speech emphasized preserving the environment while developing jobs and revenue through fracking. Ridge may have advised canceling the "summit," but MSC may have been happy to cancel, wanting more firepower in keynote addresses promoting Marcellus drilling. To date, the "moderate" Ridge has not made any high-profile appearances for MSC. Instead, on Wednesday, the keynote was given by Rove, suggesting that the fracking industry is digging in at the same time public objection to the radical technology grows into what some see as a mass movement.

"Poor fracking execs" -- that was the joke that made its way among the high-spirited protesters who considered themselves blessed with a perfect sunny fall day while the conference attendees were stuck inside in viewless rooms with recycled air, boring speakers and a smirking Rove, whose Crossroads Grassroots group, through contributions of hundreds of thousands of dollars, had just handed the Pennsylvania Senate and gubernatorial seat to drill-now Republicans.
Inside, governor-elect Tom Corbett was the hero of the day. Rich Weber, president of Appalachia-based Atlas Energy said, "Operators in Pennsylvania will find thoughtful leadership at the state capital ... With Corbett, I know we're going to get it right." Pennsylvania was declared the capital of fracking and the Marcellus.

Tom Sherman, an analyst for Bentek LLC, an energy industry analysis firm, said, "It's not that we don't think West Virginia and New York are important. The point is that Pennsylvania's production and acreage is prolific and ample enough to drive the forecast on its own, regardless of what happens in West Virginia and New York."

Some sessions dealt with technology ("Visualizing the Many Black Shales and Tight Sand Reservoirs of Appalachia," "Regional Petrophysical Analysis of the Marcellus Shale") but most dealt with the financials, with speakers giving talks titled "Appalachian Gas Price Premiums," "Market Effects of the Marcellus" and "The Economic Impacts of the Marcellus Shale." All in all, fracking was praised as the biggest boom for Pennsylvania since steel.

In a speech called "Lessons Learned," David Porges, president and CEO of Pittsburgh-based EQT Corp., addressed the industry's poor reputation. The problem was just a few "bad actors," but the industry was made up of "good guys" who cared about the environment, he said. They just had to show it more. Only one session, a two-hour "Roundtable of Stakeholders" included an environmentalist (from Trout International), but the session was dominated by industry heavies and moderated by Leslie Haines, editor-in-chief of Oil and Gas Investor and Kathryn Klaber, president and executive director of the Marcellus Shale Coalition.

Rove's luncheon keynote reflected the self-congratulation and boldness of the speakers. Flushed with victories of his pro-drilling candidates in Pennsylvania, he announced that the election meant America will get it "right" as far as energy and climate legislation. "They sure as heck won't be able to pass it," he said referring to climate-change legislation. In a thoughtless but perhaps revealing choice of words, he announced, "Climate's gone." The Frac Act in the Senate, which would require more regulation and disclosure of chemicals, was history too, according to Rove. "The Waxman-Markey legislation will be dropped ...You can bet on Markey's special committee being disbanded ... we're back to a period of sensible regulations."

As speakers inside praised deregulation, financial outcomes, and hailed fracking's friends from Pennsylvania in the Senate and State House, protesters outside saw a very different world. The beautiful day seemed the perfect scene for their demands for clean air and water. In downtown Pittsburgh at lunchtime, people stopped to talk with protesters and to watch the lively speakers and musicians explain the practices of the under-regulated and perilous method of extracting methane. The gas industry has begun drilling 10 miles from Pittsburgh, and leasing land within the city limits, and some onlookers were worried enough to take a sign.

A lineup of fine musicians kept up the spirit of the day. Punk musician Justin Sane sang "Gasland Terror," a song he wrote for the occasion, which likens fracking to a terrorist attack of the homeland. And other singers offered inspiring songs, including Mike Stout, Kelly Burgos, Laura Daniels and the Newlanders' Gerard Rohlf.

Speaker after speaker spoke of the strong spirit of the crowd and how a mass movement was beginning, with more and more people troubled by stories or their own experiences with drilling. Doug Shields, a Pittsburgh city councilman, said Pittsburgh was very close to achieving victory in an upcoming vote on a proposal to ban drilling within the city limits. Already at the edge of the city, drilling is going day and night next to a popular shopping mall and hotel.

Local farmers Ron Gullah and Stephen Cleghhorn spoke poignantly of their land being destroyed by water contaminated from fracking. "This is a revolution!" said Loretta Weir, a Pittsburgh resident, and necessary because the gas companies operate "outside the law." Gloria Forouzan, a Marcellus Protester organizer, told AlterNet she was sure a mass movement was in the making. Every day she has been getting calls from people across the country. On Wednesday Wilkes-Barre ran its own protest, and people on the street who had never heard of fracking promised to travel out to Luzerne Community College to see a free showing of the documentary Gasland. Residents of Little Rock and Dallas held their own protests, too, on November 3 and in Cherry Valley, NY a protest will be held on Nov 11. "People are taking heart in what others are doing," Forouzan said.

Josh Fox, director of Gasland, agreed that a huge movement to put a hold on fracking was building. He told a story about a family in a fracking area whose kids suffer constant nosebleeds from toxins linked to fracking. "We are here for that family," he said. Taking out his cell phone, he called governor-elect Tom Corbett's office. He told the woman who answered the phone that he had a message for Mr. Corbett: "We the people of Pennsylvania, joined by our allies, demand an end to hydro-fracking gas drilling." He held his phone out to the crowd, which chanted, "No fracking way!" Then Fox thanked the woman for her time, and ended the call.

President Obama might be feeling friendly to fracking. As reported by Mike Soroghan of Greenwire, fracking industry spokesmen found Obama's statements consistent with positions of his State Department, which is looking to push the technology globally and the Energy Department, which puts a lot of stock in shale gas production.

But even in government, all is not lost. Proposition 23, an effort to roll back California's climate law, was overwhelmingly defeated with 61.4 percent of the vote. The federal climate bill, however inadequate, might not be dead according to Matthew Garrington, advocate for the group Environment Colorado. "Of the House members who voted for the American Clean Energy and Security Act [climate bill], 81 percent survived. Of those who voted no, 61 percent lost. It'll be hard for someone to credibly make the case that yesterday's election was a referendum on that vote," he said.

Hear that, Karl Rove?

Candidate Corbett received $835,720 from the natural gas industry, seven times more than any other candidate in the race for governor, according to the watchdog group, MarcellusMoney.org. Rove's Crossroads spent over $100,000 to defeat the pro-moratorium New York Congressman Maurice Hinchey, who kept his seat and can be counted on to work for disclosure and regulation of fracking. On Wednesday Pittsburgh protesters shouted loud and clear to the governor-elect, "No fracking way." On Thursday, many of the protesters attended the city council meeting to support the ban on drilling within Pittsburgh's city limits. "We're seeing activity for drilling moratoriums all across the country" Mel Packer said, "some days in the street, some days in government offices."

In Pittsburgh they called the November 3protest "No Fracking Way." Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania joined in and called it the First National Day of Protest against Gas Fracking, and protesters in Flower Mound, Texas called their protest the First World Protest Against Shale Gas Fracking. Whatever you call it, November 3 was an important day in the making of the mass movement activists are betting on to stop unregulated and unhealthful hydro-fracking by energy companies that are advancing eastward across the nation and planning to dig in and stay. With Karl Rove and Barack Obama finding common ground in shale drilling, the battle could be harder than ever to fight. But all at the November 3rd rally seemed undaunted and ready, as the final speaker implored, to “go forth and organize.”

Monday, October 25, 2010

Tea Party Inc.: The Big Money and Powerful Elites Behind the Right Wing's Latest Uprising

The Tea Parties are billed as a people's movement. But they wouldn't exist without the help of deep-pocketed billionaires.
By Adele M. Stan, AlterNet/The Investigative Fund at The Nation Institute
Posted on October 25, 2010



This article was reported in collaboration with The Investigative Fund at The Nation Institute.

Win or lose, the Tea Party movement will come away from next week's elections triumphant, having injected into the Republican Party a group of candidates pledged to the dismantling of government and wed to the religious right. Of the movement's dozen favored candidates for U.S. Senate, all are anti-abortion, and five oppose it even in cases of rape and incest. Among their number are Colorado's Ken Buck, who has compared homosexuality to alcoholism, and Nevada's Sharron Angle, who wants to demolish both the Department of Education and the Environmental Protection Agency. Major GOP players, from political strategist Karl Rove to former Bush speechwriter David Frum, have fretted publicly over Tea Party extremism, with Frum complaining of the movement's "paranoid delusions."

But it has now become clear that these Tea Party "outsiders" are all part of an inside game, a battle for control of the Republican party.

Though billed as a people's movement, the Tea Party wouldn't exist without a gusher of cash from oil billionaire David H. Koch and the vast media empire of Rupert Murdoch. Many of the small donations to Tea Party candidates have been cultivated by either Fox News Channel, a property of Murdoch's News Corporation, or the Americans for Prosperity Foundation, chaired by Koch. The movement's major organizations are all run, not by first-time, mad-as-hell activists, but by former GOP officials or operatives.

Taken together, Americans for Prosperity, FreedomWorks (another far-right political group seeded by the Kochs) and Murdoch's News Corp, owner of Fox News and the Wall Street Journal, form the corporate headquarters of a conglomerate one might call Tea Party, Inc. This is the syndicate that funds the organizing, crafts the messages, and channels the rage of conservative Americans at their falling fortunes into an oppositional force to President Obama and to any government solution to the current economic calamity. Groups such as Tea Party Express, Tea Party Nation, and the FreedomWorks-affiliated Tea Party Patriots; the bevy of political consultants for hire; and various allied elected officials can be understood as Tea Party, Inc.'s loosely affiliated subsidiaries. The Web sites of FreedomWorks, Americans for Prosperity and the Tea Party side projects of Fox News Channel's Glenn Beck are linked with those of Tea Party Express and Tea Party Patriots, all of which in turn solicit support for Tea Party candidates.

The armies of angry white people with their "Don't Tread on Me" flags, the actual grassroots activists, are not the agents of the Tea Party revolt, but its end users, enriching the Tea Party's corporate owners just as you and I enrich Google through our clicks.

Coming Out Party

Tea Party, Inc. was on full display in our nation's capital in late August, when Glenn Beck gathered his angry white multitudes at the Lincoln Memorial on the anniversary of Martin Luther King's historic "I Have a Dream" speech. The tens of thousands of Tea Partiers who showed up for this political revival were mobilized by untold hours of free promotion on Murdoch's network, while a related "Take America Back" convention, held the day before at Constitution Hall, was convened by FreedomWorks.

At that event, the crowd was treated to a trailer for a forthcoming film called Runaway Slave, narrated by Rev. C.L. Bryant, an African-American pastor from Louisiana identified as "a former NAACP radical," who made the case that liberalism is yet another means of enslaving black people.

"[I]n the black community," Bryant says in the film, "there's always somebody who's gotta keep them niggers in control." A photo of Jesse Jackson flashed on the screen. Then one of Al Sharpton. Some images flashed by so quickly that they were barely discernable. One was of a wriggling maggot.

Before the night was out, Glenn Beck himself graced the stage, asking the crowd to "expect miracles" at the next day's rally.

A few miles away, a more sedate crowd was jammed into a Marriott ballroom for a gala dinner that wrapped up yet another activist conference, the Defending the American Dream Summit, this one convened by the Americans for Prosperity Foundation. Striding toward the podium to the opening strains of "New York, New York" was chairman Koch. Tall and dapper in a precisely tailored dark suit, the 70-year-old stood in sharp contrast to the 2,500 middle-class women in pastel frocks and men in department-store sport coats who populated the ballroom tables.

Koch prefers to be known for the hundreds of millions he lavishes on his adopted city's cultural institutions -- the New York City Ballet, the Metropolitan Museum of Art, and the Metropolitan Opera, to name a few. But the quieter largess behind events like these, dispensed by David Koch and his brother Charles, has reshaped Washington, D.C., and our national politics. Though Americans for Prosperity, which he founded, and its foundation, whose board he chairs, have been instrumental in organizing the Tea Party movement, Koch still publicly claims to have no Tea Party ties, making tonight's appearance notable.

"Six years ago, when we launched this organization," he said in his uneasy and halting style, "we envisioned a grassroots organization of Americans from all walks of life banded together to advance economic freedom and prosperity by limiting government's reach, and curbing government's growth, reining in government spending. …We envisioned an organization that would boldly and unapologetically defend the free-market economy. The Tea Party is Koch's dream come true; the Washington summit, he told attendees, was designed to train grassroots activists in the defense of the "free-market economy" and "to send a message to the political class that these activists [are] energized and watching" its members.

The Capitol Hill Franchise

The self-appointed head of Tea Party, Inc.'s Capitol Hill division is the junior senator from South Carolina, Jim DeMint. DeMint is the top Senate recipient of donations from the Koch Industries' PAC, reeling in $22,000 in the current election cycle for a race he stands virtually no chance of losing. The Kochs' PAC is also the number three donor to DeMint's PAC, the Senate Conservatives Fund, which he spends on other races.

In DeMint, the Kochs found a politician who will make no compromises on their far-right agenda, favoring tax cuts and opposing health-care reform, green energy, labor unions and regulation of any kind. Last year, DeMint received the Americans for Prosperity Foundation's George Washington Award, bestowed upon the senator by Koch himself. Speaking at the organization's summit in August, Koch said DeMint "has consistently stood for freedom against this big-government agenda." In backing DeMint's power play against leaders of the Republican establishment, particularly his challenge to the power of Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, the Kochs stand poised to push those establishment leaders into the same uncompromising positions.

Echoing DeMint's agenda are Rep. Michele Bachmann, a Minnesota Republican who, in July, founded a Tea Party Caucus in the House of Representatives, and Rep. Mike Pence, a Republican from Indiana, who is House GOP conference chairman and a charter member of the new caucus. Both are Tea Party favorites, and Bachmann is a regular speaker at Americans for Prosperity events. At the Americans for Prosperity Foundation's RightOnline conference, held in Las Vegas in July, Pence used a luncheon address to make the case for melding the free-market Tea Party agenda with the values of the religious right, while Bachmann entertained a banquet crowd with herplan to phase out Social Security.

FreedomWorks has its eye on a political transformation in the Senate, and is closely allied with DeMint, whose PAC is spending hundreds of thousands of dollars on behalf of many of the same Tea Party-backed Senate candidates endorsed by the FreedomWorks PAC, including Sharron Angle (currently in a tight race against Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid), Rand Paul in Kentucky, Marco Rubio in Florida, and Utah's Mike Lee. (Bachmann's Tea Party Caucus was announced the day after Paul, addressing FreedomWorks activists on a July 13 conference call, suggested a Tea Party caucus for the Senate.) Each of these candidacies began as primary challenges to establishment Republicans endorsed by McConnell.

In September, Huffington Post political columnist Sam Stein cited a Democratic strategist who said that by the midterms' close, Americans for Prosperity will have spent $45 million on organizing "voter education" and get-out-the-vote activities that test the limits of legal nonprofit expenditures. Actually, Americans for Prosperity president Tim Phillips told me his plan was to raise and spend even more, though he wouldn't name a figure. Even the lesser amount, according to tax filings, would represent a tripling of its funds since 2008.

FreedomWorks also hopes to triple its revenue, from $3 million in 2008, according to tax filings, to an anticipated $10 million this election cycle, according to Adam Brandon, the group's communications director. In a fundraising video sent by FreedomWorks to new members, leaders announce that every dollar raised will be matched by an unnamed donor. Both Brandon and Koch Industries spokesperson Melissa Cohlmia say that FreedomWorks has received no funding from the Kochs or their foundations since 2004, so there is likely another high-roller involved. But neither FreedomWorks nor Americans for Prosperity,nor its foundation, is required by law to disclose its donors and -- like advocacy organizations across the political spectrum -- they don't.

At any rate, the vast expenditures on organizing have worked in at least one way: FreedomWorks' membership had reached nearly 1.1 million by mid-October, according to the group's Web site ticker. Americans for Prosperity claims 1.5 million members and chapters in 31 states.

Both groups excel at training activists and spreading the word for Tea Party candidates, who have raked in a significant portion of their campaign donations from small donors, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. When Angle's campaign announced earlier this month that it had raised a whopping $14 million since June, spokesperson Jarrod Agen told the Washington Post that 96 percent of those donations were $200 or less. (At press time, neither Angle nor the FEC had released official filings.)

One “voter education” exercise I witnessed was the dispatch of participants in July’s RightOnline conference to canvass the Las Vegas suburbs, armed with a script about Harry Reid. “Reid voted for the failed $800 billion stimulus plan that has wasted our tax dollars on more government,” it read. “Reid’s policies will make government bigger, waste more money, drive up budget deficits and kill jobs.”

The canvassers had just heard Angle, Reid’s opponent, deliver the conference’s closing speech. But as they boarded vans for their deployments, they were reminded this was, of course, a nonpartisan exercise — since the Americans for Prosperity Foundation, a nonprofit, is forbidden from endorsing candidates.

The Money Men

The Tea Party’s two major patrons are fabulously wealthy. David Koch is heir to the fortunes of Koch Industries, described in 2008 by Fortune as the largest privately held corporation in the United States, and was ranked by Forbes as one of the world's richest people, with an estimated personal wealth of $17.5 billion. Rupert Murdoch, founder and CEO of News Corp -- ranked by Fortune as world's second-largest entertainment company -- was also rated by Forbes among the world's wealthiest, with personal wealth of $6.3 billion.

Koch Industries, with David as executive vice-president and his brother Charles as CEO, presides over a vast conglomerate of oil and gas interests, as well as holdings in timber and chemicals. Since the 1970s, the two men have funded and controlled a large network of right-wing institutions, launching the libertarian Cato Institute in 1977 and the Mercatus Institute in 1985, all of which advocate business deregulation under the rubric of "free markets."

Both cornerstones of Tea Party Inc. -- FreedomWorks and the two entities comprising Americans for Prosperity -- sprang from Koch's riches. FreedomWorks rose from the ashes of Citizens for a Sound Economy, an early Astroturf group and think tank he founded during the Reagan years to advocate for lower taxes, less regulation, and smaller government. CSE was rebranded as FreedomWorks in 2004, after a corporate-style merger with Empower America, founded by the late Republican Congressman Jack Kemp to limit government and privatize government services.

That same year, Koch rebranded CSE's foundation as the Americans for Prosperity Foundation and founded its sibling organization, Americans for Prosperity.[i] Koch hired the politically connected Tim Phillips to serve as president of both organizations. (Phillips is a business partner of former Christian Coalition director Ralph Reed in a political consulting firm, Century Strategies, which was implicated, but never charged, in the bribery scandal that sent Jack Abramoff to prison.)

Koch and his allies built the underpinnings for a movement not quite ready to be born. The absent ingredient was rage. But by 2009, with the collapse of the economy and the election of the nation's first African-American president, the supply chain of rage was complete, and the Tea Party came roaring to life. Rupert Murdoch gave the new movement legitimacy by means of sympathetic columns in the Wall Street Journal, boosterism from Sean Hannity and Glenn Beck and a regular media platform on Fox News Channel for Tea Party personalities and candidates. As Jane Mayer remarked in her New Yorker profile of the Kochs, the Tea Party had at last turned their private agenda into a mass movement.

The role of these groups in launching the movement is indisputable. In concert with Glenn Beck's 912 Project, FreedomWorks did the logistical organizing for the first Tea Party march on Washington, in September 2009. Beck launched the 912 Project on his Fox News Channel show, promoted the march on his show and mobilized for it through a social networking Web site built by his production company.

Since then, the groups have been tearing through the Murdoch-Koch agenda. Americans for Prosperity says it convened, through an offshoot, some 300 rallies against health-care reform, and once the healthcare bill was passed in March, the organization quickly moved to block cap-and-trade as a means of regulating carbon emissions. In fact, at an Americans for Prosperity Foundation conference I attended in Pittsburgh in August 2009, cap-and-trade was already being introduced as the next Tea Party battle. This is a longstanding priority for Koch Industries, a major polluter heavily invested in old energy technologies. In a March 2010 report, Greenpeace said that, over the years, the Koch brothers have "quietly funneled" nearly $50 million to "climate-denial front groups that are working to delay policies and regulations aimed at stopping global warming."

Wall Street Journal columnist Stephen Moore -- a member of the newspaper's editorial board and a former fellow at the Koch-funded Cato Institute -- told the gathering of Tea Party activists he thought global warming was "the greatest hoax of the last 100 years." He called the climate change agenda "not just evil, but…contrary to the free-market system that made this country great."

The Media Storm

It is not unusual for op-ed pages to reflect the bias of an outlet's owners. It is highly unusual, however, for news operations to engage in outright political organizing on behalf of a CEO's agenda. Yet that's just what certain Fox News hosts and Wall Street Journal columnists seem to be doing on behalf of Rupert Murdoch, who is opposed to regulation of any kind, hates taxes, and despises labor unions -- having famously broken unions at his UK newspapers.

News Corp's best-known personalities accomplish this by working hand in glove with the like-minded ideologues at Americans for Prosperity. Fox News hosts, along with Stephen Moore and fellow Wall Street Journal columnist John Fund, are regular speakers at conferences sponsored by the Americans for Prosperity Foundation. At the group's 2009 RightOnline conference, a third of the plenary speakers were News Corp writers and pundits, including Moore and Fund, as well as Jim Pinkerton and Michelle Malkin, who were paid Fox commentators at the time. Fox News personality John Stossel spoke against health-care reform at three rallies sponsored by Americans for Prosperity, while Sean Hannity, host of a prime-time Fox News show, live-broadcast Americans for Prosperity's 2009 Tax Day protest in Atlanta -- and the network preempted regular programming to present it. Moore and Fund also shill for the foundation's anti-regulatory "worker education" project, known as Prosperity101.

The door swings the other way as well. By means of his regular presence on Fox's airwaves and column at the FoxNation Web site, Americans for Prosperity vice president Phil Kerpen was instrumental in building the case against Obama green jobs adviser Van Jones, who was ultimately forced to resign his White House post.

At last year's RightOnline conference, I asked Americans for Prosperity president Tim Phillips if his group worked in partnership with News Corp, given the presence of so many of its personalities on the roster.

"Not at all, not at all," he replied with a laugh. "The fact is, the Wall Street Journal's my favorite newspaper; I love those guys. I like what they write. I look at Steve Moore and John Fund, and those are two of the smartest guys. But there's no partnership -- financially, understood, or anything else."

News Corp enjoys a similarly friendly -- if similarly informal -- relationship with FreedomWorks. In early October, FreedomWorks was promoting its Take America Back campaign -- a get-out-the-vote effort -- with a photo of Glenn Beck standing before his iconic blackboard. The FreedomWorks' Web site also featured an audio message from Beck: "I've been sayin' it for weeks. If you care about freedom, you must get involved. If you really want to end tyranny in Washington, you must get involved. And the group you need to find out about is FreedomWorks. … Take America back -- FreedomWorks.org." Just days ago, Beck's image was used in a splash screen to solicit contributions for FreedomWorks' PAC.

To Rupert Murdoch, Glenn Beck is much more than a broadcaster; he's Murdoch's lead community organizer. His show has leached revenue since the civil rights group Color of Change launched a boycott of his advertisers, reportedly chasing away at least 100. But his act is far more profitable to News Corp in another way -- by creating the conditions for a stripping away of federal regulations that limit the growth of News Corp and its bottom line. And so Beck's rants become more shrill and his claims more preposterous, whether he is stoking racial fears or recalling that old bogeyman threat of looming socialism -- a theme straight out of the John Birch Society, of which the Kochs' father, Fred, was a founding member.

The Campaigns

In Washington, D.C., Adam Brandon, FreedomWorks' communications director, is bubbling over with excitement at the end of a long, hot July day. "I'm racking up the frequent flyer miles," he says of his relentless weekend trips to train Tea Party activists in how to chalk up wins for candidates FreedomWorks' PAC has endorsed.

FreedomWorks doesn't aim to elect just any Tea Party candidate to office: as with DeMint's Senate Conservatives Fund, its endorsements seem designed to undermine the current GOP establishment, push the party rightward and further an anti-regulatory agenda. Well before others joined in, FreedomWorks embraced far-right insurgencies, notably those of Marco Rubio and Rand Paul. Both endorsements put FreedomWorks at loggerheads with Sen. McConnell, whose candidates -- including his hand-picked protégé in his home state of Kentucky -- were vanquished.

DeMint's PAC spends hefty amounts on behalf of its endorsed candidates, including $447,000 for Rubio and $95,000 for Paul ($95,000). FreedomWorks matches DeMint's cash with ground forces. The PAC runs an online "service center," where, according to FreedomWorks president Matt Kibbe, Tea Partiers "get the tools they need to turn a protest into a sophisticated, turn-out-the-vote effort." Those tools include walking maps, door-hangers, talking points, and "a sophisticated phone-banking system that is going to allow you to make calls in all of our targeted races." If you're an activist in Wisconsin, FreedomWorks can set you up to turn out voters for Rand Paul in Kentucky. Combined, these Tea Party outfits have proven that they have the potential to decide elections.

When I asked whether FreedomWorks' endorsements were chosen in part to undermine McConnell, Brandon declined to answer directly, but his response revealed the intimate ties between his outfit and DeMint's. DeMint has been stalwart on behalf of FreedomWorks' positions, Brandon explained. These include opposition to healthcare and energy reform and labor unions. But DeMint needs more people like him in the Senate in order to create something of a caucus -- "a new power center," Brandon called it.

Their combined might was recently on display in Utah, where DeMint and FreedomWorks joined forces to replace incumbent Republican Senator Bob Bennett. DeMint's PAC and FreedomWorks' PAC each rank among the top twelve donors to Bennett's challenger, Tea Partier Mike Lee.

In Utah, candidates must win delegates at their state party convention; primaries take place only if a run-off is needed. So FreedomWorks helped pack the convention with Tea Party-allied delegates, and Lee showed convention-goers a video endorsement by DeMint. Bennett lost his seat that day, coming in third with 26 percent of the vote. (The remainder was split between Lee and another Tea Party candidate.) Lee prevailed in the subsequent two-way primary, with more help from DeMint's PAC, which has spent $315,000on his behalf, including $184,000 in so-called "independent expenditures," according to FEC filings.

Suppliers and Subsidiaries

While Americans for Prosperity, FreedomWorks and News Corp run the boardroom of Tea Party, Inc., a growing number of national organizations have sprung up to provide a range of services; call them the suppliers. Some have similar names -- Tea Party Patriots, Tea Party Nation, Tea Party Express -- though they compete ferociously. Reed's Faith & Freedom Coalition provides a unique service to Tea Party Inc.: the promise of delivering religious-right voters to its candidates. Like the big players, these groups, too, are run by former Republican officials or political consultants.

Tea Party Patriots, perhaps the most substantial of these groups, was born of FreedomWorks, as co-founder Jenny Beth Martin points out in a FreedomWorks video, and its state chapters do the on-the-ground organizing for FreedomWorks' agenda. Martin, a former Republican political consultant in Georgia, coordinates the group with Mark Meckler, a Northern California attorney who previously ran an online political consultancy with GOP ties.

More flamboyant is Tea Party Express, another name for Our Country Deserves Better, an anti-Obama PAC founded by Howard Kaloogian, the California attorney who orchestrated the recall of Gov. Gray Davis. The group has already weathered controversy -- its spokesperson, radio talk-show host Mark Williams, was forced to exit the organization in July after authoring a demeaning satire of NAACP president Ben Jealous. But Tea Party Express has nevertheless raised $6.6 million this election, according to recent FEC data, making it, in the estimation of the New York Times, "the single biggest independent supporter of Tea Party candidates." And the group has racked up primary victories for Tea Party insurgencies such as Christine O'Donnell in Delaware, who benefitted from $250,000 in Tea Party Express ad buys; Joe Miller in Alaska, who beat incumbent Lisa Murkowski with the aid of $550,000 from the group; and Angle, who has enjoyed nearly $1 million in "independent expenditure" advertising by the group, according to FEC filings.

"Sharron Angle, in my opinion, wouldn't have won [the Republican primary] without the Tea Party Express," California Republican consultant and Tea Party organizer Eric Odom told participants in this year's RightOnline conference.

Reed's Faith & Freedom Coalition, which seeks to unite the Tea Party and the religious right, is provides a unique service to Tea Party Inc.: delivery of religious-right voters to its candidates. On September 11, Reed brought together a few hundred activists for a strategy briefing at Washington, D.C.'s Mayflower Hotel. The event featured speakers from the GOP's glory days, from Karl Rove to Newt Gingrich.There Reed instructed activists on how to "move the needle" when the polls are against you.

"We're building databases of faith-based and fiscal conservatives in every key congressional race, U.S. Senate race or governor's race, and a lot of targeted state legislative races," Reed explained. "Those voters are going to be contacted an average of seven times.We're gonna mail ‘em, we're gonna phone ‘em, if we have an e-mail, we're gonna e-mail ‘em, if we have a cell phone number, we're gonna text-message them.And at the end, we're gonna knock on their door."

-----------

Reed's big announcement of his new Faith & Freedom Coalition took place in August 2009, at an Atlanta rally against health-care reform convened by Americans for Prosperity, the organization fronted by his old business partner, Tim Phillips. FreedomWorks chairman Dick Armey delivered the keynote address, and Fox News contributor Herman Cain made the business case against health-care reform.

Phillips couldn't make it to Atlanta that day. He was stuck in Pittsburgh, at his RightOnline conference, rubbing elbows with the stars of Rupert Murdoch's News Corp.

Sunday, October 24, 2010

The Perfect Storm That Threatens American Democracy

The top one-tenth of one percent of Americans now earn as much as the bottom 120 million of us.
By Robert Reich, Robert Reich's Blog
Posted on October 24, 2010

It’s a perfect storm. And I’m not talking about the impending dangers facing Democrats. I’m talking about the dangers facing our democracy.

First, income in America is now more concentrated in fewer hands than it’s been in 80 years. Almost a quarter of total income generated in the United States is going to the top 1 percent of Americans.

The top one-tenth of one percent of Americans now earn as much as the bottom 120 million of us.

Who are these people? With the exception of a few entrepreneurs like Bill Gates, they’re top executives of big corporations and Wall Street, hedge-fund managers, and private equity managers. They include the Koch brothers, whose wealth increased by billions last year, and who are now funding tea party candidates across the nation.

Which gets us to the second part of the perfect storm. A relatively few Americans are buying our democracy as never before. And they’re doing it completely in secret.

Hundreds of millions of dollars are pouring into advertisements for and against candidates — without a trace of where the dollars are coming from. They’re laundered through a handful of groups. Fred Malek, whom you may remember as deputy director of Richard Nixon’s notorious Committee to Reelect the President (dubbed Creep in the Watergate scandal), is running one of them. Republican operative Karl Rove runs another. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce, a third.

The Supreme Court’s Citizens United vs. the Federal Election Commission made it possible. The Federal Election Commission says only 32 percent of groups paying for election ads are disclosing the names of their donors. By comparison, in the 2006 midterm, 97 percent disclosed; in 2008, almost half disclosed.

We’re back to the late 19th century when the lackeys of robber barons literally deposited sacks of cash on the desks of friendly legislators. The public never knew who was bribing whom.

Just before it recessed the House passed a bill that would require that the names of all such donors be publicly disclosed. But it couldn’t get through the Senate. Every Republican voted against it. (To see how far the GOP has come, nearly ten years ago campaign disclosure was supported by 48 of 54 Republican senators.)

Here’s the third part of the perfect storm. Most Americans are in trouble. Their jobs, incomes, savings, and even homes are on the line. They need a government that’s working for them, not for the privileged and the powerful.

Yet their state and local taxes are rising. And their services are being cut. Teachers and firefighters are being laid off. The roads and bridges they count on are crumbling, pipelines are leaking, schools are dilapidated, and public libraries are being shut.

There’s no jobs bill to speak of. No WPA to hire those who can’t find jobs in the private sector. Unemployment insurance doesn’t reach half of the unemployed.

Washington says nothing can be done. There’s no money left.

No money? The marginal income tax rate on the very rich is the lowest it’s been in more than 80 years. Under President Dwight Eisenhower (who no one would have accused of being a radical) it was 91 percent. Now it’s 36 percent. Congress is even fighting over whether to end the temporary Bush tax cut for the rich and return them to the Clinton top tax of 39 percent.

Much of the income of the highest earners is treated as capital gains, anyway — subject to a 15 percent tax. The typical hedge-fund and private-equity manager paid only 17 percent last year. Their earnings were not exactly modest. The top 15 hedge-fund managers earned an average of $1 billion.

Congress won’t even return to the estate tax in place during the Clinton administration – which applied only to those in the top 2 percent of incomes.

It won’t limit the tax deductions of the very rich, which include interest payments on multi-million dollar mortgages. (Yet Wall Street refuses to allow homeowners who can’t meet mortgage payments to include their primary residence in personal bankruptcy.)

There’s plenty of money to help stranded Americans, just not the political will to raise it. And at the rate secret money is flooding our political system, even less political will in the future.

The perfect storm: An unprecedented concentration of income and wealth at the top; a record amount of secret money flooding our democracy; and a public becoming increasingly angry and cynical about a government that’s raising its taxes, reducing its services, and unable to get it back to work.

We’re losing our democracy to a different system. It’s called plutocracy.

Thursday, September 16, 2010

GOP Civil War: Establishment vs Tea Party

Evan McMorris-Santoro | September 15, 2010

Add Rush Limbaugh to the list of prominent conservatives tearing into Karl Rove's hide today. As Rove continued his tour slamming freshly minted Delaware Republican Senate nominee Christine O'Donnell over the considerable number of skeletons in her closet, Rush was almost literally beside himself with frustration at the idea that anyone -- much less The Architect -- would dare violate the 11th Commandment so brazenly.

O'Donnell's nomination has created deep divisions between the Republican Party and right-wing activists. Last night, Rove bashedO'Donnell -- and her chances of being elected -- and insisted that she's said a lot of "nutty things." He was attacked by some right-wingers for those comments. O'Donnell whacked him back in a televised interview this morning. And then Rove responded to O'Donnell and his right-wing critics, daring them to 'prove me wrong'. Then Palin slammed Rove. Now it's Limbaugh's turn.

"If 51 seats was really the objective -- if getting the majority is really that important, then let's go balls to the wall for Christine O'Donnell!" Limbaugh screamed on his radio show today after playing a clip of Rove's already infamousanti-O'Donnell interview on Hannity last night.

"Why not fight for it?" Limbaugh asked. "Why not fight for it? Castle's OK as the 51st vote but this woman isn't?"

Rush seemed in danger of having an aneurysm at the idea that Rove would do something as heretical as point out that O'Donnell has more than a few very serious character flaws and -- as the polls show -- is a serious underdog against her Democratic opponent in November, in a race that Republicans had once thought was theirs for the taking.

"Everyone I know that saw this was just--they were perplexed and said, 'What's going on? Why is he so mad at a Republican?'" Rush said of Rove. "Where was this anger directed at a Democrat ever?"

Limbaugh then freaked out over all the horrible character flaws about Democrats -- the late Ted Kennedy and President Obama were mentioned -- that Rove has supposedly never pointed out in an interview.

"Our Vice President Joe Biden is a known plagiarist," Rush said. "We're going to talk about Christine O'Donnell's baggage? Where is this criticism of Democrats? Where has it been?"