Saturday, February 26, 2011

How Public Unions Took Taxpayers Hostage

I recently read a blog by Arthur Conley which gave a very good history of the labor movement in America and its connection to the democrats. In the blog he indicated that the chaotic years of the 1960s and '70s are best known by the leading attraction of the news which was antiwar, civil rights and women's rights movements. But there was another "rights" movement, largely ignored by the lying news media, that was a large factor for American labor movement. The looming public-pension crisis that threatens to bankrupt city, county and state governments had its origins in those same years when public employees, already protected by civil-service rules, gained the right to bargain collectively.

Liberals at one time were opposed to public-sector unionism. In 1937 FDR stated that "a strike of public employees manifests nothing less than an intent on their part to prevent or obstruct the operations of Government until their demands are satisfied. Such action, looking toward the paralysis of Government by those who have sworn to support it, is unthinkable and intolerable."

Private-sector unions were also opposed to the idea of public-sector unions. George Meany argued that it was "impossible to bargain collectively with the government." Private-sector unions were very concerned that public-sector labor would be extracting taxes from a public that included their own workers. However, the late 1950s, with the failure of the private-sector labor movements organizing campaigns they gave in and insisted on the necessity of winning the right to organize public employees. While the private-sector was waning the public-sector was increasing in membership.

The first to seize on the political potential of government workers occurred in New York City. A prominent New Deal senator had authored the landmark 1935 Wagner Act, which imposed on private employers the legal duty to bargain collectively with the properly elected union representatives of their employees. New York City, forced by the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (Afscme), gave city workers the right to bargain collectively in 1958.

Democrats turned to a new force, the public-sector unions, as their political machine. This re-election technique caught on at the Kennedy White House and staffers began to develop plans. Kennedy looked to mobilize public-sector workers as a new source of Democratic Party political support. In mid-January 1962, he issued Executive Order 10988, which gave federal workers the right to organize in unions.

The scene in downtown Manhattan during a sanitation workers' strike, 1968. Two young and militant public-sector unions, the American Federation of Teachers and Afscme, both strong supporters of the still nascent civil rights movement, seized the opportunity. Union leaders saw both teachers and African-Americans as second-class citizens fighting the old-line political bosses. They called a brief teachers strike in 1960, and called another strike in 1962 that shifted the balance of power from principals to teachers, where it has remained down to the present.

In 1958, there had been but 15 public-employee strikes nationwide, involving a handful of workers. By 1968, after the old guard in Afscme had been deposed by the so-called young leaders, more than 200,000 union members, mostly in local and state government, were involved in 254 strikes. In 1968, amid rioting, civil rights and antiwar protests, Martin Luther King Jr. backed an Afscme strike by poorly paid, mostly African-American sanitation men in Memphis, Tenn. After King's tragic assassination, the city quickly settled with the union.

In the 1970s, government-worker unions became a political setting for New Leftist, feminist and black activists hoping to carry on in the militant spirit of the 1960s. The divisions within organized labor over the Vietnam War allowed the public-sector unions to take on the declining private unions of the AFL-CIO, whose leaders backed the war. Public-sector unions leadership become a key player in George McGovern's 1972 presidential campaign, and public employees have had a lead role in Democratic Party politics ever since.

Public-employee unionism seemed to gaining membership; Afscme was gaining a thousand workers a week, until the summer of 1975. At that point there was a surge in strikes, and the government unions began to threaten Democratic officeholders. In 1975 New York sanitation workers walked off the job, allowing garbage to pile up in the streets and the city was already in the throes of fiscal crisis. In short order, cops objecting to furloughs imposed by the city's liberal Democratic Mayor shut down the Manhattan side of the Brooklyn Bridge, with marchers carrying signs that read "Cops Out, Crime In" and "Burn City Burn."

On that same year 76,000 Pennsylvania state workers went on strike against the liberal Democratic Governor because of the Governors austerity measures. Afscme's leader in Pennsylvania told his members "Let's go out and close down this God-damned state." And in Seattle, the fireman's union initiated a recall ballot on July 1 directed against the one-time union favorite, Mayor Wes Uhlman, who held back pay hikes in the midst of rising deficits.

Mr. Uhlman narrowly survived and he, like other democrats, calmed the situation by largely caving in to the striker's demands. But a line had been crossed: With New York's near-bankruptcy a visible marker, the peril posed by public-sector unionism became a problem for Democrats as well as Republicans. The fiscal burden of public-employee unions briefly became visible again in the early '80s, when many warned of a looming public-pension crisis. That crisis was averted by the stock market boom that began in 1982-83 and lasted until 2007-08.

It is now back with a vengeance. Wisconsin, Ohio, Indiana and many other states now are in a desperate financial situation because the democrats have given these public-sector unions anything and everything that they have desired!

Restraining the immense clout that government-employee unions have accumulated over the past half-century will be difficult, but not impossible. Civil rights for African-Americans and women was a fulfillment of the principals of the American promise as expressed in the Declaration of Independence. Collective bargaining by public employees was not rooted in deep-seated American tradition.

Instead, the decision to grant this privilege was a political decision designed to enhance the power of a pressure group whose interests, even many liberals assumed, would be at odds with those of the general public. Political decisions can be reversed and in this case conservatives should bring this colossus down.

When public-sector unions act as if they deserve more, than what hard working men and women in the private-sector receive, during this "Great Recession" then we need to take action. The largest percentage of public labor union support has always gone to democrats and because of this fact democrats have always voted for the labor unions. However; the more important fact is that tax payers are forced to pay for these services and benefits without representation!

Politicians need to write a bill that would allow an increase in the government sector pay and benefits only with a vote of the people. This process already occurs in some states and it needs to occur in all states! Otherwise, the tax payer is left out of the equation and the politicians are left with the ability to use this power as a bargaining chip to stay in office.

Thursday, February 17, 2011

The Radical Progressive Mind

In the radical progressive liberals mind "two plus two equals five" and is a slogan used in Orwell's BigGov masterpiece '1984' as an example of an obviously false dogma one must believe, similar to current obviously false slogans by the radical progressive liberal BigGov Party. It is contrasted with the phrase "two plus two makes four", the obvious – but politically inexpedient – truth.

In the book '1984'George Orwell's protagonist, Winston Smith, uses the phrase to wonder if the State might declare "two plus two equals five" as a fact; he ponders whether, if everybody believes in it, does that make it true? If the "ONE" deems it so must it therefore be factual? Smith writes in his log, "Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows." Later in the novel, Smith attempts to use doublethink to teach himself that the statement "2 + 2 = 5" is true, or at least as true as any other answer one could come up with.

Eventually, while undergoing reeducation, Winston declared that he saw five fingers when in fact he only saw four ("Four, five, six - in all honesty I don't know"). The Inner Party interrogator of thought-criminals says, of the mathematically false statement, that control over physical reality is unimportant; so long as one controls their own perceptions to what the 'Party' wills, then any corporeal act is possible. In accordance with the principles of doublethink, "sometimes there are five, sometimes there are three. Sometimes there are all of them at once". In the mind of the radical progressive liberal this is logical thinking and therefore, all things from the "ONE" is truthful and correct and must be protected by all means possible.

This type of thinking has existed in the liberal mindset for centuries and was developed into the current belief that the State was the answer for all the ills of society. During the Third Reich Hitler and his cronies took this idea to a level that had never been seen before and George Orwell stated:
“Nazi theory indeed specifically denies that such a thing as "the truth" exists. […] The implied objective of this line of thought is a nightmare world in which the Leader, or some ruling clique, controls not only the future but the past. If the Leader says of such and such an event, "It never happened"—well, it never happened. If he says that two and two are five—well, two and two are five. This prospect frightens me much more than bombs".

"Two Plus Two Equals Five", which was a slogan used by Stalin's government to predict that the Five year plan would be completed in four years, which for a time appeared widely in Moscow. However, Orwell may also have been influenced by Nazi Reichsmarschall Hermann Göring, who once, in a debatably hyperbolic display of loyalty to Adolf Hitler, declared, "If the Führer wants it, two and two makes five!"

In Nineteen Eighty-Four, Orwell writes:
“In the end the Party would announce that two and two made five, and you would have to believe it. It was inevitable that they should make that claim sooner or later: the logic of their position demanded it. Not merely the validity of experience, but the very existence of external reality, was tacitly denied by their philosophy. The heresy of heresies was common sense. And what was terrifying was not that they would kill you for thinking otherwise, but that they might be right. For, after all, how do we know that two and two make four? Or that the force of gravity works? Or that the past is unchangeable? If both the past and the external world exist only in the mind, and if the mind itself is controllable—what then?”

Victor Hugo said "Now, get seven million five hundred thousand votes to declare that two and two make five, that the straight line is the longest road, that the whole is less than its part; get it declared by eight millions, by ten millions, by a hundred millions of votes, you will not have advanced a step." The idea seems to have been significant to Russian literature and culture under the rule of Stalin. Ivan Turgenev wrote in prayer, one of his Poems in Prose "Whatever a man prays for, he prays for a miracle. Every prayer reduces itself to this: Great God, grant that twice two be not four."

Also similar sentiments are said to be among Leo Tolstoy's last words when urged to convert back to the Russian Orthodox Church:
"Even in the valley of the shadow of death, two and two do not make six." Even turn-of-the-century Russian newspaper columnists used the phrase to suggest the moral confusion of the age".

In Ayn Rand's 'Atlas Shrugged', the hero John Galt posits that "the noblest act you have ever performed is the act of your mind in the process of grasping that two and two make four". However, having said that we must stay alert at all times because the Devil is hiding in the details! If we lose sight of the importance of our freedoms then the Devil will be there to take then away and once this happens there is no guarantee that we can ever get them back.

It seems that when serfs are placed under the rule of BigGov there will always be measures or rules that are made to keep the serfs alike so that BigGov can keep control. The rules of the "ONE" have to be adhered to so that chaos does not become evident and upset the rules! This aspect really is confusing since that usually is how BigGov gets started in the first place. BigGov steps up when radical progressive liberals are able to create chaos and then place their special rules to fix the chaos. This is where Mr. Alinsky stepped in and developed his 'Rules for Radicals' and then the usual suspects stepped in and trained a large group of progressive radicals on how to use his playbook.

Modern America will become something that Americans have never been before if we allow these radicals to transform America as they are trying to do right now. I would urge you to read George Orwell's books or Ayn Rands' books or similar authors and compare what these authors are saying to what is going on here in America. Do not for a second think that this could never occur in America because it can! Liberals have the defective mind set that will allow them to continue to forge ahead until that day WE allow it to happen. The radicals remind me of a dog with a bone.

Friday, February 11, 2011

Radical Marxist Progressives

Rules for Radicals By Saul Alinsky - 1971 Opening page - Dedication by Saul Alinsky has a statement that has a dark meaning: “Lest we forget at least an over-the-shoulder acknowledgment to the very first radical: from all our legends, mythology, and history... the first radical known to man who rebelled against the establishment and did it so effectively that he at least won his own kingdom — Lucifer.” We could not say it better than the Devil himself in describing how modern Marxists think about what they are doing in America! Mr. Alinsky states the obvious, because that is exactly what the Radical Progressives want; their own kingdom.

This is so typical of progressives who have this arrogant attitude that they are so much more than the rest of us! They feel that they are so smart and that they have this innate ability to know and understand what the rest of us need to survive in this life. They immediately can predict and provide our every need so that the serfs need not concern ourselves with things because BIG government will be there for all the serfs in the serfdom.

There have been many varieties of socialism pop up during the past millenniums that one has to be surprised by its longevity. An old adage states that if an idea keeps getting repeated with the same results that someone needs to find a better idea! However, if nothing else progressives are tenacious when they get an idea; it reminds me of a dog with a bone.

The Radical Progressive Liberals (New Democrats) have found their new idea in Marxism. Those that studied the Marxist Theory and felt that it was something that would work to improve American society must have a genetic defect or a learning problem. The first thing that Marxism requires is to dissemble the religious foundation that exists in America. I realize that they are trying to do this at this moment but with only a limited success. However, all it takes for evil to win is for religious men and women to do nothing. The fact is that there seems to be a lot of resistance now against this satanic Marxist theory in most churches. I will save this new version of evil that is attempting to invade our churches for another blog.

Mr. Alinskys theory has been able to brainwash many progressive politicians into believing that his 'Rules for Radicals' holds promise for the future of America. These politicians drink this Kool-aid and believe and then "Hope" that Mr. Alinsky is correct because they want to 'Change' America. With this 'Change' they want to become the elite leadership that helps the serfdom become all that it can be! It is so easy to sell the serfs on this bad idea because after all the serfs are only serfs and we know their inabilities and how the leaders love to care for them. The 'One' will help level the playing field for them and improve their lives with the aid of everyone's money that the 'One' has.

The Serfdom will soon be able to support all serfs at the same lower level while all the elites sit back in their upper levels and feel good about all that they have accomplished. While Rome burns the elites continue on without a care because after all they have put the serfs all on the same lower level, and this is good sayeth the 'One'. The 'One' told them that this would be done and the 'One made it so. You must understand, sayeth the 'One', all on the lower level are being taken care of and won't have to worry about working to get to the upper level. Life goes on without a care until the evil satanic monster arrives!

These elitists learn their power tactics well from their studies of Mr. Alinsky.
The following are statements from Mr. Alinsky:
1. "Power is not only what you have, but what the enemy thinks you have."
2. "Never go outside the expertise of your people. When an action or tactic is outside the experience of the people, the result is confusion, fear and retreat.... [and] the collapse of communication”.
3. "Whenever possible, go outside the expertise of the enemy. Look for ways to increase insecurity, anxiety and uncertainty”. (This happens all the time. Watch how many organizations under attack are blind-sided by seemingly irrelevant arguments that they are then forced to address.)
4. "Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules. You can kill them with this, for they can no more obey their own rules than the Christian church can live up to Christianity."
5. "Ridicule is man's most potent weapon. It is almost impossible to counteract ridicule. Also it infuriates the opposition, which then reacts to your advantage."
6. "A good tactic is one your people enjoy."
7. "A tactic that drags on too long becomes a drag. Man can sustain militant interest in any issue for only a limited time...."
8. "Keep the pressure on, with different tactics and actions, and utilize all events of the period for your purpose."
9. "The threat is usually more terrifying than the thing itself." 10. "The major premise for tactics is the development of operations that will maintain a constant pressure upon the opposition. It is this unceasing pressure that results in the reactions from the opposition that are essential for the success of the campaign."
11. "If you push a negative hard and deep enough, it will break through into its counterside... every positive has its negative."
12. "The price of a successful attack is a constructive alternative."
13. “Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.”

In conflict tactics there are certain rules that [should be regarded] as universal. One is that the opposition must be singled out as the target and 'frozen.'... "...any target can always say, 'Why do you center on me when there are others to blame as well?' When you 'freeze the target,' you disregard these [rational but distracting] arguments.... Then, as you zero in and freeze your target and carry out your attack, all the 'others' come out of the woodwork very soon. They become visible by their support of the target...' "One acts decisively only in the conviction that all the angels are on one side and all the devils on the other." Mr. Alinsky apparently learned the jargon of Christianity even if he failed to understand the concept.

The same failure to really understand the concept of Christianity afflicts all the other radicals. Radicals have a plan to persuade the serfs by a continuous use of propaganda that is delivered by their useful idiots and the compliant news media. It is apparent that we must develop a counter plan to use against these radicals and become activists. Remember that all is necessary for evil to win is for good people to do nothing. Thank God for the Tea Party because they will save the day, provided they don't become part of the elitist group and think they have the only answers. If the tea party groups demand their way or the highway then the radicals will win! The leadership of the current party must also be held accountable and forced to comply with the conservative ideals.

As a former democrat I know how they will fight with everything they have so that they win. They will use every trick in their playbook. The lame street media will constantly push every negative tidbit available plus they will make up the rest. The tea Party should counter this effort with a strong push in all local areas, making sure that they promote with quiet persuasion, which is an Alinsky rule. Beat them with their own game but this will require reading Mr. Saul Alinsky and applying the message when possible. The Alinsky tactics can and should be used by conservative activists. Activists can select targets to freeze; for example advertisers with any liberal media would be a great choice. The liberals have used this tactic against conservative advertisers successfully for decades. It is now time for conservatives to become activists; I realize that this may be uncomfortable for many but I must repeat if good people do nothing then evil will win!

Tuesday, February 8, 2011

Radical Progressive Liberal Propaganda Techniques

Propaganda is a specific type of message presentation, aimed at serving an agenda, even if the message conveys true information, progressives will make it partisan and fail to paint a complete picture. The book ‘Propaganda and Persuasion’ defines propaganda as "the deliberate, systematic attempt to shape perceptions, manipulate cognitions, and direct behavior to achieve a response that furthers the desired intent of the propagandist."

Propaganda shares many techniques with advertising and public relations; in fact, advertising and PR can be said to be propaganda promoting a commercial product. As commonly understood, however, the term usually refers to political or nationalist messages. It can take the form of leaflets, posters, TV broadcasts, newspapers or radio broadcasts. In a narrower and more common use of the term, propaganda refers to deliberately false or misleading information that supports a political cause or the interests of those in power.

The propagandist seeks to change the way people understand an issue or situation, for the purpose of changing their actions and expectations in ways that are desirable to the interest group. In this sense, propaganda serves as a corollary to censorship, in which the same purpose is achieved, not by filling people's heads with false information, but by preventing people from knowing true information. This currently goes on with the news media and the public would not know the difference were it not for the electronic media that lets the public know what really is happening.

What sets propaganda apart from other forms of advocacy is the willingness of the propagandist to change people's understanding through deception and confusion, rather than discussion and understanding. The leaders of an organization know the information to be one sided or untrue but this may not be true for the rank and file members who help to disseminate the propaganda.

With the progressives the fact that something is not true does not matter, what is important to them are the results. Like the Marxist beliefs that they adhere to, ‘the end justifies the means’. Progressives are no longer afraid to show their true colors and therefore carry their red flags with pride.

A number of techniques are used to create messages which are persuasive, but false. Many of these same techniques can be found under logical fallacies since propagandists use arguments which, although sometimes convincing, are not necessarily valid.

Some time has been spent analyzing the means, by which propaganda messages are transmitted, but it's clear that information dissemination strategies only become propaganda strategies when coupled with propagandistic messages. Identifying these propaganda messages is a necessary prerequisite to studying the methods by which those messages are spread. That's why it is essential to have some knowledge of the following techniques for generating propaganda:

Appeal to fear: Appeals to fear seeks to build support by instilling fear in the general population - for example Joseph Goebbels exploited Theodore Kaufman's ‘Germany Must Perish!’ to claim that the Allies sought the extermination of the German people.
Appeal to authority: Appeals to authority cite prominent figures to support a position idea, argument, or course of action.
Obtain disapproval: This technique is used to get the audience to disapprove of an action or idea by suggesting the idea is popular with groups hated, feared, or held in contempt by the target audience. Thus, if a group which supports a policy is led to believe that undesirable, subversive, or contemptible people also support it; the members of the group might decide to change their position.
Rationalization: Individuals or groups may use favorable generalities to rationalize questionable acts or beliefs. Vague and pleasant phrases are often used to justify such actions or beliefs.
Intentional vagueness: Generalities are deliberately vague so that the audience may supply its own interpretations. The intention is to move the audience by use of undefined phrases, without analyzing their validity or
attempting to determine their reasonableness or application
Labeling: This technique attempts to arouse prejudices in an audience by labeling the object of the propaganda campaign as something the target
audience fears, hates, loathes, or finds undesirable.
Scapegoating: Assigning blame to an individual or group that isn't really
responsible, thus alleviating feelings of guilt from responsible parties
and/or distracting attention from the need to fix the problem for which
blame is being assigned.
Virtue words: These are words in the value system of the target audience which tend to produce a positive image when attached to a person or issue. Peace, happiness, security, wise leadership, freedom, etc., are virtue words.
Slogans: A slogan is a brief striking phrase that may include labeling and stereotyping. If ideas can be sloganized, they should be, as good slogans are self-perpetuating memes. See also doublespeak, information warfare, meme, and psyops.

Common methods for transmitting propaganda messages include news reports, government reports, historical revision, theater, books, leaflets, movies, radio and television, and posters. Some of the most effective propaganda techniques work by misdirecting or distracting the public's finite attention away from important issues. It's important to read between the lines of the news and see what isn't being reported, or what is reported once, quietly, and not followed up. In an age of information overload, distraction techniques can as effective as active propaganda.

One way to test for distraction is to look for items that appear repeatedly in foreign press (from neutral and hostile countries) and that don't appear in your own. But beware of deliberately placed lies that are repeated with the hope that people will believe it if it is repeated often enough.

Politicians use many types of propaganda techniques to mislead and confuse voters. Today’s voters must be versed in the many types of information management that is used by the government, politicians, news media, and others that are attempting to control how the public thinks!!! The public must understand that the elite leadership of the progressives thinks that the public is stupid and gullible and will therefore believe anything that they say.

I will try to convey these various types of propaganda on this web site and hopefully we can all begin to see the real picture of what is going on in our country. The American people are being controlled by the liberal news media along with the progressives and their stated goal is to establish BIG GOVERNMENT that is led by these elite progressives.