Below we see MOVEON co-opted all of LEFT social progressive talking points----while installing far-right wing global banking 5% freemason/Greek pols and players KILLING all those CORE VALUES.
'This is MoveOn
We are changing our look and lifting up our core values, like equality, sustainability, justice, and love. We are democracy in action and we stand for people-powered progress. We are MoveOn'.
Today's US young adults have only experienced these few decades of far-right wing Clinton neo-liberalism as DEMOCRATIC PARTY. These political machines are built by global banking to silence REAL 99% POPULIST MOVEMENTS. Same thing happened with REAGAN/Bush neo-liberal/neo-con political machines silencing REAL right wing conservatives in 1990s.
This happened in 1990s when Clinton was consolidating all US media corporations and corporatizing all US public university campuses. All this hit hard over only a few decades-----all this can be VOIDED if 99% WE THE PEOPLE hit hard NOW.
This is MoveOn
We are changing our look and lifting up our core values, like equality, sustainability, justice, and love. We are democracy in action and we stand for people-powered progress. We are MoveOn. YOU TUBE
REAL left social progressive voices may have been silenced from mainstream media and universities---but we have been shouting these few decades educating on REAL LEFT 99% POPULIST policy goals. We discussed over over two decades how far-right wing global banking 1% would be morphing from PRETENDING to be CENTER LEFT----neo-liberals----to PRETENDING to be far-left MARXISTS and we KNEW our right wing Republicans taken by REAGAN/BUSH would be morphing into far-right wing LIBERTARIANS.
We shared yesterday the article showing BLADES and MOVEON making that TRANSFORMATION by partnering with LIBERTARIANS. MOVEON partnered these few decades with BUSH neo-cons-----now they are MOVING FORWARD as global corporate campuses, GLOBAL FACTORIES the size of US cities fill US FOREIGN ECONOMIC ZONES ----wanting to bring Chinese-style MAO-MARXISM to those massive worker dormitories, massive factory floors.
THIS IS WHAT MOVEON-----WHETHER WORKING AS CLINTON NEO-LIBERAL POLITICAL MACHINE OR NOW BERNIE SANDERS ET AL 'OUR REVOLUTION' POLITICAL MACHINE CALL-----CORPORATE SUSTAINABILITY.
Corporate sustainability is a WORLD BANK UNITED NATIONS term for maximizing corporate profits and competition all wrapped in ENVIRONMENTALISM/GREEN talking points.
MOVEON is a FAR-RIGHT WING GLOBAL BANKING 1% political machine----NOT left social progressive ---NOT far-left socialism.
MoveOn Members Vote Overwhelmingly to Endorse Bernie Sanders in Democratic Primary
By Brian Stewart. Tuesday, January 12 2016
Sanders won the group’s endorsement with more than 78% of the vote, shattering MoveOn records with most votes cast and largest margin of victory.
MoveOn will mobilize in support of Sanders with initial focus on turning out 43,000 Iowa and 30,000 New Hampshire MoveOn members—early states where polling shows a neck-and-neck race just weeks out.
*** Read More from MoveOn Executive Director Ilya Sheyman on Medium: http://bit.ly/1ZpVxaU ***
Members of MoveOn.org Political Action, one of the nation’s largest and most influential grassroots groups, have voted overwhelmingly to endorse Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders and join the political revolution backing the Vermont Senator at a crucial juncture in the presidential contest. Sanders gained an overwhelming 78.6 percent of the 340,665 votes cast by MoveOn members.
Fellow Democrats Hillary Clinton and Martin O’Malley secured 14.6% and 0.9%, respectively, and 5.9% of votes were cast in favor of not endorsing. 340,665 total votes were cast, marking the most of any MoveOn endorsement vote.
“This is a massive vote in favor of Bernie Sanders, showing that grassroots progressives across the country are excited and inspired by his message and track record of standing up to big money and corporate interests to reclaim our democracy for the American people,” said MoveOn.org Political Action Executive Director Ilya Sheyman. “MoveOn members are feeling the Bern. We will mobilize aggressively to add our collective people power to the growing movement behind the Sanders campaign, starting with a focus on voter turnout in Iowa and New Hampshire.”
See a post on Medium from MoveOn’s Sheyman on the vote: http://bit.ly/1ZpVxaU
Sheyman and MoveOn staff will announce the results of the vote in an email to members on Tuesday.
“I’m proud to have MoveOn and its community of millions of members join our people-powered campaign,” Bernie Sanders said. “MoveOn has spent more than 17 years bringing people together to fight for progressive change and stand up against big money interests. MoveOn’s fight to give the American people a voice in our political system was reflected in the group’s internal democratic process. I’m humbled by their support and welcome MoveOn’s members to the political revolution.”
WE HAVE YET TO FIGURE OUT HOW GLOBAL BANKING 1% UNITED NATIONS/WORLD BANK 'OUR REVOLUTION' MOVING FORWARD US FOREIGN ECONOMIC ZONES AND GLOBAL FACTORIES IS 'FIGHTING CORPORATE INTERESTS'.
In the decisive weeks leading up to the first votes of this presidential campaign in Iowa and New Hampshire, MoveOn is poised to mobilize thousands of volunteers, make thousands of phone calls to potential voters, and recruit more small-dollar donors to support Sanders. MoveOn’s first priority will be turning out its 43,000 members in Iowa and 30,000 members in New Hampshire—the first caucus and primary states, where polling shows the candidates running neck-and-neck.
“MoveOn members’ endorsement of Bernie Sanders is a natural progression from the Run Warren Run campaign and so much of the work MoveOn members have done in recent years to elevate issues of economic and other forms of inequality,” Sheyman said. “We’re ready to fight alongside Bernie Sanders and other progressive populists to take on Wall Street and corporate special interests to make sure our economy and our country work for everyone.”
Here’s what some MoveOn members had to say in voting to endorse Sanders:
“His refusal to accept the status quo of the wealthiest Americans using their power to influence politicians matters to me. If we’re going to push back against the rising oligarchy in our country, we need people like Bernie Sanders representing us in government.” – Matt R., Reston, VA
“In a nutshell, he exemplifies the ‘We the People’ style of democracy I believe in. He has stood by and with the people, supporting women, people of color, LGBTQ, seniors, and the poor against those who look to subjugate these historically oppressed groups for profit.” – Natalie R., Claremont, CA
“He represents integrity. He was also right about Iraq and I prefer his stance on foreign policy. I feel that he is concerned with getting our country on track and not getting us in more wars.” – Janekee C., Davenport, FL
“I voted for MoveOn.org to endorse Bernie Sanders for president because he represents the progressive movement like this organization. His views align perfectly with my own—wealth inequality, a living wage, job creation, Wall Street reform, racial justice, women’s and LBGT rights, college without debt, climate change, and peaceful solutions to prevent war, such as his support for the Iran deal.” – Terri D., Brookfield, WI
The presidential primary endorsement is just the second in the 17-year history of the group, which has a track record of using people power to help win progress on progressive priorities and to help endorsed candidates at all levels win elections.
In 2004, MoveOn declined to endorse any Democratic candidate for president during the primaries after a vote of the membership showed Howard Dean leading with 44 percent, but no candidate meeting the endorsement threshold. In 2008, shortly before the Super Tuesday primaries, MoveOn members endorsed Barack Obama with a vote of 70 percent and then raised funds and mobilized volunteers to support him. In 2012, members voted to endorse Obama in his re-election bid.
The endorsement builds on the work done through the Run Warren Run campaign, a joint effort by MoveOn and Democracy for America that was suspended in June of 2015. That effort engaged more than 365,000 supporters, and included offices and paid staff in Iowa and New Hampshire, hundreds of on-the-ground events, and major endorsements from dozens of elected officials, celebrities, and media outlets.
MoveOn has committed to running a purely positive campaign in support of Sanders. After the Democratic National Convention this summer, MoveOn will work to unite progressives around widely popular progressive priorities to help the eventual Democratic nominee keep a Republican out of the White House.
MoveOn.org Political Action represents the collective will of MoveOn’s members at the ballot box by helping to elect progressive candidates.
Below we see these same political machines being built in our US right wing politics-----we have known these few decades of CLINTON/BUSH/OBAMA that what is called THE TEA PARTY was far-right wing LIBERTARIAN controlled by global corporations ----while Clinton neo-liberals controlled the FINANCIAL sector---banking and global technology. They are two heads of same global 1% OLD WORLD KINGS AND QUEENS' ONE WORLD ONE GOVERNANCE coin-----so, MARK MECKLER of course provided cover for far-right wing Clinton neo-liberals by continually calling they and global banking 1% policy goals ----LEFT WING GROUPS. All think tanks, all consumer groups, all environmental groups, all labor groups these few decades controlled by FAR-RIGHT WING.
Study Confirms Tea Party Was Created by Big Tobacco and ...www.huffingtonpost.com/brendan-demelle/study...
A new academic study confirms that front groups with longstanding ties to the tobacco industry and the billionaire Koch brothers planned the formation of the Tea Party movement more than a decade
Since REAL right wing conservatives don't like LIBERTARIANS any more than our REAL left social progressives like NEO-LIBERALS-----MARK MECKLER will never use the term LIBERTARIAN ----he uses the talking point----CITIZENS FOR SELF-GOVERNMENT touting the need for a CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION to take our US Constitution back to COLONIAL days. Who were CITIZENS in America back in colonial days? The global EAST INDIA CORPORATION and OLD WORLD KINGS AND QUEENS.
'Levin: Unions, environmental groups, left-wing think tanks, so-called consumer groups, a whole panoply of the left'.
So, both far-right wing global banking 1% BLADES and her MOVEON----and far-right wing global banking 1% MARK MERKLER with his TEA PARTY PATRIOTS are working for the same global banking 1% and the same goals---ONE WORLD ONE GOVERNANCE for only the global 1% OLD WORLD KINGS AND QUEENS.
Mark Meckler is one of the nation’s most effective grassroots activists. He co-founded the Tea Party Patriots and served as its national coordinator. Upon leaving Tea Party Patriots, Mark founded Citizens for Self-Governance in 2012 to focus on growing the nation’s bipartisan self-governance movement. Mark appears regularly on a wide variety of television outlets, including MSNBC, ABC, NBC, Fox News, CNN, Bloomberg, Fox Business and the BBC. He is the co-author of Tea Party Patriots: The Second American Revolution, and writes regularly on Breitbart, The American Spectator, and SelfGovern.com. He also is an attorney who specializes in internet privacy law.
Mark and his wife live in Northern California with their two teenage children where they share their love of the outdoors, mountain-biking, soccer and horses.
CITIZENS FOR SELF-GOVERNMENT as OPEN BORDERS SANCTUARY CITIES/STATES ARE BOTH WORKING TO BREAK DOWN UNITED STATES AS A FEDERAL SOVEREIGN NATION----CREATING US FOREIGN ECONOMIC ZONES ACTING INDEPENDENTLY RULED BY GLOBAL CORPORATE TRIBUNALS.
Without coincidence our FAKE far-right wing Clinton neo-liberals and OUR REVOLUTION are also calling for a CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION.
Mark Meckler with Levin on Convention of States: ‘This Is the Battle of Our Generation, Literally’
By Craig Millward | August 20, 2018 | 3:03 PM EDT
Mark Levin, Mark Meckler and Tom Coburn on "Life Liberty & Levin" on Fox News. (Screenshot)
On nationally syndicated radio talk show host Mark Levin’s Fox News Show “Life, Liberty & Levin” on Sunday, Citizens for Self Governance President and Founder of the “Convention of States” Project Mark Meckler told Levin that the Convention of States is the “battle of our generation, literally” between the progressive and constitutionalist vision of the future.
“[T]his is the battle of our generation, literally, because the question is: the progressive vision of the future or the founders and the constitutionalists vision of the future,” Mark Meckler told Mark Levin.
Below is a transcript between Mark Levin, Mark Meckler and Former Senator Tom Coburn (R-Okla.):
Mark Levin: “Isn’t this the big battle between constitutionalism and progressivism because the progressives reject, at least, as I said, their intellectual forefathers, the Constitution? They do not like the way it's set up. They want centralized decision-making like they had in Europe, Hagel, Marx, whatever you want to call it, socialism, communism, soft communism.
NO US FOUNDING FATHERS IN ONE WORLD ONE GOVERNANCE EAST INDIA CORPORATIONS MEETS OLD WORLD KINGS AND QUEENS' CONSTITUTION MOVING FORWARD.
“This separation of powers stuff, where individuals make decisions – individuals are not allowed to make decisions. Decisions have to be made for the general good, the community. Isn't that ultimately the battle that we're facing right now?”
Former Senator Tom Coburn: “Absolutely, and that’s the direction we're going. And with that comes the loss of liberty, the loss of decision-making, the loss of freedom in the long term and tremendous debt. I mean, how do you think we got to $22 trillion in debt?
Well, let's see. BUSH/CHENEY declared there is nothing bad about national debt----they ran up several billion in national debt then OBAMA super-sized it with US TREASURY BOND FRAUD which Republican much-loved JP MORGAN was top gun.
“You can take some of it for the war in the Middle East, but the rest of it is members of congress expanding social programs without raising the revenue to pay for them. I mean, that's why we’re where we are. And that's nothing but pure socialism. We just didn't tax to pay for it.”
Mark Meckler: “And Mark, this is the battle of our generation, literally, because the question is the progressive vision of the future or the founders and the constitutionalists vision of the future. And the progressives are aligning against this. Hundreds of groups are literally speaking out against it. We see new pieces every day. They're attacking it in the culture, in The Atlantic and Esquire.”
Levin: Unions, environmental groups, left-wing think tanks, so-called consumer groups, a whole panoply of the left.
Meckler: “Over 250 of them signed a press release together attacking this saying it is the most dangerous thing that could happen in America. What they said— They don’t usually tell the truth. They actually said something truthful. They said, ‘This is intended to reverse 115 years of progressivism,’ and we say, ‘Yes, it is.’”
'Mark Meckler, the president of Citizens for Self Governance, the nonprofit organization that hosted the event, was interviewed by people pretending to be journalists covering the day’s events as if they were the political moment of the century'
Right-Wing Billionaires Are Buying Themselves a New Constitution
Days before the first debate between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump, as protests at Standing Rock intensified and the costliest wildfire in United States history burned across Big Sur, some 150 current and former state legislators gathered in Colonial Williamsburg for a weekend of role play—to debate amendments to the U.S. constitution. The event was led by Ken Ivory, a state representative from Utah.
“Like air in a tire, gas will expand to fill the space that is given to it. Government, like that, expands to the limit that it’s checked. Left unchecked, government expands limitlessly,” he told those gathered before him, according to a video later posted on YouTube. Addressing them for the last time, after several days of debate that culminated in passing three proposed (fake) amendments, he said, “It’s time for us to be leaders among leaders, to take this back, this spirit that we’ve felt--the beauty of self-governance.”
It was a role-playing exercise at a historical theme park, but what the participants were acting out was not a homage to the past, but a vision of a radical future—and one which they are closer than ever to realizing. A nationwide political movement, fueled by millions of dollars in political dark money and guided by some of the most powerful and influential figures on the right, has come historically close to invoking a previously unused constitutional provision, which could put the entire structure of American rights and government in play. At a moment when political norms and institutions are already being stretched to their limits, the advocates see an opening to breach those limits altogether.
The mock convention included simulated media coverage: After proceedings came to a close, Mark Meckler, the president of Citizens for Self Governance, the nonprofit organization that hosted the event, was interviewed by people pretending to be journalists covering the day’s events as if they were the political moment of the century. “You have the power to bypass the president, Congress, the Supreme Court—to throttle down the federal government to get it out of our lives and to get it back to what the Founders intended,” Meckler said, speaking directly into the camera. “Anything is possible. We are the impossible nation. We obviously had the Lord’s wind in our sails when our nation was founded.”
He shared a story about his wife, whose favorite Founding Father is James Madison, visiting Colonial Williamsburg while they were looking for a location to hold the simulated convention. As they walked through the historically correct streets, she prayed for a sign—and lo, she came upon an actor dressed as Madison. Colonial Williamsburg was the place to hold the simulated convention. “We have a chance to do something extraordinary,” Meckler continued. “We have a chance to save this republic from the fate that has faced every other republic. They’ve all gone extinct. We have an opportunity because the Founders gave us a tool.”
That tool is Article V of the United States Constitution, which governs the passage of amendments. Meckler, Ivory, and their allies believe that the federal government has become tyrannical, and that Congress is too corrupt ever to limit its own (or the executive’s) powers; the framers of the Constitution anticipated this possibility, and included in Article V a provision that would allow state legislatures to circumvent Washington, D.C., altogether.
Hmmm, US right wing spent these few decades and used PRESIDENTIAL EXECUTIVE ORDER to ignore all of last century's US Constitution and its AMENDMENTS----now they find a reason to create AMENDMENTS?
“We have a chance to save this republic from the fate that has faced every other republic. They’ve all gone extinct. We have an opportunity because the Founders gave us a tool.”
Since its ratification in 1788, the United States Constitution has been amended 27 times. Under Article V, each of those amendments was supported by two thirds of the members of the both the House of Representatives and the Senate and then ratified by at least three quarters of the states. The article allows a second route to proposing amendments: “On the application of the legislatures of two thirds of the several states, [Congress] shall call a convention for proposing amendments.” Proponents of such a convention present it as an Alexandrian solution to the Gordian knot of federalism and states’ rights—cutting away the tangle of government bureaucracy they argue has increasingly limited Americans’ freedom.
According to Meckler, the idea to push for an Article V convention was not his own but that of Michael Farris, a religious conservative and founder of the Home School Legal Defense Association (HSLDA) who now serves as the CEO and general counsel of Alliance Defending Freedom, one of the largest and most influential entities on the Christian right, and the founder of “God’s Harvard,” Patrick Henry College—the alma mater of many Convention of States staffers. Farris is himself registered as a Convention of States lobbyist; he has long pressed for a “parental rights” amendment that would effectively render children their parents’ property, enshrining in the Constitution parents’ right to beat their children.
This is all in the service of training them to “think God’s thoughts,” as HLDSA’s late senior counsel Chris Klicka put it. Klicka, an early legal theorist of the homeschooling movement, wrote in Home Schooling: The Right Choice that “God describes our children as arrows in the hands of a warrior!...Have we diligently crafted our ‘arrows’ so they can be trusted to hit their target as we launch them into the world?”
The plan reaches far beyond advocates of legalized spanking. Right-wing media personalities like Glenn Beck and Mark Levin—the latter of whom looms large enough in the mind of Trump to have inspired his incorrect accusation on Twitter that Barack Obama ordered surveillance against him--have advocated for an Article V convention. (Levin’s Liberty Amendments: Restoring the American Republic was a New York Times best-seller.) Even ostensibly moderate Republicans like Jeb Bush, John Kasich, and Marco Rubio have expressed their support for the idea of holding an Article V convention. Former Senator Tom Coburn now travels to statehouses across the country, persuading legislators to pass resolutions asking Congress to call a convention. “I’ve dedicated the rest of my life to getting this done,” Coburn said in Williamsburg.
The passion that Meckler, Coburn, and especially Ivory express on this topic might suggest that the Convention of States Project emerged from a grassroots movement to bypass a phlegmatic Congress, or a streak of extremism outside the mainstream Republican party’s movements and machinations. In fact, the same billionaires who ushered in the ruling hard-right Republican majorities over the past ten years are funding and betting on the success of this project, and its key figures are using a thicket of connected dark money groups to do it.
Meckler himself is no stranger to dark money; he is a veteran of the anti-tax, anti-government movement’s failed opposition to Obamacare; he ran the Tea Party Patriots group, an ostensibly grassroots conservative organization that Rolling Stone revealed in 2009 was in fact controlled by the large and well-funded lobbying group FreedomWorks. Meckler resigned from FreedomWorks in 2012, shortly after being arrested for trying to board an airplane at Laguardia Airport in New York with a semi-automatic handgun, which he was permitted to carry in California, in his luggage. He pleaded guilty to disorderly conduct. (“To say that I was stunned would be an understatement,” he wrote in a blog post at the time. “It was a nightmare that I can scarcely describe to you.”)
Every article we read these few decades from MOVEON/CLINTON NEO-LIBERAL media outlet shouting against those dastardly KOCH BROTHERS and TEA PARTY and not shouting against far-right wing global banking 1% Clinton neo-liberals----fast becoming the BILLIONAIRES of banking and technology-----we KNEW were far-right wing players.
Isn't it too late to STOP MOVING FORWARD now that US politics are controlled by global 1% OLD WORLD KINGS AND QUEENS global billionaires? Of course not-----we are watching as US politics MORPHS into a NEXT GENERATION----our 99% US WE THE PEOPLE both right wing and left wing can STOP THIS TRANSFORMATION.
This is why OBAMA era tied our young adults to all those far-right wing global NGOs PRETENDING to be 99% populist -----our young adults whether US citizens black, white, and brown citizens our our new to US immigrants must stop supporting FAKE LEFT SOCIAL PROGRESSIVE GROUPS if you are LABOR AND JUSTICE and FAKE RIGHT WING PATRIOT SELF-GOVERNANCE NGOs if you are right wing conservatives.
IF OUR 99% OF WE THE PEOPLE ARE NOT SUPPORTING THESE FAKE POLITICAL GROUPS---THEY DO NOT HAVE POWER.
If you are putting your fist up under the guise of #RESIST ---you are supporting far-right wing corporate fascism---HITLER, STALIN, MAO------just as are TEA PARTY LIBERTARIAN PATRIOTS.
The Tea Party and Move On: Finding Common Ground? | Institute of Politics
Published on Apr 24, 2014
Joan Blades, the co-founder of MoveOn and a MomsRising.org, joined National Tea Party Patriots co-founder and Citizens for Self Governance founder Mark Meckler for a "Challenges to Democracy" discussion. The panel was moderated by Harvard Kennedy School Professor and Ash Center Co-Director Archon Fung and focused on the importance of hearing from different perspectives, democratic participation, and the common ground between conservative and liberal opinions.
Oh, look---this political event occurs on far-right wing global 1% OLD WORLD KINGS AND QUEENS corporate campus---HARVARD. This capture of US political machines these few decades on right and left are why today 99% WE THE PEOPLE black, white, and brown citizens have NO POLITICAL VOICE---only global banking 5% freemason/Greek players working for these global 1%.
Opinion | Op-Ed Columnist
The Billionaires Bankrolling the Tea Party
By FRANK RICHAUG. 28, 2010
ANOTHER weekend, another grass-roots demonstration starring Real Americans who are mad as hell and want to take back their country from you-know-who. Last Sunday the site was Lower Manhattan, where they jeered the “ground zero mosque.” This weekend, the scene shifted to Washington, where the avatars of oppressed white Tea Party America, Glenn Beck and Sarah Palin, were slated to “reclaim the civil rights movement” (Beck’s words) on the same spot where the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. had his dream exactly 47 years earlier.
Vive la révolution!
There’s just one element missing from these snapshots of America’s ostensibly spontaneous and leaderless populist uprising: the sugar daddies who are bankrolling it, and have been doing so since well before the “death panel” warm-up acts of last summer. Three heavy hitters rule. You’ve heard of one of them, Rupert Murdoch. The other two, the brothers David and Charles Koch, are even richer, with a combined wealth exceeded only by that of Bill Gates and Warren Buffett among Americans. But even those carrying the Kochs’ banner may not know who these brothers are.
Their self-interested and at times radical agendas, like Murdoch’s, go well beyond, and sometimes counter to, the interests of those who serve as spear carriers in the political pageants hawked on Fox News. The country will be in for quite a ride should these potentates gain power, and given the recession-battered electorate’s unchecked anger and the Obama White House’s unfocused political strategy, they might.
All three tycoons are the latest incarnation of what the historian Kim Phillips-Fein labeled “Invisible Hands” in her prescient 2009 book of that title: those corporate players who have financed the far right ever since the du Pont brothers spawned the American Liberty League in 1934 to bring down F.D.R. You can draw a straight line from the Liberty League’s crusade against the New Deal “socialism” of Social Security, the Securities and Exchange Commission and child labor laws to the John Birch Society-Barry Goldwater assault on J.F.K. and Medicare to the Koch-Murdoch-backed juggernaut against our “socialist” president.
Only the fat cats change — not their methods and not their pet bugaboos (taxes, corporate regulation, organized labor, and government “handouts” to the poor, unemployed, ill and elderly). Even the sources of their fortunes remain fairly constant. Koch Industries began with oil in the 1930s and now also spews an array of industrial products, from Dixie cups to Lycra, not unlike DuPont’s portfolio of paint and plastics. Sometimes the biological DNA persists as well. The Koch brothers’ father, Fred, was among the select group chosen to serve on the Birch Society’s top governing body. In a recorded 1963 speech that survives in a University of Michigan archive, he can be heard warning of “a takeover” of America in which Communists would “infiltrate the highest offices of government in the U.S. until the president is a Communist, unknown to the rest of us.” That rant could be delivered as is at any Tea Party rally today.
Last week the Kochs were shoved unwillingly into the spotlight by the most comprehensive journalistic portrait of them yet, written by Jane Mayer of The New Yorker. Her article caused a stir among those in Manhattan’s liberal elite who didn’t know that David Koch, widely celebrated for his cultural philanthropy, is not merely another rich conservative Republican but the founder of the Americans for Prosperity Foundation, which, as Mayer writes with some understatement, “has worked closely with the Tea Party since the movement’s inception.” To New Yorkers who associate the David H. Koch Theater at Lincoln Center with the New York City Ballet, it’s startling to learn that the Texas branch of that foundation’s political arm, known simply as Americans for Prosperity, gave its Blogger of the Year Award to an activist who had called President Obama “cokehead in chief.”
The other major sponsor of the Tea Party movement is Dick Armey’s FreedomWorks, which, like Americans for Prosperity, is promoting events in Washington this weekend. Under its original name, Citizens for a Sound Economy, FreedomWorks received $12 million of its own from Koch family foundations. Using tax records, Mayer found that Koch-controlled foundations gave out $196 million from 1998 to 2008, much of it to conservative causes and institutions. That figure doesn’t include $50 million in Koch Industries lobbying and $4.8 million in campaign contributions by its political action committee, putting it first among energy company peers like Exxon Mobil and Chevron. Since tax law permits anonymous personal donations to nonprofit political groups, these figures may understate the case. The Kochs surely match the in-kind donations the Tea Party receives in free promotion 24/7 from Murdoch’s Fox News, where both Beck and Palin are on the payroll.
The New Yorker article stirred up the right, too. Some of Mayer’s blogging detractors unwittingly upheld the premise of her article (titled “Covert Operations”) by conceding that they have been Koch grantees. None of them found any factual errors in her 10,000 words. Many of them tried to change the subject to George Soros, the billionaire backer of liberal causes. But Soros is a publicity hound who is transparent about where he shovels his money. And like many liberals — selflessly or foolishly, depending on your point of view — he supports causes that are unrelated to his business interests and that, if anything, raise his taxes.
This is hardly true of the Kochs. When David Koch ran to the right of Reagan as vice president on the 1980 Libertarian ticket (it polled 1 percent), his campaign called for the abolition not just of Social Security, federal regulatory agencies and welfare but also of the F.B.I., the C.I.A., and public schools — in other words, any government enterprise that would either inhibit his business profits or increase his taxes. He hasn’t changed. As Mayer details, Koch-supported lobbyists, foundations and political operatives are at the center of climate-science denial — a cause that forestalls threats to Koch Industries’ vast fossil fuel business. While Koch foundations donate to cancerhospitals like Memorial Sloan-Kettering in New York, Koch Industries has been lobbying to stop the Environmental Protection Agency from classifying another product important to its bottom line, formaldehyde, as a “known carcinogen” in humans (which it is).
Tea Partiers may share the Kochs’ detestation of taxes, big government and Obama. But there’s a difference between mainstream conservatism and a fringe agenda that tilts completely toward big business, whether on Wall Street or in the Gulf of Mexico, while dismantling fundamental government safety nets designed to protect the unemployed, public health, workplace safety and the subsistence of the elderly.
Yet inexorably the Koch agenda is morphing into the G.O.P. agenda, as articulated by current Republican members of Congress, including the putative next speaker of the House, John Boehner, and Tea Party Senate candidates like Rand Paul, Sharron Angle, and the new kid on the block, Alaska’s anti-Medicaid, anti-unemployment insurance Palin protégé, Joe Miller. Their program opposes a federal deficit, but has no objection to running up trillions in red ink in tax cuts to corporations and the superrich; apologizes to corporate malefactors like BP and derides money put in escrow for oil spill victims as a “slush fund”; opposes the extension of unemployment benefits; and calls for a freeze on federal regulations in an era when abuses in the oil, financial, mining, pharmaceutical and even egg industries (among others) have been outrageous.
The Koch brothers must be laughing all the way to the bank knowing that working Americans are aiding and abetting their selfish interests. And surely Murdoch is snickering at those protesting the “ground zero mosque.” Last week on “Fox and Friends,” the Bush administration flacks Dan Senor and Dana Perinoattacked a supposedly terrorism-tainted Saudi prince whose foundation might contribute to the Islamic center. But as “The Daily Show” keeps pointing out, these Fox bloviators never acknowledge that the evil prince they’re bashing, Walid bin Talal, is not only the biggest non-Murdoch shareholder in Fox News’s parent company (he owns 7 percent of News Corporation) and the recipient of Murdoch mammoth investments in Saudi Arabia but also the subject of lionization elsewhere on Fox.
No less a Murdoch factotum than Neil Cavuto slobbered over bin Talal in a Fox Business Channel interview as recently as January, with nary a question about his supposed terrorist ties. Instead, bin Talal praised Obama’s stance on terrorism and even endorsed the Democrats’ goal of universal health insurance. Do any of the Fox-watching protestors at the “ground zero mosque” know that Fox’s profits are flowing to a Obama-sympathizing Saudi billionaire in bed with Murdoch? As Jon Stewart summed it up, the protestors who want “to cut off funding to the ‘terror mosque’ ” are aiding that funding by watching Fox and enhancing bin Talal’s News Corp. holdings.
When wolves of Murdoch’s ingenuity and the Kochs’ stealth have been at the door of our democracy in the past, Democrats have fought back fiercely. Franklin Roosevelt’s triumphant 1936 re-election campaign pummeled the Liberty League as a Republican ally eager to “squeeze the worker dry in his old age and cast him like an orange rind into the refuse pail.” When John Kennedy’s patriotism was assailed by Birchers calling for impeachment, he gave a major speech denouncing their “crusades of suspicion.”
And Obama? So far, sadly, this question answers itself.
Both CREDO ACTION and MOVEON created by Silicon Valley ---CREDO is simply a digital phone corporation----super-sized this political capture of our left DEMOCRATIC PARTY by far-right wing global banking 1% Clinton neo-liberals now morphing into GLOBAL CORPORATE CAMPUS MARXISTS----by creating ONLINE PETITIONS. OBAMA did the same with WHITE HOUSE ONLINE PETITION sites. All those petitions had our US 99% WE THE PEOPLE wanting to fight for what were indeed good labor and justice issues giving their EMAILS when signing these petitions----then CREDO and MOVEON would sell those EMAILS to candidates who were FAR-RIGHT WING GLOBAL BANKING 1% CLINTON NEO-LIBERAL----now MORPHING TO MARXIST 'OUR REVOLUTION' for only the global 1%.
All that REAL 99% left activism continually being captured to benefit FAR-RIGHT WING GLOBAL BANKING 1%.
So, does that mean our US 99% real populists cannot use petitions in campaigning and civil populist actions? With all our US political machines capturing these venues----we need to act locally ----GETTING RID OF ALL GLOBAL BANKING 5% FREEMASON/GREEK PLAYERS FROM LOCAL CITY/COUNTY/STATE political committees tied to DEMOCRATIC PARTY---GREEN PARTY.
Has this Media Source failed a fact check? LET US KNOW HERE.
Credo Action - Left Center BiasLEFT-CENTER BIAS
These media sources have a slight to moderate liberal bias. They often publish factual information that utilizes loaded words (wording that attempts to influence an audience by using appeal to emotion or stereotypes) to favor liberal causes. These sources are generally trustworthy for information, but may require further investigation. See all Left-Center sources.
Factual Reporting: HIGH
Notes: Credo Action is a part of the Credo Mobile Network, which has created an online network of more than 3 million activists who take actions both online and offline. Credo Action organizes for progressive change through the use of campaigns in which they collect signatures for petitions. Most petitions are for liberals causes. They also have a news feed that derives news from mostly left of center sources. (11/23/2016)
FAR-RIGHT WING NEO-----LIBERALS ARE OPPOSITE OF LEFT SOCIAL LIBERALS
On the right wing side of capture to global banking 1%------below we see FAKE RIGHT WING Maryland Larry Hogan using CHANGE.ORG PETITIONING aimed at right wing 99% of voters-----gathering EMAILS DATA he then sells to far-right wing global banking 1% BUSH/REAGAN NEO-LIBERAL candidates.
'Larry Hogan - Wikiquote
I, Lawrence J. Hogan, Jr, Governor of the state of Maryland, by virtue of the authority ... In 2011, Hogan founded the grassroots organisation Change Maryland'.
LARRY HOGAN is as much a far-right wing global banking 1% ONE WORLD ONE GOVERNANCE for only the global 1% as is Maryland O'Malley---they are the same 5% freemason/Greek players and pols.
Petition · Larry Hogan: Save Maryland's Flag · Change.org
Maryland's flag is under attack. The current flag of Maryland is the heraldic banner of our state's founder, the first Lord Baltimore. It combines the arms of the ...
Petition · larry hogan: Maryland Carry Law ... - Change.org
Maryland Carry Laws Prevent Citizens From Legally Protecting Themselves ... Damon Maisel started this petition to Governor of Maryland Larry Hogan.
Petition · Larry Hogan: Gov Hogan, please pardon a ... - Change...
steven johnson started this petition to Governor Larry Hogan and 1 other ... By this time, he had completed his Maryland G.E.D. course and was now a full time ...
Online Petitions Take Citizen Participation to New Levels. But Do They Work?
By Christopher Mele
- Dec. 28, 2016
Some are political (like one asking members of the Electoral College to vote for Hillary Clinton as president instead of Donald J. Trump); others are unearthly (like one asking that “Star Wars: The Old Republic” series be shown on Netflix).
That first petition drew 4.9 million signatures on Change.org. Nonetheless, members of the Electoral College voted for Mr. Trump on Dec. 19. The second petition drew over 123,000 names.
There has been a proliferation of these petitions — Change.org has more than 100 million users in 196 countries — but are they effective? Do the intended recipients, often policy makers or elected leaders, pay attention?
Worldwide, Change.org users claim one victory per hour, A.J. Walton, a spokesman for the online petition forum, said in an interview.
Among them: persuading Arlington National Cemetery and other military cemeteries to bury members of the Women Airforce Service Pilots, female aviators in World War II, and getting Florida transportation officials to install barriers between roads and lakes, ponds and canals to reduce the number of crashes that result in drownings.
In the case of the Electoral College petition, Mr. Walton said the person who started it, Daniel Brezenoff, was able to generate widespread interest and raise more than $250,000 for his cause.
That a petition did not produce the desired outcome does not mean it failed, he added.
“Was he victorious? No,” Mr. Walton said, referring to Mr. Brezenoff. “Was he successful? I would say yes.”
Those who start a petition can deliver printed copies to the intended recipient. Those targeted do not receive emails every time a person signs, but they are often alerted by email that there is a petition directed at them.
The biggest benefit from a petition is raised awareness, Jason Del Gandio, a professor of communications and social movements at Temple University in Philadelphia, said in an interview. “In some ways it’s just the updated version of the letter-writing campaign to a representative that has been going on for years,” he said.
Successful petition drives do not exist in a vacuum, he added in an email.
“No president is going to do an about-face on a major policy because of 20,000 signatures,” he wrote. “But coupling that petition with other tactics like protests, rallies, phone calls, face-to-face lobbying, a well-organized media plan and community outreach creates an environment in which the goals of the signatories can become reality.”
Beyond seeking change, petitions serve other important functions, such as mobilizing supporters and reinforcing views, Gerald Benjamin, a political scientist and director of the Benjamin Center for Public Policy Initiatives at the State University of New York at New Paltz, said in an interview.
The effectiveness of a petition drive depends on how many signatures are collected, who is signing and whether those being petitioned are in a position to make changes, he said. A petition with 300 signatures, for instance, would carry greater weight if it was aimed at a city council member, who would have fewer constituents than a member of Congress.
Still, lawmakers on all levels pay attention to petitions because they demonstrate “either existing organizational strength or the ability to organize,” Scott Payne, who worked as a legislative assistant in Congress, said in an interview.
Mr. Payne, who also worked as an organizer for NationBuilder.com, a software company that among other things helps clients gather supporters and donors, said congressional staff members knew that if petitioners did not get a response, they could take their case to the news media.
A decade ago, when he worked for Representative John Hall, a Democrat from the Hudson Valley, the office received 5,000 emails and letters a week. Online petitions can take that level of communication to a larger scale by amassing signatures quickly and easily.
“Congressional offices are seeing a river of mail coming into their offices,” Mr. Payne said. “Petitions add a garden hose to that.”
Digital petitions are popularly used to build databases of names, emails and phone numbers of those who can be called on to act or donate. “It’s moved from an organizing effort to an intelligence-gathering operation,” he said. That granular level of detail also allows organizations to direct ads to supporters on Facebook.
Jeb Ory, chief executive of Phone2Action, which relies on technology to help those who want to reach their lawmakers, said digital participation has helped amplify the voices of citizens.
“All it takes is a handful of tweets and Facebook posts for lawmakers to realize there are real people in the community who care about these issues,” he said. “I think technology has done an amazing job of making these decision-makers and policy-makers accessible to the average person.”
We say often to our US 99% WE THE PEOPLE----it is not just ANY JOB. Global banking 1% have tied all our US and global trades workers to building FOREIGN ECONOMIC ZONES overseas in third world nations----now they are bringing global labor pool 99% to do the same here in US FOREIGN ECONOMIC ZONES.
Our local US city/county councils have been saying JOBS, JOBS, JOBS---AFFORDABLE HOUSING AFFORDABLE HOUSING ---COMMUNITIES AND FAMILIES COMMUNITY AND FAMILIES these few decades of global banking making FAILED STATES of our US cities.
Below we have that question----are we ANTI-DEVELOPER----the answer is NO-----we are ANTI-GLOBAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION AND GLOBAL BANKING DEVELOPMENT. Now, here in Baltimore our local BALTIMORE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION/GREATER BALTIMORE COMMITTEE have been GLOBAL development corporations and global banking 1% these few decades---that is why Baltimore City is surrounded by ghettos---COMMUNITIES UNITED in Baltimore will become one great big GLOBAL FACTORY the size of US cities with several of those GLOBAL FACTORY cities defining ONE US FOREIGN ECONOMIC ZONE.
IF WE BUILD US FOREIGN ECONOMIC ZONES AND GLOBAL CORPORATE CAMPUSES----THEY WILL INDEED---COME.
Is Chinese-style FOREIGN ECONOMIC ZONES complete with societal structures and third world wages and working conditions REALLY the US urban development our 99% WE THE PEOPLE of US cities WANT?
The Market Urbanism Report
September 12 at 12:37 PMHere's a thinker: "Anti-developer attitudes might lead to a vicious cycle of regulation and resentment. Preventing developers from what are viewed as unfair or unsavory gains prompt regulatory clampdowns. All but the deepest-pocketed and most aggressive developers are discouraged from building."
This article does not ask the right QUESTIONS-----they do not discuss GORILLA IN ROOM issues of what MOVING FORWARD development goals will look like. We cannot rebuild our US cities with REAL local, domestic small and regional businesses and free market opportunity and access for all our US citizens black, white, and brown and our new to US immigrants with GLOBAL DEVELOPMENT FIRMS TIED TO GLOBAL BANKING FIRMS
.'In a survey of 1,300 people in Los Angeles County, they found powerful evidence that negative feelings about developers drive negative feelings about development, possibly even more than the drive to avoid perceived harms'.
Do People Object to Development—or Mostly Developers Making Money?
A UCLA study shows that a desire to punish developers drives anti-homebuilding attitudes.
Author: Anna Fahey
(@afahey) on September 12, 2018 at 8:35 am
In a survey of 1,300 people in Los Angeles County, they found powerful evidence that negative feelings about developers drive negative feelings about development, possibly even more than the drive to avoid perceived harms.
Locals often object to new buildings or increased density in their neighborhoods, whether we’re talking about subsidized homes, apartment buildings, or backyard cottages—and whether or not they may believe in principle that their community needs more homes. Opposition to new homes can hobble community goals for affordability and sustainability. But what if people dislike development because they don’t like to see developers profit? And what if the rules that result—ones that punish developers—in reality encourage only the most deep-pocketed, aggressive developers, preclude all but the most expensive kinds of homes, and wind up punishing the community instead?
Maybe we’ve been interpreting opposition wrong? We usually attribute motivations for objections to risk aversion, whether straightforward—like concerns about rising rent, increased traffic congestion, loss of neighborhood “character,” and strains on infrastructure—or complicated, unfounded, or contemptible, like when resentments of newcomers or race and class bias play into people’s calculus.
But in a study of neighborhood opposition to new building, UCLA researchers Paavo Monkeonen and Michael Manville find that perceived harm is just part of story. A more powerful motivator for opposing new housing may be the drive to punish someone else. Namely, developers.
In a survey of 1,300 people in Los Angeles County, they found powerful evidence that negative feelings about developers drives negative feelings about development, possibly even more than the drive to avoid perceived harms. Specifically, Monkeonen and Manville report that “opposition to new development increases by 20 percentage points when respondents see the argument that a developer is likely to earn a large profit from the building.” The research is experimental and deserves more study, but this magnitude, they report, is double the increase in opposition associated with other more commonly stated concerns like traffic.
All of the usual housing attitudes hold true in this study: People are more likely to oppose the same building when it is in their neighborhood, as opposed to elsewhere. Messages about congestion, or infrastructure, or character do help build opposition to development. But the most powerful opposition frame is about the developer. “When we told survey respondents that a developer may have received special permission to build, and that he would make a large profit, they became far more hostile to new housing—more than with any other frame.”
What’s surprising here is not that people dislike developers, but the distinct departure from risk aversion as a driver. Instead of acting in their own interest, people appear motivated to enforce community norms of fairness.To punish developers feels like one way to disrupt a pattern of winners and losers. This helps explain the popularity of regulations that impose costs on developers—such as linkage fees, exactions or inclusionary zoning ordinances. “If residents derive satisfaction from seeing developers punished,” they write, “the persistence of these programs in the face of ambiguous evidence about their efficacy becomes less mysterious.”
But it could backfire. Monkeonen and Manville remind us that stopping developers—and their homebuilding—in thriving cities can punish others instead. Housing prices would remain high, which exacerbates segregation by income and race, pushes people to longer commutes, and shifts gentrification pressure from wealthier to less-affluent neighborhoods. Our progress toward affordability in cities where housing supply is short may require a shift in thinking about what’s truly fair and for whom. Could we shift away from developers to a focus on people who can or cannot afford certain neighborhoods? Could that interpretation of fairness trump indignance about developer profit?
To be fair, there are reasons that developers are cast as villains in everything from city council meetings to countless movies. (There’s even a database of “evil movie developers.”) Developers are the most visible—embodied—agents of change to places people care about. We remember them not for benign stuff, like developing the neighborhood or building we’re in right now, but for the kinds of devastating changes they’re associated with—from undercutting poor communities to clearcutting for golf courses.
Plus, as the researchers point out, people may consider development an inherently “repugnant market.” When so many struggle to afford a home, in other words, the idea of profiting from housing might seem morally inappropriate. Even if the overall effect is to make more homes available and keep a city affordable, if the transaction itself seems ethically or morally wrong, the social benefits can be lost or ignored. It’s even worse if people believe developers are courting favor and bending the rules, Monkeonen and Manville say. And these narratives about developers likely play into more widespread cynicism about business and the wealthy.
In that context, suggesting we try to recast developers as partners rather than adversaries is farfetched. But Monkeonen and Manville warn that anti-developer attitudes might lead to a vicious cycle of regulation and resentment: Preventing developers from what feels like unsavory gains prompts regulatory clamp downs that discourage all but the deepest-pocketed and most aggressive developers from building. So by punishing developers, we not only risk thwarting affordability—and punishing people who need homes—but also discourage all but the the least likable developers and most expensive projects (think: luxury). This reinforces stereotypes about developers and locks in a cycle of repugnance, objection, and stalled progress. As Monkeonen and Manville put it, “Blocking the product to punish the producer has a visible short-term consequence that might look progressive (assuming the developer is in fact rich) but a less-visible long-term consequence that lands on vulnerable people elsewhere.”
Again, trying to change how people feel about developers will be a steep climb. But to break out of the cycle of regulation and resentment and break down opposition, we’d be wise to recalibrate our collective definition of fairness. The same good-hearted people who want to sock it to developers might be convinced that developers making a profit is a worthy trade off for communities where homes of all shapes and sizes are available and attainable to neighbors of all income levels. Could they see developers as necessary and important tools for fair and moral community goals, even if they have to hold their nose?
IF YOU BUILD IT THEY WILL COME ------here we see REAGAN/CLINTON era Hollywood FAD tied to sending US corporations overseas in what were then being built---FOREIGN ECONOMIC ZONES in Asia. If global banking 1% built those FOREIGN ECONOMIC ZONES in China----our US corporations would move overseas. It is no coincidence that FIELD OF DREAMS depicts an agricultural region being developed ----as that was what overseas FOREIGN ECONOMIC ZONES did-----
The use of US BASEBALL as the symbol of global banking 1% building FOREIGN ECONOMIC ZONES takes our AMERICAN PIE-----and made it a nightmare for 99% of overseas Asian citizens. Our US 99% WE THE PEOPLE can indeed STOP MOVING FORWARD US FOREIGN ECONOMIC ZONES with GLOBAL FACTORIES the size of cities. We must do this BEFORE global banking can actually BUILD those global corporate campus FOOTPRINTS which will spread for tens and hundreds of miles.
THERE WILL BE NO 'FIELD OF DREAMS' IN MOVING FORWARD US FOREIGN ECONOMIC ZONES----AND ONCE ALL THAT CONCRETE JUNGLE IS POURED IT WILL BE IMPOSSIBLE TO DECONSTRUCT.
Our overseas global 99% of citizens fought as hard as they could---they are still fighting to stop MULTI-NATIONAL CORPORATIONS from attacking and ending their SOVEREIGNTY.
If You Build It, They Will Come - Field of Dreams (1989)
The Devastating Effects of Pollution in China (Part 1/2)
We went to the single most polluted place on earth, the coal-mining town of Linfen in Shanxi Province, China,…
China's New Special Economic Zone Evokes Memories Of Shenzhen
www.forbes.com/sites/greatspeculations/2017/04/21/chinas-new-special-economic-zone-evokes-memories-of-shenzhen/ Apr 21, 2017 ...
But in 1980, then-Communist Party leader Deng Xiaoping designated the southern town as one of four special economic zones (SEZs), thereby giving it special ... to liberate its economy and open Shenzhen up to foreign investment, the ... Shares of several Chinese construction, infrastructure, utilities and ...
Forty years ago, Shenzhen, China, was a sleepy fishing village of 30,000. But in 1980, then-Communist Party leader Deng Xiaoping designated the southern town as one of four special economic zones (SEZs), thereby giving it special tax benefits and preferential treatment to foreign investment. In the years that followed, Shenzhen expanded at an alarming pace. Its GDP per capita grew a jaw-dropping 24,569 percent between 1978 and 2014, and by 2016 its population stood at nearly 12 million.
Today Shenzhen is universally held up as one of capitalism’s great success stories. Because of Deng’s willingness to liberate its economy and open Shenzhen up to foreign investment, the once-poor, now-thriving megacity is known as a world-class tech hub, home to the Shenzhen Stock Exchange and one of the busiest financial centers in the world.
We will end this week's discussion on public policy looking in detail at today's POLITICAL MACHINES capturing all our US political action to FAR-RIGHT WING GLOBAL BANKING 1%-----OLD WORLD KINGS AND QUEENS-----whether hitting our US right wing conservative REPUBLICAN PARTY or our US left wing LEFT SOCIAL PROGRESSIVE LIBERAL PARTY.
Here is AFL-CIO------sending a meme showing all these FAKE LEFT NGOs as being 99% populist. We took each day this week to discuss WHY these groups are not LEFT-----they are not 99% social benefit-----they are all led by far-right wing global banking 5% freemason/Greek players MOVING FORWARD ONE WORLD ONE GOVERNANCE for only the global 1%----they support US FOREIGN ECONOMIC ZONES----they support these zones filling with FOREIGN GLOBAL FACTORIES----they support the UNITED NATIONS CORPORATE SUSTAINABILITY behind global corporate LIVE, EAT, BE SCHOOLED, WORK and never leave that GLOBAL CAMPUS as SUSTAINABLE because----it maximizes global corporate PROFITS AND POWER.
REMEMBER, organized labor or justice is not a bad thing. All last century our 99% WE THE PEOPLE made great gains when these NGOs were working for our US citizens. When global banking 1% Clinton neo-liberals sent our US corporations overseas to FOREIGN ECONOMIC ZONES---these labor and justice organizations went international and connected to UNITED NATIONS/WORLD BANK,
NONE OF THESE ORGANIZATIONS ARE 99% GRASSROOTS POPULIST----ALL WORK FOR GLOBAL BANKING 1% MOVING FORWARD US FOREIGN ECONOMIC ZONES AND ONE WORLD ONE GOVERNANCE FOR ONLY THE GLOBAL 1%.
HERE IS WHAT WAS OUR AMERICAN LABOR UNION AFL-CIO TAKEN TO INTERNATIONAL LABOR UNION ORGANIZATION TIED TO UNITED NATIONS/WORLD BANK AND GLOBAL CORPORATIONS----NOT WORKING FOR OUR US 99% WE THE PEOPLE OR OUR NEW TO US IMMIGRANT WORKERS.
Our Affiliated Unions
Actors' Equity Association (AEA)
Air Line Pilots Association (ALPA)
Amalgamated Transit Union (ATU)
American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE)
American Federation of Musicians of the United States and Canada (AFM)
American Federation of School Administrators (AFSA)
American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME)
American Federation of Teachers (AFT)
American Postal Workers Union (APWU)
American Radio Association (ARA)
American Train Dispatchers Association (ATDA)
Associated Actors and Artistes of America (4As)
American Guild of Musical Artists (AGMA)
American Guild of Variety Artists (AGVA)
The Guild of Italian American Actors (GIAA)
Bakery, Confectionery, Tobacco Workers and Grain Millers International Union (BCTGM)
Brotherhood of Railroad Signalmen (BRS)
California School Employees Association (CSEA)
Communications Workers of America (CWA)
Association of Flight Attendants (AFA-CWA)
Industrial Union of Electronic Workers (IUE-CWA)
National Association of Broadcast Employees and Technicians (NABET-CWA)
Printing, Publishing and Media Workers, CWA (PPMW-CWA)
The Newspaper Guild (TNG-CWA)
Farm Labor Organizing Committee (FLOC)
International Alliance of Theatrical Stage Employees, Moving Picture Technicians, Artists and Allied Crafts of the United States, Its Territories and Canada (IATSE)
International Association of Bridge, Structural, Ornamental and Reinforcing Iron Workers (Ironworkers)
International Association of Fire Fighters (IAFF)
International Association of Heat and Frost Insulators and Allied Workers (HFIAW)
International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers (IAM)
National Federation of Federal Employees (NFFE-IAM)
Transportation Communications International Union/IAM (TCU/IAM)
International Association of Sheet Metal, Air, Rail and Transportation Workers (SMART)
International Brotherhood of Boilermakers, Iron Ship Builders, Blacksmiths, Forgers and Helpers (IBB)
International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW)
International Federation of Professional and Technical Engineers (IFPTE)
International Longshoremen's Association (ILA)
International Plate Printers, Die Stampers and Engravers Union of North America (Plate Printers and Die Stampers)
International Union of Allied Novelty and Production Workers (Novelty and Production Workers)
International Union of Bricklayers and Allied Craftworkers (BAC)
International Union of Elevator Constructors (IUEC)
International Union of Operating Engineers (IUOE)
International Union of Painters and Allied Trades of the United States and Canada (IUPAT)
International Union of Police Associations (IUPA)
Laborers' International Union of North America (LIUNA)
National Postal Mail Handlers Union (NPMHU)
Marine Engineers' Beneficial Association (MEBA)
Professional Aviation Safety Specialists (PASS)
National Air Traffic Controllers Association (NATCA)
National Association of Letter Carriers (NALC)
National Nurses United (NNU)
National Taxi Workers Alliance (NTWA)
NFL Players Association (NFLPA)
Office and Professional Employees International Union (OPEIU)
Operative Plasterers' and Cement Masons' International Association of the United States and Canada (OPCMIA)
Screen Actors Guild-American Federation of Television and Radio Artists (SAG-AFTRA)
Seafarers International Union of North America (SIU)
Transport Workers Union of America (TWU)
UNITE HERE (UNITE HERE)
United Association of Journeymen and Apprentices of the Plumbing and Pipe Fitting Industry of the United States and Canada (UA)
United Automobile, Aerospace & Agricultural Implement Workers of America International Union (UAW)
United Food and Commercial Workers International Union (UFCW)
Retail, Wholesale and Department Store Union (RWDSU-UFCW)
United Mine Workers of America (UMWA)
United Steel, Paper and Forestry, Rubber, Manufacturing, Energy, Allied Industrial & Service Workers International Union (USW)
Glass, Molders, Pottery, Plastics & Allied Workers International Union (GMP)
United Union of Roofers, Waterproofers and Allied Workers (Roofers and Waterproofers)
Utility Workers Union of America (UWUA)
Writers Guild of America, East Inc. (WGAE)