Monday, September 25, 2006

The Secret Life of Howie Rich and Ed Crane




Howie Rich is now famous; the very, very long time lynch pin of the Crane Machine was featured last Friday on the PBS news program NOW. He was not happy about the publicity.

Those ancient libertarian folks among us who remember the very old days know that it was Howie Rich who, with Edward H. Crane, III, took the LP from a movement that spontaneously organized itself across the country to a top down organization that limited information flow to a “need to know” basis. Local activism was sharply discouraged. This was so pronounced that after the Clark Campaign most local activists swore they would never support any national candidate proposed by Crane and Company again despite the seductive clink of Koch dollars.

There was a goofy software developer who wrote the following ditty on Cato Institute, which was the base of wealth around which the Crane Machine operated.

The Cato Song
(by what's his name)


Ed Crane is Cato's president. He keeps his standards high
He says he runs a trim, taut ship, yes, just like Captain Blight (pun)
The similarity is really nothing but a joke -
For they'll be no mutiny on the bounty of billionaire Charles Koch

(Ever changing chorus)
C – A – T – O, C – A – T – O
Aren't you glad their helping freedom grow?
They divide the labor equally, they lead and we follow for liberty!
The finest freedom fighters that we know.

(There are two ways of understanding the last verse)

Murray Rothbard plans the long range Cato strategy
And here is Murray's sage advice for friends of liberty
We must be more professional, we must be better lead
We need centrally planned anarchy if we're to forge ahead.

C – A – T – O, C – A – T – O
Aren't you glad they're helping freedom grow?
Our most prolific scholars worth their weight in fiat dollars
The finest freedom fighters that we know.


Bill Evers edits Inquiry, the Cato magazine
His footnotes all have footnotes to tell you want they mean
His annotated bibliographies have footnotes, too
Read Inquiry or stay ignorant, the choice is up to you!


C – A – T – O, C – A – T – O
Aren't you glad they're helping freedom grow?
They're short and tall and furry, their Bill and Ed and Murray
The finest freedom fighters that we know.


C – A – T – O, C – A – T – O
Aren't you sad they're letting freedom go?
They've lost their love of liberty,
They never knew how to be free
Our former freedom friends, C – A – T – O


That was written and performed around 1980 and reflected what most of us knew about Crane and Company; so while Ed and Howie and friends are older and saggier and Murray was given the bum's rush from Cato for having other ideas on economics in 1981, and Williamson Evers is now happily ensconced at Hoover Institute and attended the Bohemian Grove even with John Fund this year, many things have remained the same.


Libertarians should think hard about this. The expose has just begun, rumor has it. Many Americans are angry with what they view as deceitful behavior and are identifying Howie and his friends as Libertarians. There are political ramifications and even more profound issues to consider here.


You will hear the issue posed by the media as one of legality. Most libertarians will reject that argument. If the State is illegitimate then it has no right to make laws that limit the actions of individuals, especially if their actions are arguably self defense and intended to bring the State to its knees. But is this true? And will their actions result in more or less freedom for those impacted?


On the illegality issue, Howie and friends might have acted illegally, if not in refusing to report the source of their donations but in other ways. Some are saying they violated statutes on money laundering, though that remains for a court to determine. How do Libertarians view such actions? Are they allowable as a means of self defense?


On the argument of acting in their own defense did they have a right to meddle in the affairs of states where they do not live? Would these actions have been allowable by our standards if Howie had spent the money in New York? Since Libertarians tend to believe that self defense does not include harm to innocent parties any actions that resulted in such harm to those in the states targeted would not be defensible.


The facts indicate that they have acted covertly with intention to deceive. Those they deceived were those signing petitions who did not understand the proposed statutes. The PBS story mentions that multiple petitions for more than one initiative were offered deceptively.


They have undoubtedly caused to be created Astroturf organizations in around 24 states that have placed initiatives on the ballots in those states. They have worked to have it appear that those initiatives had local support when they did not in most cases. In each case where they worked to create an illusion of grass roots and encountered the argument of disclosure they repeated, like parrots, that they were following the law and had no obligation to disclose the origin of the funds used.


From that I deduce that the source is not Howie Rich, but someone with far deeper pockets, maybe even someone mentioned in the ditty above. But that is just me.


The core of the issue Libertarians need to consider is very different from those above, however. It is the same issue that caused Crane and Howie to run into opposition in the LP.


Are the actions of Howie and Friends forwarding or hindering the cause of libertarianism?


I think they are harmful, here is why.


America's structure of government is now fascist. To mount an effective opposition we need to focus on enabling local people to organize effectively and as far as possible, we need to enable local people to keep their money. Through mandates and taxation, direct and through the regulatory abuse of the nasty combination of government and quasi-governmental corporations, Americans are being bled dry. Debt is rising, 40% of American mortgages are now held by Chinese, and many states are nearly bankrupt, causing them to put additional squeeze on those living there.


We may need to fight a war. Americans today lack organization and resources.


Any effective resistance necessitates an alternative infrastructure for maintaining life while that resistance can work.


As was true in 1775, with the Powder Revolt, we need to ensure we have what is needed to do what must be done. Without supplies any army starves. Independent local organizations, cooperation, communication, and trust are essential to effective action. Building out that alternative infrastructure in the communities across the United States should be at the top of the agenda. But that is exactly what Howie and Friends have opposed, both historically and with their present actions.


Their strategy is flawed. This may be simple stupidity or lack of strategic savvy but their actions lend themselves to another less appetizing interpretation.


They appear to be living well, most of them within six blocks of a golf course. Most of them appear to be employed running these Initiatives, many of which have pulled in money from libertarians in addition to being funded by the corporations who traditionally fund Cato. For them as individuals this has been lucrative. Crane pulls down a half a million as Cato president every year not counting his other sources of income, for instance serving on various boards.


Go look over the names of those corporations and then examine the source of their profits. Koch Industries itself was in Vietnam with Halliburton and is today in Iraq as a working Halliburton partner. Think cost plus contracts, both there and here in America. Koch has never been an exemplar of accountability.


Now, no Libertarian minds profits. But honest profits do not come through government contracts or by using government as a tool of their corporate policy. Therefore Libertarians need to ask themselves what message Crane, Howie and friends are sending to us and to Americans and open the question of their real motives. Many of us became Libertarians not to find a job but to change the direction America was taking.


If they really thought in 1980 that their fellow Libertarians were too dumb to run their local chapters of the LP and Americans are incapable of self government then perhaps they should find a country that better suits them. Or perhaps they could all move to New York and live with Howie.


I sent this button to Crane in 1980. Questioning all authority means everyone. It is not the State that now betraying freedom, that already happened. It is our friends we need to scrutinize, now while we can still take action.

NEWS RELEASE: Hart Williams on BBSradio.com


Hart Williams, the journalist who broke the story on Howie and his friends through his blog and who was featured on the PBS show last Friday will be the guest on Melinda's radio show, the Spiritual Politician, next Friday at 4pm PDT, September 29th, at BBSradio.com.


Hart Williams grew up in Wyoming and graduated from Santa Fe High School in Santa Fe, New Mexico. He attended Texas Christian University and moved to Hollywood, California in 1976.


Mr. Williams has been a professional writer since 1976, published since 1973. He has written for newpapers and magazines from the Washington POST to the Los Angeles TIMES and FREE PRESS, The Kansas City STAR, Portland OREGONIAN, NEW WEST, OUI, Los Angeles Magazine, the Santa Fe SUN, and more. A published novelist and screenwriter, he lives in Eugene, Oregon with his wife -- a science fiction author in her own right -- her centenarian father and their Manx cat.


Call ins are welcome and in this case encouraged.

Sunday, September 10, 2006

The Path to 9/11 Leads Through Disney to David Horowitz - and his NeoConning friends



The Path to 9/11 Leads Through Disney to David Horowitz - and his NeoConning friends


(Update not seeming related to this subject – go to http://www.howierichexposed.com/

for amazing insights that will prove to be very much connected to the NeoCon Cabal. One of the first Political Operatives to be hired on by Edward H. Crane, III was John Fund of the WSJ and Project Arkansas. No one could have invented this as fiction.)


September 14, 2006 -- When disaster strikes, you use the tool you know. Disaster is staring Bush and Co. in the face, hence the tool is the Disney Fantasy Extravaganza which just aired on September Bush, 10th and 11th to outrage and protest. The film may well backfire since the obvious disinformation included has energized many to revisit the evidence, and public interest has been reawakened.

What they thought would be their electoral salvation may well prove to be their downfall.

By planting Path to 9/11 as an obvious tool for reinventing facts Rove and Co. suceeded in advertising just how inept they are at everything except politics and propaganda. They may well have hitched their hopes of electoral deniability to "The Path to 9/11."

The moment is fraught with danger; indications are that plans may go past simple vote tampering and into areas that are new for any American government on our own shores. They are using the tool they understand – and they don't understand much.

Since politics and its accompanying tool, political propaganda, are the only tools they are competent to handle. Therefore, all problems appear to them through the lens of what they know. They need to be able to say they won and have enough people believe them without sniggering to avoid overt challenges. It would be entirely pathetic if not for the fact that so many Americans seem unable to discriminate between fact and fiction. Since this is bound to come up over and over again it would be well to use this incident to demonstrate to the public the difference between the two. That is step one, which immunizes too credulous Americans when the other hob-nailed boot falls.

Knowing is the best defense; the people need to know and we can show them. Propaganda, challenged and used as a tool, can sputter and die in the face of the truth. According to reports, the movie has built not only on material from the official government 9/11 but from other sources, artfully spun to obfuscate the sheer incompetence of the Bush Cabal while injecting scenes featuring the salacious saga of Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinsky. We should aim at having the Path to 9/11 bury them instead.

It is well to remember that there is no exit strategy, either from the Iraq or the White House. Therefore they are desperate for the means of staying on in perpetuity, something elements of the military have let them know will not be tolerated. The overall affect aimed for here was one of "See? It could have happened to anyone!" and “Those news reports must had been wrong.!”

Those who did the writing were from Hollywood and connected with Youth With A Mission and other groups associated with David Horowitz. We know that is not true. It took amazing levels of incompetence to achieve 9/11. The Bush Cabal is desperately hoping this movie will allow them to segue past the election so that an exit strategy can be actualized, from the White House not Iraq.

And why would Disney and ABC cooperate in this effort? We all know the answer. The centralization and consolidation of media in the United States makes this kind of thing a natural extension of the use of the political tools Rove finds familiar. They looked around and decided that this film could solve several problems if they avoided the bodice ripper-type fantasy they foisted on us with DC 9/11, trotted out for the 2004 campaign. That project did not work but evidently they decided it wasn't the technique that was at fault but the way it was scripted.

That film, written by Lionel Chetwynd, lacked credibility and dropped through the cracks. This one will be a more polished effort. Therefore it needs to be challenged intelligently and point-by-point this can be done. What they wish to see as a drama on a huge and magnificent scale is actually pathetically small and petty when viewed from the front row. Putting together the whole story reduces it to a satire.

Let me share a few small items of interest that fill in some holes. I happened to talk to Lionel just before Air Force One picked him up for the purpose of working on the aforementioned film. I placed the call to ask about how it felt to be sued by David Horowitz for showing the bad judgment of helping David out. Those were, I think, my words, certainly now Chetwynd's. Lionel was, however, very excited about the ride on the airplane though, you could tell that. About the lawsuit, Lionel was just glad it was to be settled. The money was probably about the same but it took far less time.

Horowitz has been extremely helpful to the Neocons in several ways. I had noticed several of these suits involving Horowitz because I knew the people involved. Manny Klausner, for instance, an old chum of mine from the Good Old Days of early Libertarianism, was acting as Horowitz's attorney. I first met Manny when he spoke to the local LP region of West Los Angeles in my living room in 1975. We had intended to have the meeting at a local restaurant but the rowdy behavior of some of the non-libertarians caused the event to be relocated. I don't remember the topic, but Manny is always entertaining. So I saw Manny occasionally. When I was elected Southern Vice Chairman of the California LP in 1979 we had another encounter of note.

I had decided that what the LP needed was its own ACLU to focus on litigating freedom issues. Showing unusual initiative Manny called me, having discovered through a fellow attorney my intentions. Manny told me his Libertarian Law Council was handling that and so my efforts were unnecessary. I invite you to notice the number of cases the LLC has litigated in the last 28 years. The group exists; it is an adjunct of the Federalist Society in Los Angeles if you check out the Volokh Conspiracy blog.

Lists do not get much shorter. This might lead you to believe that no issues of individual rights have arisen in the last 28 years. But Manny is the head of the litigation arm for what is now called the David Horowitz Freedom Center, formerly the Center for the Study of Popular Culture. Check it out and you will find that one Manny Klausner is the General Counsel with 'affiliated attorneys' unnamed. The Freedom Center, which might fit neatly into Horowitz's bathtub, shortened its name and its focus. It is the Horowitz Group that co-sponsors what is called the Freedom Film Festival. Various groups from the Conservative Christian faction have decided to take on Hollywood, working to compete in sending their own message out into the wasteland of American values. Nothing wrong with that; honest messaging in values should be respected as the right of all Americans. Free Speech, you know.

But the operative word here is honesty in advertising. The storm of objections to The Path to 9/11 and related threatened lawsuits for a project that presumed to position itself as a documentary show two things. First, the truth is a slippery concept for anyone associated with the Neocons; reports on the content show the 'documentary' to actually be a carefully manufactured disinformation film that ignores facts only established after overcoming the full force of Neocondom. (Neocondom is the Official World of Neocons; information carefully covered with plastic, in case you did not know.)

Second, Liberals, at least the ones not presently serving in Congress, are still capable of ensuring their opinion is heard. Those Democrats serving in Congress evidently are nervous about the content of the tapes from the NSA, probably rightly so.

The story of how Manny acquired the IRF is also interesting and David Horowitz is, of course, involved.

In the early 90s an attorney in San Diego named John W. Howard started doing individual rights lawsuits. The Individual Rights Foundation litigated issues unpopular with Liberals that found intense support among Libertarians and Republicans. The IRF was set up to do great things. Then fate in the form of David Horowitz, Manny Klausner, and John Fund's college roommate intervened.


Horowitz, that Pink Diaper Baby who has now worked his way through the Libertarian Party and into the Republican Party indiscriminately selling his books to everyone credulous enough to buy, had invited Howard to come on board with the Center for the Study of Popular Culture. Howard's IRF was doing great fundraising. CSPC was not. After an amazingly short period of time Howard was out on his ear and the IRF had been stapled to the CSPC. The fundraising continued but the lawsuits petered out. However, within a remarkably short period of time the Institute for Justice had been founded and Clint Bolick, the previously mentioned Fund roommate, had been installed as its President. The IJ would go on to a career of law suits that were less than stellar but which raised and spent money, badly filling the niche for a much needed ACLU in Libertarian Land.


I got an amazing insight into Horowitz around 1999 when my daughter Morgan attended the Horowitz wedding, hosted by Arianna Huffington as her home in Beverly Hills. Morgan and her then-boyfriend, Eugene Volokh, had arrived early and Morgan wandered off in search of entertainment. She found Arianna's two daughters galloping their Breyer Horses across the carpeted pastures of a bedroom. As a child Morgan had a collection of around 1,000 Breyer horses her self. So Morgan was cantering a diminutive mare across the carpet to the barn when two loud and very distinctive voices approached and entered the room next door. Arianna had offered to hostess the event; Horowitz was responsible for food and beverages. What David had brought, mostly bagels and a few scant accompaniments, might have been fine for a hasty nosh after picketing but certainly was not for an event at Arianna's home. Arianna filled out the menu to be offered. As soon as Horowitz ascertained that he would not be paying he was happy to concede.

Obviously, Horowitz is used to getting other people to pay. By all reports it was a nice event. We can hope that David and his lovely bride were properly thankful to Arianna but given David's behavior with those who offer their help to the CSPC of him personally perhaps Arianna should be grateful she was not sued.

It is just amazing how connected the Bush folks are with those with whom I once rubbed elbows.

Manny was also an attorney involved in the notorious Sidney Blumenthal. Matt Drudge lawsuit. In case you do not recall, Sidney Blumenthal, effectively accused of spousal abuse by Matt Drudge, sued to establish his innocence. This became a cause célèbre among Libertarians and Conservatives, with funds flowing into the coffers of the Drudge Defense Fund—to the immediate benefit of Manny Klausner and Matt Drudge. Unfortunately, it was all too true: Drudge had conspired with John Fund to put out the story in yet another Arkansas Project-related smear, in a textbook example of how you can libel someone and profit simultaneously—all the while doing the job that pays to fill up the offshore account.


Not that I liked Sidney especially, but the truth is the truth. John babbled the truth about how the abuse story had been orchestrated when he was well into his cups the evening the suit was settled. Even Fund worries occasionally that justice might unexpectedly prevail. I had discerned the outlines of the Arkansas Project, funded by Richard Mellon Scaife, by the mid-1990s. It was the story about the tattoo of the flag on Clinton's privates that did it for me: I wondered how Fund had managed to see that for himself!

On his blog on Professors, Horowitz had placed an article about a teacher who burned the American flag as a demonstration of free speech. Evidently, in the world of David Horowitz, such an act is a Bozo No-No. Curiously enough; I did not see any mention of the even more frightful situation that confronted parents and children in the mid-1990s at Hillsdale, the college that supposedly loved liberty and free speech. Of course this was not an errant professor. It was the administration.

My daughter, Ayn, called me from the school one day, terribly upset about a situation that had shocked her. Now, at this point you might think I am referring to the suicide of Lisa Roche, who shot herself because of her longtime lover and father-in-law, George Roche, who was then Hillsdale President and the man who nearly single-handedly turned the faltering college serving about 1,000 students around into one of the best-endowed institutions on the face of the Earth.


Roche had recently divorced his wife and married another. No, that was not it. Ayn was shocked because two students at the college had been expelled for (gasp) daring to put out an alternative newspaper. Imagine that, thinking they had a right to pay for their own free speech! I immediately informed my old friend John Fund about this. Naturally, he did nothing, having assured me he would take action. John was routinely paid huge amounts of money to speak at Hillsdale, by the way. I really think David should note that all idiotic behavior does not involve Liberals. There is more than enough stupidity to go around.

So what do we do about the Disney Extravaganza? For one thing, stop going to Disneyland. Also notice that Disney may be involved because the copyright on Old Mickey is about to run out and rumor has it that they want Congress to extend this as a sort of special favor. That coud explain a lot.

The Intended us of Path to 9/11is as a tool for disinformation. The film clearly is intended to provide the justification for arguing that the November election, now well on its way to being stolen using the layers of techniques perfected by the Neocons, could arguably have been won by NeoCon friendly candidates like Lieberman. Have no doubt: that is what is happening right now.

I have an old friend in Fresno, California who has been living and working in the same place for most of his life. He is a retired journalist who rarely strays far from home but when he went into vote in the primary, surprise, he had become unregistered. This is happening all over the country, especially in target states that include California, Ohio, Florida, New Mexico, Arizona, and Montana. Lots of techniques will be used. These will include the already mentioned unregistering of long time voters, 'purging' the rolls, intimidation at the polls, and the trusty Freedom Dies Machines you encounter in the polls themselves. Those can handily provide whatever outcome you want, like the CPA's employed by the Mafia.

There is a solution.

If you are registered Democrat or other leftish party, go out and reregister Republican. If possible find one of those tables personed by the National Federation of Republican Women and get them to register you. They will be delighted to greet you as a fellow Republican. These are very nice ladies, I know because I am a member. If they understood how they are being used by the Neocons it would make them very sad so don't tell them.

How you are registered does not really much matter; both major parties are corrupt and changing that is not on the immediate horizon. But how you are registered can confuse them.

Then make sure you go into the polls to vote on Election Day. Sow confusion to all enemies of freedom—especially the realm of Neocondom



Wednesday, September 06, 2006

Family Fascism: The Destruction of American families



What the NeoCons (and all those in government) have wrought


Today we are becoming used to the tapes on line that show grieving relatives holding up the body parts of tiny children, killed in a war thought up by Bush and Company as a means of securing the untapped oil supplies from around the world that their Core Constituents have not managed to acquire by other means.

Human life means nothing to those in power. Divorced from human emotion in their insular and privileged world, they can look at 'populations' and determine how people can best be used to help power their policies and profit. Using the medium created through 'family law' government, and through them the same Core Constituencies, have asserted ownership of our persons and our children. Families all over the United States are struggling to fight back.


Greg and Melissa Pound live in Largo, Florida in a four bedroom, two bath house. Their children used to live with them; no more. The Pound's children were happy and healthy before DCF entered their lives. On a day more than two years ago now an accident took place. It could have happened to any of us. That accident was reported in an article written by Robert Hurt, a local man who has become involved in their cause.

Greg’s sister Diane had come to visit and brought her white German Shepherd-like dog. They kept the dog outside, but Diane brought the dog inside to escape the rain. Greg had taken the 3 older children with him to run some errands. Melissa had lain their two-week baby on their large bed, left the room, and closed the door behind her. Greg’s sister went into the bedroom a few minutes later to check on the baby, then left the bedroom, leaving the door ajar. A few minutes later Melissa went into the living room and found the baby lying on the rug, with the dog lying in front of the baby. The baby was not crying.”

The baby had not been attacked; the dog was evidently trying to protect it but in carrying it had left teeth marks on the baby's head. Horrified, the mother called the paramedics, something that any of us might have done. But in this case and in increasing numbers of cases across the country, what plays out is a clever means for converting a cost center, social services, in this case DCF, into a profit generator.

American children and their families are being converted into cash. The means used by the ugly combination of government and corporate (corporament) interests is called by various names across the country, but in Pinellas County, Florida, the violations of America's original vision for the autonomy of individuals comes from the Department of Children and Family (DCF), with such as the Pinellas County Sheriff’s Deputies, helping the Pinellas Court there converting the DCF into a profit center that steals, maims and kills.

The Pounds have struggled for over two years to get their children back. They are not alone. All over the country parents are fighting a war that gets as little publicity as the one being waged on returning American service people, the war on the environment and the war on our right to free and open elections. This goes to the principle of war that says you should divide the potential opposition and make it impossible for them to unite and fight back.

The children taken from homes ring the cash register for such as Tom Delay, who was an early investor in “foster homes” in Texas. Children from such homes can disappear, never to be seen again. The lucky ones are sold to adopting families who really want them. The fate of others we may never know. How the money is generated is efficient and clever.

Foster children are scheduled for appointments with physicians and other professionals who file paperwork to be paid while the services are never rendered. Children in foster care experience increasing health problems. Greg and Melissa's kids, healthy when they were taken, supposedly taken to doctors 70 times now suffer from neglect, ringworms, lice, and numerous other complaints.

The kids in Iraq and Lebanon died quickly, for the most part. Our children are dying slowly. Those that survive will come out of a shattering childhood largely uneducated. Their likely career path will be into a militry that will then be dependent on the draft, now beginning, or into the criminal justice system, which is itself yet another profit generator for Corporament. Some will escape, through change, sheer ability, or luck. Most will not.

Tomorrow, September 7th, the Pounds will be back in court struggling to keep their parental rights intact. Representing themselves, they will most likely lose that battle as well.

Fascism is the merger of corporate interests with government. We can thank the NeoCons for the latest incarnation of that system here in America, but for the appetite and habits that grew it to its present size we can thank both major political parties. The NeoCons optimized the efficiency of the system; liberals birthed it with the best of intentions. If one of them had done the right thing with the power and resources with which both were entrusted today our families would not be at risk and the world would not hate us.

The road to Hell is paved with good intentions; greed just paints the line down the middle.

We need to understand the full extent of the problems, see the common strategy that optimizes the profits and control for the Corporament, and take the necessary steps to return to America's original mission statement, never yet realized.

The mistake took place at the time the US Constitution was written and ratified. The Founders did not have a right to compromise on the very simple guidelines laid out. Those were:


We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed...”

Personally, I hereby withdraw consent. These people are not acting for me, not in Pinella, Florida and not in Iraq. Now, how to build out an alternative infrastructure.

Many Americans have confronted problems and accomplished amazing things in the face of untenable conditions. Government, the tool that does not work, has many alternatives.

The Children's Aid Society was founded in 1853 by Charles Loring Brace and a group of social reformers at a time when orphan asylums and almshouses were the only "social services" available for poor and homeless children.

It worked. Today Corporament would make sure it did not happen. The Corporament assets that families, and children, belong to them. That needs to be changed.

Family law can be moved back into the control of individuals. By doing so most of the problems will be solved and the costs drastically reduced for all of us. Many good, decent people are moving in that direction spontaneously. One of those people is a Catholic law professor, the father of seven, who believes in what he calls True Marriage.

Stephen Safranek believes in his mission, which is to return control of marriage to those marrying. That is one of the battles that must be fought.

The bottom line is individuals deciding for themselves, taking the responsibility and being accountable. That was the original Mission Statement.

We need to do this for children here, children in Iraq and Lebanon, and children yet unborn who will come into this world to suffer only death if we delay.

The Pounds in Florida and other families across the country are ready to take action. David Griscom in New Mexico is fighting for clean elections as is Sophie di Vries in California. Stephen Safranek is fighting for our rights through the courts. Soon, Americans will be fighting a draft that will take their children to fight corporamental wars across the globe.

Instead of ghettoizing the arenas where each of us is fighting to retain or restore a small part of our inherent rights, we need to come together; know what is happening and why so that everyone we talk to can see and understand the larger picture.

Anyone fighting the Corporament is fighting for all of us.

Are you ready? Together, we can do anything. Time to reboot starting where ever you are today.

Stephen Safranek will be a guest on the Spiritual Politician this coming Friday at 7pm, EDT. Access the show through BBSradio.com.


Coalition: Cooperation: Respect, a direction for concerned Americans


After the piece above was published in oped news I received several comments that could be categorized. One type of comment went to the viewpoint that children are less important than (fill in the blank) the specific depended on the particular interest of the responder. Most of these were individuals focusing on issues that did not impinge on family at all.

Another responder thought that unless the focus was not on children but on the adversarial rights of parents it was irrelevant. Each perspective went to the needs and desires of the responder. Each assumed I had written the article because I had not thought about the other issues. They were wrong. I have thought about all of them.

The message I was trying to convey is that while each arena matters most to some number of us the problem we face is systemic. I spent many years working as a libertarian activist for causes in which I had no personal investment. Although I dislike drugs I worked for drug decriminalization., for example. I also worked for the freedom of business to avoid the regulatory interference of government while assuming the justice system would reliably handle where the cases where liability should be exacted. I was wrong about that. Time, if we pay attention, will heal the breeches in our understanding. The lack of liability for big business is one of the weapons converting America into a third world country.

The legal system is entirely corrupt today and that is one of the issues we need to keep in mind. When Wally Olson and I came up with the first deregulation organization, S. O. U. R., Stamp Out Unfair Regulations in 1975 it never occurred to me that absolute accountability would be left off the agenda.

Somehow accountability was pushed overboard. I suspect Ed Crane might know who thought that would be a good idea. See the Hart Williams articles on this.

The whole system, political, judicial, and executive, has been converted from one originally intended to provide services to one that generates monetary benefits of other considerations for those who are supposed to be providing services. Pedophiles are an immediate example of non-monetary beneficiaries of the family law system, for instance. Presumably, Tom Delay is just in it for the money but I have an open mind on that issue.

To successfully displace the present power structure all of the means for conversion must be taken into account and the means targeted for change. It is sheer stupidity to fight a war that fails to deal with the same weapons being applied to different populations. It is also inhumane. All decent people are being harmed. Gloating when others are suffering is just plain nasty.

My suggestion is that someone or several people track developments in each of these arenas, noting the means and so providing better and more informed means for response that keeps in mind the growing general realization that people are best able to make their own decisions and we need to stop using government as a means of using force against each other at second hand.

The original vision was for a people who governed themselves. The unspoken assumption was that we would not be grabbing up guns or laws to force others to conform to our ideas.

Both the Left and Right have continued to bicker about which ideas will be forced down the throats of other people. It is time to stop bickering and move towards a realization of the Mission Statement, allows people to choose for themselves. Americans have proven over and over that this is entirely possible. The government is just people, and generally those in government are less than sterling examples of personal ethics anyway.

Notice the effective responses to Katrina, 9/11, and major emergencies through our history. People dropped what they were doing and responded, doing the right thing without any studies, mandates or guidelines. Life is not rocket science.

Notice that when things do not work the reason is very often those in power who have their own agenda. That agenda usually goes to control, not to real relief.

Instead of the delight of inventing more arrangements for the deck chairs in the Titanic I suggest we be practical.

Whatever government we end up deciding we need should be subjected first to impact reports and experiments on the most local level. If you want to get people to adopt a program prove it works first, for gosh sakes. If it does not work in Podunk, Arkansas why would you want to force it on everyone? Personally, I think we matter at least as much as an endangered species and should be granted the same consideration.

Otherwise let's change our species affiliation to something endangered.

Left and Right is not the issue here, the issue is freedom and accountability for each of us. Coalition at this point is a simple matter of survival.

The original vision for America is still valid. That mission statement is:


We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, —


That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.


Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. “


Time we started heading in that general direction.