Now, HCAN’s [Health Care for America Now] field crews are finding that the best way to support reform-friendly lawmakers is to talk about something else: jobs, the economy or other issues likely to resonate with voters more.

“We want to be flexible in talking about what is most relevant to constituents, whatever issues are most motivational,” says HCAN’s national field director, Margarida Jorge, who organizes a daily call with their partner organizations. “We can have a high level of focus on health care but also understand at times the focus is going to shift.”

HCAN activists say they are not dodging their key issue; rather, they want to keep pace with voter concerns, which have markedly shifted over the past year.

But what HCAN describes as a tactical shift reform opponents see as proof that the law is unpopular, a loser for Democrats in a tough election cycle. “Voters don’t like health reform and they know that,” says Douglas Holtz-Eakin, a former CBO director who now works with the American Action Forum on their Operation Healthcare Choice project. “Independents are key to control, health reform is unpopular but jobs and economy could move votes. When it comes to substance, on health reform, they’re in bad shape.”

Recent polling from the American Action Forum found low levels of support for health reform in competitive districts: in OH-16, for example, 28 percent of voters supported the new law.

Jorge describes this summer’s strategy as conscientious shift from last year, when HCAN directed partner groups to focus exclusively on health reform advocacy. “This August is not last August, where we would prescribe a certain approach” that focused solely on health reform, she tells POLITICO. “We want to be talking about what the public is thinking about. We might go into a community all set to educate about health care but, if that’s not what folks want to talk about, we’re flexible.”

Read more here. The howler here, of course, is that back when Democrats passed ObamaCare, they deluded themselves that their government take over would become wildly popular. Not so much.

But let’s just look for one moment at where some of that line of thinking comes from on the other side.  I’ve written previously about the birth of Media Matters as a spawn of Rob Stein’s Conservative Message Machine Money Matrix road show, from which the Democracy Alliance was born.  It’s through this organization from which much of the organization’s funding had come; in recent years, more has been spread out across other progressive organizations, but the funders often remain the same names in most cases.  For instance, The Tides Foundation gave Media Matters and their Action Network over $175,000 just last year.  In earlier years, groups like Montclair, New Jersey-based (hometown of Media Matters’ Eric Boehlert) Schumann Center for Media & Democracy gave the organization $500,000.

The donors’ list is vast and diverse, and we plan to cover that in detail in the future.  So I’ll focus in on one set of donors to Media Matters, which is the Labor Unions.  More specifically, in light of some recent posts regarding the Kenneth Gladney incident, I thought it appropriate to revisit donations made to Media Matters specifically by the Service Employees International Union.

When you look at the timeline of events and the media calendar in general leading up to the Gladney incident last August, it’s difficult not to conclude that there was collaboration amongst White House staff, components of Big Labor, and certain liberal media outlets.  However, we know that all will continue to deny it.

Further, just as the flurry of media activity finally starts to wind down a bit around October last year, this is when SEIU makes three separate donations to Media Matters totaling $50,000, under the classification of “Communications”, according to the SEIU LM-2 report. (In reviewing other LM-2s for several previous years, this appears at least to be the first time that SEIU has donated to Media Matters, and there does not seem to have been another donation recorded since these.)

This is the type of funding that I would question in return to Media Matters.  With their membership being so low and their unfunded pension expenses so high, can the SEIU really afford to be randomly donating funds to an organization like Media Matters?  Perhaps SEIU purchased advertising on Media Matters’ website, but then I’d think it would be categorized as such, as others ad expenses in the LM-2 were.  If not advertising, if not random donations,  then what’s the reason for SEIU having donated these funds?  One could logically conclude that Media Matters performed a service in return.  Only they can answer that.

That said, I can simply present the basic information here and suggest that readers do their own research and draw their own conclusions, in the absence of any explanation from Media Matters.

The timeline follows below.  While it is not all inclusive, it presents a collection of the most pertinent sources at that time.

8/4/2009

• 6:55 AM ET:  White House launchesFlag@whitehouse.gov, its “fishy” snitch program
• 4:45 PM ET:  SEIU Posts the White House snitch program & video in a post titled “Pushing Back on Right-Wing Lies on Reform“
• Margarida Jorge, National Field Director for Health Care for America Now, releases a four page memo instructing members of HCAN to fight “militant right-wing activists” and “teabaggers”.  Even the URL uses the word “fight”:
  http://healthcareforamericanow.org/site/fight

• Back in St. Louis, Congressman Russ Carnahan’s campaign announces Sara Howard as the new director of communications.  Howard was formerly Senior Strategist at Obama for America, National Media Relations Specialist for Anna Burger / SEIU, Communications Director for Senator Mark Dayton, and spokesperson for George Soros funded American Coming Together (ACT).  She also worked with Buffy Wicks while with SEIU on door-to-door campaigns in Missouri.
• 11:09 pm ET:  Media Matters tries to discredit Tea Party protesters by broadly painting the entire movement as “birthers”

8/5/2009

• The DNC releases “Enough of the Mob” ad calling the protesters an “angry mob” and focuses the ad repeatedly on “right-wing birthers” disrupting town hall events.

8/5/2009

12:13 am ET, Media Matters:  Special Report says “public venting” at health care town halls, ignores conservative efforts to pack events

8/6/2009

• 9:53 AM ET, Huffington Post/Sam Stein:  Unions To Take On Conservative Groups Health Care Town Halls; “In a memo sent out on Thursday, AFL-CIO President John Sweeney outlined the blueprint for how the union conglomerate would step up recess activities on health care reform… also uses the specter of the infamous 2000 recount “Brooks Brothers” protest to rally its members to the administration’s side.”
• Richard Trumka, then AFL-CIO Secretary Treasurer (now President) issues a statement, slams the town halls, calls the events corporate funded and part of the conservative strategy.
• 12:47 pm ET, Media Matters:  AP reported on town hall disruptions, ignored conservative strategy
• Afternoon:  White House aides give Senate Democrats a recess battle plan; David Axelrod and Jim Messina tell senators, “If you get hit, we will punch back twice as hard.” See Politico:  White House to Democrats: ‘Punch back twice as hard’
• Organizing for America sends out mass email for the Bernard Middle School event in St. Louis, MO:

That very evening, the Kenneth Gladney incident happens in St. Louis at the Bernard Middle School event.  A black conservative is beaten by members of SEIU.  I’ll let the guys at 24^th State cover the details of that evening’s outcome.

8/7/2009

7:14 PM ET by Kate Thomas:  Violent tactics at last night’s St. Louis town hall meeting

8/8/2009

10:11 am ET by Media Matters, Eric Boehlert:  Inventing tales of a union ”beating”

And after this date, there are so many more, from SEIU and from Media Matters.  Simply type in this Google search to retrieve a relatively thorough list.

As you’ll see from Google’s timeline, October is when the activity calmed down.

Seems to me that -hypothetically speaking, of course – if there were any sort of service arrangement in place, October would have been the most appropriate time for SEIU to make its payment installments and thank Media Matters for a job well done.  (That’s of course before anyone knew things would be heating up again once the police report would become available in November)

Hm.  I wonder if these types of payment installments are regulated under the financial reform bill?

]]> http://biggovernment.com/libertychick/2010/05/18/did-seiu-pay-media-matters-to-cover-up-the-gladney-beating/feed/ 387 http://biggovernment.com/amarcus/2010/04/22/what-you-need-to-know-about-the-recent-bertha-lewis-acorn-rant/ http://biggovernment.com/amarcus/2010/04/22/what-you-need-to-know-about-the-recent-bertha-lewis-acorn-rant/#comments Thu, 22 Apr 2010 15:39:30 +0000 Andrew Marcus http://biggovernment.com/?p=110250 There is something very important to consider about the recent Bertha Lewis rant posted earlier on Big Government, in which she referred to the Tea Party movement as a “Bowel movement”. Something that has thus far been largely overlooked.

While it is important to consider the implications of Bertha using this kind of language to describe average Americans, the actual story is not just what she said, it’s who she said it to.

Bertha was addressing the Young Democratic Socialists. This is not just some fringe, esoteric, Socialist youth group.

The Young Democratic Socialists is the on-campus section of the Democratic Socialists of America.

The Democratic Socialists of America founded the incredibly powerful Congressional Progressive Caucus with self described Socialist-Democrat, Bernie Sanders.

The Democratic Socialists of America, along with ACORN/SEIU and Citizen Action (now USAction) co-founded the New Party, and the Working Families Party, both of which Barack Obama pledged his loyalty to. Citizen Action was the organization Bob Creamer (Jan Schakowsky’s husband) was found guilty of embezzling from. Together, they all launched HCAN, the movement that spearheaded Obamacare.

The Democratic Socialists of America and Citizen Action were both founded by former members of the SDS/Weather Underground.

The Young Democratic Socialists represents the modern youth arm of America’s Congressional Progressive Caucus.

Frantic and breathless about a non-existent ‘neo-McCarthism era,’ Bertha was warning them specifically because they are the next generation of the current Socialist-Progressive government.

Educate yourselves regarding the Democratic Socialists of America, and Citizen Action (USAction), and the Congressional Progressive Caucus, and their respective youth sections.

These are the people who launched Barack Obama. These are the people who have changed America. Understanding them and their published missions will help you understand the Socialist vision they have for charted for America.

Barack Obama is not who the Conservative movement needs to defeat in an ideological battle for hearts and minds. These people are.

This is an extension of OFA’s and Health Care for America Now’s campaign to flood last summer’s town hall meetings with union members and left-wing activists supporting Obama’s government takeover of health care.

The intent then, just as it is now, was to drown out average taxpayers showing up  to voice their concerns or vent their frustrations.  The intent is also to run out the clock on real debate and take a vote on health reform with as little resistance as possible.

HCAN and ACORN were busing non-constituents, some from as far as 200 miles away, to fill the seats and skew the crowd.  It was to give the false impression that constituents really wanted ObamaCare.

But the result was even worse.  HCAN and union members, particularly SEIU, were filling the seats which would have otherwise been occupied by the average person just getting out of work.

So, the campaign now is geared toward achieving the same result: flood different talk radio shows with left-wing activists and ObamaCare apologists.  The OFA’s website has a talk radio du jour with a call-in number and “discussion points” – talking points for the latest version of the Democrats’ plan.

Be aware and be prepared, Talk Radio: The president’s got your number and his foot soldiers are coming for you.

A recent study of contributions made by the nation’s two largest teachers unions reveals that both shelled out millions in 2008-09, with a good chunk going to radical and scandal-ridden organizations.

The study, posted online by the Education Intelligence Agency, is further proof that the National Education Association and American Federation of Teachers are out of step with their members, which union officials claim are evenly split between Democrat, Republican and Independent parties.

This is what the EIA found:

The AFT gave $46,894 to the scandal-plagued Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN). That organization’s members gave tax evasion advice to pimps and prostitutes, encouraged struggling homeowners to walk away from their mortgages, and championed radical causes like softer immigration regulations and a government takeover of health care.

The AFT’s interest in government-run healthcare is also apparent in its $407,208 donation to the Economic Policy Institute, a union-funded progressive think tank that advocates for the expansion of unionized government jobs, and generally promotes organized labor’s interests.

The AFT also sent $125,000 to Health Care for America Now! HCAN, which is led by SEIU and ACORN, promotes a government takeover of health care.

The Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network received $10,000 of AFT dues money to fight for gay rights. GLSEN’s leaders have a long-documented history of promoting sex-related issues to elementary-aged kids.

The AFT made smaller donations to groups that generally promote causes like the redistribution of American wealth. Those included $15,000 to the Apollo Alliance, and $25,000 to Jessie Jackson’s Rainbow PUSH Coalition.

In total, the AFT spent $5.3 million in dues income promoting radical left-wing advocacy groups and charities. Most of the money went to seemingly innocuous organizations with radical policies.

The NEA, which doled out $26 million in dues dollars, also sent the bulk of its money to the far left.

The anti-American, human rights fanatics at Amnesty International banked $7,500 from the NEA. The Economic Policy Institute got a quarter-million in NEA membership money. GLSEN received $157,500, and HCAN got $450,000 from the NEA.

MediaMatters, which attacks and distorts reports from conservative organizations, earned a $100,000 NEA check.

The NEA also gave a $10,000 donation to Al Sharpton’s National Action Network and $165,000 to People for the American Way, two organizations with extreme left-wing agendas.

The population control advocates at the Sierra Club pocketed $150,000 in NEA dues dollars. The Zimbabwe Teachers Association is even partially bankrolled ($10,000) by the NEA. Seriously?

That union, the ZIMTA, is aligned with despotic dictator Robert Mugabe’s political party, media reports show.

Some will argue that these teachers unions can contribute their income to whatever organization they like. We agree, and strongly defend that freedom.

But we also feel that union membership, and the taxpayers that pay their wages, deserve to know where the money is going and why. We also believe that teachers should be able to keep their dues dollars from financing union PACs, if they wish.

Former NEA president Reg Weaver has repeatedly claimed that the NEA’s membership is evenly divided into Democrats, Republicans and Independents. We suspect AFT members are similarly split.

Then why does their union not distribute their dues dollars evenly to reflect that split? That’s a good question, and one we would encourage union teachers to demand an answer to.

News is Venezuelan brute Hugo Chavez has created a “new chain of government-run, cut-rate retail stores that will sell everything from food to cars to clothing from places such as China, Argentina and Bolivia,” according to Breitbart.com:

Chavez said the Comerso chain of stores will include “a network of subsidiaries” that will sell new vehicles directly imported from China and Argentina, “without capitalist intermediaries.”

“We’re going to defeat speculation. Private individuals in sales can still sell, but they’ll have to compete with us and with a people who is now fully aware,” Chavez said.

Gee, where have I heard that before?  Oh yeah!  That kind of sounds like the talking points from the Democrats government-option proposal.

Consider what White House spokesman Robert Gibbs has said:

As he [the president] said to Congress and the nation in September, he supports the public option because it has the potential to play an essential role in holding insurance companies accountable through choice and competition.

 And Senate Finance Committee chairman Max Baucus:

I included a public option in the health reform blueprint I released nearly one year ago, and continue to support any provision, including a public option, that will ensure choice and competition and get the 60 votes needed to pass the Senate.

New York Sen. Chuck Schumer?

The public option has new life because as Americans have learned more about it, they have come to see it is the best way to reduce costs and increase competition in the health insurance industry.

A statement released by the Service Employees International Union said:

We must hold insurance companies accountable:
If the insurance companies win, we lose. Insurance companies must be held accountable with strong regulations and consumer protections, and we must be given the choice of a national public health insurance option available on day one.

Last but not least, Richard Kirsch, campaign manager for the ACORN/SEIU-led Healthcare for America Now:

We applaud Majority Leader Reid’s leadership in making sure the Senate bill includes a public health insurance option to lower costs and inject much-needed competition into the health insurance marketplace.

Chavez seems to be taking a page out of the Obama’s “How to Fundamentally Transform America” playbook.  If the government doesn’t like a particular aspect of the private sector, take it over, pledge “competition” and grind the free market into the dirt.  Congratulations President Obama, you’ve just discovered the new American export.

ACORNcracked.com recently obtained an audio recording a speech by Robert Creamer, given at the Take Back America 2008 conference in Washington, DC, that was hosted by Campaign for America’s Future, an ultra-liberal organization.

In a March 19 session entitled, “Health Care: The Politics of Winning,” ex-convict Creamer and husband of Congresswoman Jan Schakowsky (D-IL), laid out his vision for health care reform.  Of Creamer’s 10-point plan, number 5 is:

To have a movement that both deals with that fact [that health care reform should be personal] and creates a movement we have to have two elements.  In a lot of campaigns we run are either about a populist kind of message and feel because it’s about people’s pocketbooks and needs directly.  Or it has a moral dimension that is inspirational and empowering – the civil rights movement, for instance.

This movement needs to have both.  To have a movement, to mobilize people, to inspire people, you have to appeal to their sense of meaning and purpose and something important.  So we have to create a sense that this is a historic battle. This is about you’re being part of something that will make you meaningful. (emphasis added)

If there is a legitimate crisis, does the “sense” really need to be “created?”  Or are Creamer, Healthcare for America Now, SEIU, ACORN and others creating a problem to suit meet their ends?  Then he talked about the campaign and how to defeat their opponents.

We have to spend a lot of time particularly now, in this next year, going after our principle adversary here: the private insurance industry. … We need to reduce the credibility of the private insurance industry as, I mean, let’s be honest, right?  Twenty five percent of America’s health care costs go to administration and advertising.  …  This is a political campaign.  We need to bring down the positives and bring up the negatives of our opponents.  And the private insurance industry is our opponent in this battle. (emphasis added)

In analyzing the defeat of HillaryCare in 1993, Creamer identified then opponents then and ways to make them allies now.  He specifically mentioned major businesses with huge legacy costs (ie. General Motors), small businesses, and the American Medical Association.

To win any major social change in America that restructures a sixth of the economy, we need some Republican support.  We need it in Congress and we certainly need it in the population.  Now, that doesn’t mean we say we have to negotiate with these guys, it means, you know, we want the train to be as long as possible, we just want the progressive vision to be in the engine here.  So we’ve got to beat the crap out of the Susan – well, if Susan Collins loses, that’s wonderful – but some of the swing votes in the Senate in particular to get them with the program. So part of our targeting has to be not just on holding Democrats with us, although that’s a problem for us, it’s also – we gotta have some of those Republicans. (emphasis added)

Creamer then suggested that liberals need to devise ways to draw conservatives into the debate.

We need to really go at their alternative but we need to establish that they have an alternative.  We need to establish as the political dialog, “everyone agrees there’s a health care crisis in America.  Here’s our plan, here’s their plan.  Now your only alternatives, public, are to choose one of the two, not the status quo.

Using language similar to SEIU president Andy Stern, Creamer articulated what is at stake:

If we get the presidency, we must deliver.  And if we do, we will create the investment of huge numbers of Americans in a revitalized commitment to the importance of the public sector and the progressive vision for the future.

Prior to Creamer’s remarks, pollster Celinda Lake gave her analysis of poll-tested phraseology that will best sell socialized medicine to an already skeptical, pro-capitalism American public.  A PowerPoint presentation, created by Lake for a similar meeting, can be seen below:

CelindaLakeHealthCare09pollingpresentation –

Let’s be clear: the need for health care reform (assuming for a moment there actually is a need), is seen in battle terms by liberals in power.  They need it.  They salivate for it.  It’s something they must deliver for their base and their biggest campaign contributors.

Pro-free market conservatives are dealing with an issue bigger than simple health care reform.  They’re dealing with a liberal movement hell-bent on securing a victory and delivering the bacon to the interest groups that can return them to power next year.