Bradley Manning: Another Day in the U.S.A.:, Another Political Prisoner

A Black Agenda Radio Commentary by BAR managing editor Bruce A. Dixon

Another day in the USA, another political prisoner.

Bradley Manning is a US political prisoner, not the first or the last. The Obama administration is just as craven, vicious, and fearful of the truth and the American people as any of its predecessors. As the Obama administration has assumed the tradition of making new political prisoners we must expand the tradition of corresponding with, supporting and educating our communities, and working toward amnesty for all US political prisoners.

This week a military judge pronounced US Army Private Bradley Manning guilty of espionage and other offenses. Private Manning admitted turning over 700,000 diplomatic cables and other documents, including a video of bloodthirsty US troops murdering a dozen or so innocent Iraqis for the crime of meeting on a street corner, to Wikileaks [6], a legitimate international press organization with a track record of exposing corporate and government wrongdoing on six continents. Manning testified in open court that he did this because he believed that the American people and the peoples of the world had a right to know what was being done in their names, and in some cases, what was being done to them.

The military judge acquitted Manning on the most serious charge the Obama administration levied against him, “aiding the enemy,” which carries a potential death penalty. Manning, who has already suffered more than two years in solitary confinement, now faces entombment in the federal gulag for two, three or four decades, under conditions which amount to torture in any civilized jurisdiction on earth. His kangaroo court martial is not yet over. Prosecutors will next produce fanciful evidence of the harm caused by his so-called “espionage,” in order to secure the longest possible sentence under the harshest imaginable.

But “espionage” is the act of spying for an alien interest such as a competing greedy corporation, or a foreign power. Private Manning acted transparently in the public interest. The documents he released expose a vast abyss of treachery, lies, high crimes and murders committed by US civilian and military officials. Clearly the Obama administration, just like all its predecessors, is deadly intent on covering up past crimes, committing new ones on their foundation, and handing off the ability to do the same to its corporate and governmental successors.

Bradley Manning is probably President Obama’s premiere political prisoner. He is the unwilling and undeserving captive of the planet’s foremost police, prison and surveillance state, in the tradition of Mumia Abu Jamal, of Jamil Al Amin, of Leonard Peltier, of Romaine “Chip” Fitzgerald, of the Cuban Five, Oscar Lopez Rivera, Russell “Maroon” Shoatz and many, many others. Current US political prisoners run the gamut from old Black Panthers and Puerto Rican independistas under hatches for decades to newly framed environmentalists, government whistleblowers and persons exposing dangerous and inhumane practices in agriculture and food processing.

Like the rest of the US ruling class, the Obama administration fears the truth, fears justice and above all, fears the American people. They won’t let a single political prisoner go, and are determined to bury alive as many new ones as it takes to continue their crime spree. Even now, in state and federal prisons across the country, what used to be called common criminals are being converted to political prisoners, as they are confined to solitary for years at a time for possession of what benighted prison administrators deem to be radical political literature, or mere names, like those of Huey Newton or George Jackson. Thus the last shreds of the prison state’s supposed legitimacy are crumbling before our eyes..

If the Obama administration’s job is to make more political prisoners, then our tasks are equally clear. We must educate our churches, workplaces and communities about them, to organize local and national campaigns to correspond with and support them, and to demand amnesty and freedom for US political prisoners. A good place to start is the Jericho Movement at www.jerichomovement.com [7].

For Black Agenda Report, I’m Bruce Dixon. Find us on the web at www.blackagendareport.com [8].

Bruce A. Dixon is managing editor at Black Agenda Report, and a member of the state committee of the Georgia Green Party. He lives and works near Marietta GA and can be reached via this site’s contact page, or at bruce.dixon(at)blackagendareport.com.

Listen to us on the Black Talk Radio Network at www.blacktalkradionetwork.com

http://traffic.libsyn.com/blackagendareport/20130731_bd_anotherday_another_political_prisoner.mp3

Source URL: http://www.blackagendareport.com/content/bradley-manning-another-day-usa-another-political-prisoner

Inside the New Strategy Group Where Right-Wing Activists and Journalists Coordinate Messaging

Inside Groundswell: Read the Memos of the
New Right-Wing Strategy Group Planning a “30-Front War”

Ginni Thomas, Allen West, and a crew of conservative journalists and activists have formed a hush-hush coalition to battle progressives—and Karl Rove.

By David Corn | Thu Jul. 25, 2013

MoJo’s full coverage of Groundswell.

Dubbed Groundswell, this coalition convenes weekly in the offices of Judicial Watch, the conservative legal watchdog group. During these hush-hush sessions and through a Google group, the members of Groundswell—including aides to congressional Republicans—cook up battle plans for their ongoing fights against the Obama administration, congressional Democrats, progressive outfits, and the Republican establishment and “clueless” GOP congressional leaders. They devise strategies for killing immigration reform, hyping the Benghazi controversy, and countering the impression that the GOP exploits racism. And the Groundswell gang is mounting a behind-the-scenes organized effort to eradicate the outsize influence of GOP über-strategist/pundit Karl Rove within Republican and conservative ranks. (For more on Groundswell’s “two front war” against Rove—a major clash on the right—click here [6].)

One of the influential conservatives guiding the group is Virginia “Ginni” Thomas, a columnist for the Daily Caller and a tea party consultant and lobbyist. Other Groundswell members include John Bolton, the former UN ambassador; Frank Gaffney, the president of the Center for Security Policy; Ken Blackwell and Jerry Boykin of the Family Research Council; Tom Fitton, the president of Judicial Watch; Gayle Trotter, a fellow at the Independent Women’s Forum; Catherine Engelbrecht and Anita MonCrief of True the Vote; Allen West, the former GOP House member; Sue Myrick, also a former House GOPer; Diana Banister of the influential Shirley and Banister PR firm [7]; and Max Pappas, a top aide to Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas).

Among the conveners listed in an invitation to a May 8 meeting of Groundswell were Stephen Bannon, executive chairman of Breitbart News Network; Dan Bongino, a former Secret Service agent who resoundingly lost a Maryland Senate race last year (and is now running for a House seat); Leonard Leo, executive vice president of the Federalist Society; Sandy Rios, a Fox News contributor; Lori Roman, a former executive director of the American Legislative Exchange Council; and Austin Ruse, the head of the Catholic Family and Human Rights Institute. Conservative journalists and commentators participating in Groundswell have included Breitbart News reporters Matthew Boyle and Mike Flynn, Washington Examiner executive editor Mark Tapscott, and National Review contributor Michael James Barton.

Groundswell has collaborated with conservative GOPers on Capitol Hill, including Sens. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.) and Cruz and Rep. Jim Bridenstine (R-Okla.), a leading tea partier. At its weekly meetings, the group aims to strengthen the right’s messaging by crafting Twitter hashtags; plotting strategy on in-the-headlines issues such as voter ID, immigration reform, and the sequester; promoting politically useful scandals; and developing “action items.”

A certain amount of secrecy cloaks Groundswell’s efforts. Though members have been encouraged to zap out [8]tweets with a #GSW hashtag [9], a message circulated to members of its Google group noted that the role of certain advocates should be kept “off of the Google group for OPSEC [operational security] reasons.” This “will avoid any potential for bad press for someone if a communication item is leaked,” the message explained. (The Groundswell documents were provided to Mother Jones by a source who had access to its Google group page and who has asked not to be identified.)

“We want to protect the strategic collaboration occurring at Groundswell and build on it. Please be careful about bringing guests and clear them ahead of time.”

Washington is full of coalitions that meet to coordinate messaging and strategy. For two decades, conservative strategist Grover Norquist [10], who heads Americans for Tax Reform, has held his now-famous Wednesday morning meetings for a broad spectrum of Republicans, including conservatives opposed to gay rights and abortion rights and those who favor them, as well as GOPers on different sides of the immigration reform debate. Groundswell, which meets at the same time as Norquist’s group, appears to be a more ideologically pure version of the Norquist confab, and its emergence—given the prominent role of Ginni Thomas and the participation of journalists—prompts several intriguing questions.

Critics have contended [11] that Thomas’ work as a lobbyist opposing Obamacare posed a conflict of interest for her husband, who would rule on the constitutionality of the health care reform initiative. (Clarence Thomas joined the Supreme Court minority that favored striking down the law.) And Common Cause has maintained [12] that Justice Thomas had a conflict of interest when he participated in the Citizens United case because his wife at the time was running a conservative nonprofit fighting the “tyranny” of President Barack Obama that would benefit from removing limits on such groups’ spending and fundraising. With her involvement in Groundswell—which zeroes in on contentious issues that come before the high court, including voting rights, abortion, and gay marriage—Ginni Thomas continues to be intricately associated with matters on which her husband may have to render a decision. Ginni Thomas did not respond to requests for comment.

The participation of journalists in coordinating messaging with ideological advocates and political partisans raises another set of issues. Conservatives expressed outrage when news broke in 2009 about Journolist, a private email list where several hundred progressive-minded reporters, commentators, and academics exchanged ideas and sometimes bickered. (I was on Journolist, mainly as a lurker [13].) The late Andrew Breitbart once offered $100,000 [14] for the full Journolist archives and denounced it as “the epitome of progressive and liberal collusion that conservatives, Tea Partiers, moderates and many independents have long suspected and feared exists at the heart of contemporary American political journalism.” The Groundswell documents show conservative journalists, including several with Breitbart News, colluding on high-level messaging with leading partisans of the conservative movement.
How Groundswellers Win “Brownie Points”
Notes prepared after a Groundswell meeting held on March 27 detailed the group’s mission and origins [9]:

Groundswell evolved out of conversations among conservative leaders after the November elections. This is the eighth meeting. Now others are asking to be included. Growth needs to be strategic; it should be made up of senior level people willing to collaborate. It is important to keep a balance of social conservatives, national security conservatives, and constitutional conservatives. Outreach has occurred to incorporate groups with extensive reach: Heritage, Heritage Action, FreedomWorks, AFP [Americans for Prosperity], FRC [Family Research Council] and the NRA, among others…Our country is in peril. This is a critical moment needing critical leadership. We want to protect the strategic collaboration occurring at Groundswell and build on it. Please be careful about bringing guests and clear them ahead of time.

The memo declared that the goal was not to merely ponder, but to be proactive:

What Groundswell is not is a room of note takers. The goal of Groundswell is to sync messages and develop action from reports and information exchanged. Going forward there should be an action item accompanying each report.

At the March 27 meeting [9], Groundswell participants discussed one multipurpose theme they had been deploying for weeks to bash the president on a variety of fronts, including immigration reform and the sequester: Obama places “politics over public safety.” In a display of Groundswell’s message-syncing, members of the group repeatedly flogged this phrase in public. Frank Gaffney penned a Washington Times op-ed [15] titled “Putting Politics Over Public Safety.” Tom Fitton headlined a Judicial Watch weekly update [16] “Politics over Public Safety: More Illegal Alien Criminals Released by Obama Administration.” Peter List, editor of LaborUnionReport.com, authored a RedState.com post [17] called “Obama’s Machiavellian Sequestration Pain Game: Putting Politics Over Public Safety.” Matthew Boyle used the phrase [18] in an immigration-related article for Breitbart. And Dan Bongino promoted Boyle’s story on Twitter by tweeting [19], “Politics over public safety?” In a message to Groundswellers, Ginni Thomas awarded “brownie points” to Fitton, Gaffney, and other members for promoting the “politics over public safety” riff.

“If we lose on immigration, we lose on every other issue. They key to defeating this bill is Sen. Rubio.”

There was much more on the agenda for the March 27 meeting [9] than a single talking point. The group routinely addresses an ambitious to-do list for its campaign against the left. At that session, Groundswellers discussed several immigration-related “action items.” These included attempting to link the pending reform bill to Obamacare and collecting health care reform horror stories to provide to Cruz, a leading opponent of the Senate immigration reform bill. (Cruz has repeatedly compared [20] the legislation to the health care reform law.)

Groundswell members saw immigration as a life-or-death issue. “If we lose on immigration,” the post-meeting memo noted, “we lose on every other issue. The key to defeating this bill is Sen. Rubio. He can gracefully remove himself from the ‘gang of 8’ and still save face…The messaging on this issue has to be ‘we can’t trust Obama’ to enforce immigration laws after the amnesty.”

The group also reviewed how best to oppose the confirmation of Tom Perez [21], Obama’s nominee for labor secretary. Groundswellers claimed that Perez, then a senior Justice Department official, supported “Muslim Brotherhood organizations and Shariah.” (One Groundswell memo maintained that Perez “is extremely antagonistic toward whites.”) A third agenda item that Wednesday morning was beating back the effort to end the Boy Scouts of America’s ban on gay Scouts. And there was yet another issue for the Groundswell members to stoke: “John Kerry has family ties to Iran that opens the doors to blackmail and other national security risks. Kerry’s son in law is an Iranian American with extensive family still in Iran.” The post-meeting memo suggested Twitter hashtags to push: #CantTrustObama, #PoliticsOverPublicSafety, #SequesterLies.

“We’re Failing the Propaganda Battle”
The Groundswellers feel that they too often lose the political narrative to their progressive rivals. One memo that circulated among members declared, “We must reclaim the language and put ‘a face’ on our messages; tell stories. Write articles on 4th grade level!”

A Groundswell memo noted, “Terms like, ‘GOP,’ ‘Tea Party,’ ‘Conservative’ communicate ‘racism.'” They proposed an alternative: “Fredrick Douglas Republican.”

Notes from a February 28 Groundswell gathering [22] reflected both their collective sense of pessimism and desire for aggressive tactics: “We are failing the propaganda battle with minorities. Terms like, ‘GOP,’ ‘Tea Party,’ ‘Conservative’ communicate ‘racism.'” The Groundswellers proposed an alternative: “Fredrick Douglas Republican,” a phrase, the memo noted, that “changes minds.” (His name is actually spelled “Frederick Douglass.”) The meeting notes also stated that an “active radical left is dedicated to destroy [sic] those who oppose them” with “vicious and unprecedented tactics. We are in a real war; most conservatives are not prepared to fight.”

The notes from the March 20 meeting [23] summed up Groundswell griping: “Conservatives are so busy dealing with issues like immigration, gay marriage and boy scouts there is little time left to focus on other issues. These are the very issues the Left wants to avoid but we need to magnify. R’s cannot beat Obama at his own game but need to go on the offense and define the issues.” The group’s proposed offensive would include hyping the Fast and Furious [24] gun-trafficking controversy, slamming Obama’s record, and touting Benghazi as a full-fledged scandal. “The problem,” the memo noted, “is Speaker Boehner and [Rep.] Mike Rogers (Intelligence Community) are refusing to deal” with the Benghazi issue. It added, “Leaders can and should be shamed into doing the right thing.”

Another problem for right-wingers, this memo pointed out, was that though “a group of freshmen and sophomore representatives in Congress…are willing and ready to stand up” for conservative causes, “no one is willing to step up and become that leader.” Reflecting the dim view held by Groundswell members of House GOPers, the memo maintained that too many Republican lawmakers were co-opted by power and reluctant to challenge House Republican leaders: “The Speaker holds the control in the House. He controls committees, chairmanships, meeting rooms, etc. Conservatives sell out rationalizing their compromises will position them to advance their agenda through committee work. In reality they are being bought.” Boehner, according to his memo, was too frightened to confront Obama head-on regarding budget issues because he “believes that Newt lost his speakership due to the government shutdown.”

Venting about weak and squishy GOP leaders was a regular feature of Groundswell gatherings. One action item put it bluntly [25]:

GAP of REPUBLICAN LEADERSHIP: how do we tell them they are failing their base; will lose in 2014 unless they fight for principles (as opposed to show disdain for them and accommodate Obama; O is dividing Rs and they seem clueless: IDEAS NEEDED!

A week later, Newt Gingrich was scheduled to address the group [26] on the “lack of Republican Leadership right now, and Rove.” For 10 minutes.

At the March 27 meeting, Groundswellers once more voiced their anger with the GOP establishment and Rove—ideological sellouts, they believed, who undercut conservative candidates in order to back Republicans deemed more electable. They discussed the efforts among conservatives to respond to the Republican Party’s recently released autopsy [27] (PDF) of the 2012 elections, which called on the party to be more inclusive of minorities and less severe on social issues.

Republican National Committee chairman Reince Priebus, the post-meeting memo huffed, “is sending messages to the party…If we were all gay illegal aliens, the party likes us. He is preparing the way for a change on social issues by giving a warning, ‘don’t go Old Testament’ and advising the party to consider what Rove said about the next nominees could speak favorably of homosexual marriage in the campaign.” The memo summed up Groundswell’s preferred solution to GOP woes: “embrace the libertarian and conservative wing of the party.”
“I’m Going to Need Help Pushing Back”
Shortly after its creation, Groundswell started bolstering interactions between right-wing advocates and conservative members of the Senate and the House. On March 5, Gaston Mooney, a staffer for the Senate Republican Steering Committee, posted a message [28] to Groundswell’s Google group asking for questions that could be posed to Gina McCarthy, Obama’s nominee to lead the EPA, during confirmation hearings or in meetings between her and individual senators. (She was confirmed as EPA chief this month.)

“If we were all gay illegal aliens, the party likes us. [RNC chair Reince Priebus] is preparing the way for a change on social issues by giving a warning, ‘don’t go Old Testament.'”

At an April 3 meeting [29], Groundswell members were encouraged to send Paul Teller, executive director of the Republican Study Committee, the caucus of House conservatives, “feasible asks in exchange for raised debt ceiling.” The post-meeting memo noted, “House conservatives want clear consensus on what the conservative grassroots want to see negotiated.” Here was a chance for Groundswellers to shape the next debt ceiling showdown.

In Groundswell’s first months, one of the most active members in its Google group was Danielle Cutrona, chief counsel to Alabama Sen. Jeff Sessions. She frequently placed information—speeches, articles, press releases—on Groundswell’s Google group. In February, she posted opposition research material [30] regarding a judicial appointment and asked members to distribute it: “Any help is much appreciated.” In another message to Groundswell, she requested assistance in opposing the pro-immigration reform GOP establishment. “I’m going to need help pushing back,” [31] she wrote.

On one occasion [32], Cutrona promoted a column [33] from the conservative site RedState.com. Headlined “Who is Going to Put an End to the McCain/Graham Circus?” this RedState.com post excoriated Republican Sens. John McCain and Lindsey Graham as “Benedict Arnolds” for retreating on their opposition to Chuck Hagel’s nomination as defense secretary and for “their treachery on the issue of illegal immigration.” Cutrona, who occasionally used her official Senate email to communicate with Groundswell members, was encouraging this band of conservatives to spread the word that two party colleagues of her boss were ideological traitors. A spokesman for Sessions says that this blog post did not reflect Cutrona’s views and “was simply one of scores of diverse news and opinion pieces she emailed on immigration.”

“Even If the Idea Isn’t Perfect, I Can Help Massage It”
Several conservative journalists have enthusiastically participated in Groundswell’s deliberations. In March, Mark Tapscott, the executive editor of the conservative Washington Examiner, sent his most recent column [34] to group members [35]. It focused on a theme that Groundswellers had resolved to hype: President Obama is a divider. And after a meeting that month, Tapscott wrote to the group [36], “Enjoyed hearing from all of you who spoke earlier today. It’s amazing how much we are accomplishing on so many fronts.” But Tapscott tells Mother Jones that after attending one or two meetings at the invitation of Ginni Thomas, he decided to stop participating: “The implication of attending is that you’re participating in their planning, and, as a journalist, I don’t think that’s appropriate. Other journalists may think differently.”

At another Groundswell gathering, according to the minutes [9], the members decided to ask Breitbart‘s Stephen Bannon to arrange for his media organization “to get senators on the record regarding their support [or non-support]” of the filibuster that GOP Sens. Mike Lee, Rand Paul, and Ted Cruz were threatening to mount against the gun control bill. This suggested that the Groundswellers thought they could task Breitbart News to pursue a story that would be strategically useful for the group. (Breitbart News was already covering the possible filibuster.)

“It’s amazing how much we are accomplishing on so many fronts,” the Washington Examiner‘s Mark Tapscott wrote to fellow Groundswell members.

Groundswell has forged a particularly close relationship with Breitbart. Matthew Boyle, one of Breitbart‘s more prominent reporters, has attended Groundswell meetings, used the group as a source for tips and a mechanism to promote his stories, and joined in its efforts to whip up coordinated bullet points to be deployed by conservative advocacy shops. In February, he tried to enlist the group [37] to push a story [38] he had written the year before at the Daily Caller, in which he maintained the Justice Department was in cahoots with the liberal group Media Matters to smear conservative whistleblowers and journalists. In a long note addressed to all Groundswellers—written at a time when reporter Bob Woodward was making (what turned out to be inflated) claims about the Obama White House intimidating foes—Boyle said, “Figured this might be a good time to bring this story back up and see if there’s a way to drive it.”

Boyle said he was hoping to prompt congressional Republicans to launch an investigation. He contended he had only revealed the “tip of the iceberg” and shared his suspicion that many government agencies (State, the CIA, the Pentagon, the EPA, and more) were conspiring with “far left wing groups” to undermine conservatives in the media: “I think we can get at the heart of the Obama admin’s weaknesses here.” He explained: “Any evidence obtained would be more proof of collusion between the administration and the media and far left groups, while at the same time serving as evidence of whatever ridiculously moronic big government policies they’re pushing are.”

The following month, Boyle sent a message to Groundswell members [39] seeking tips and offering to help shape stories Groundswellers wanted to disseminate: “I’m saying we can get pieces out fast on Breitbart. Whenever you have an idea, email or call me with a pitch and I’ll do my best to get the story out there. Keep us on offense, them on defense. Even if the idea isn’t perfect, I can help massage it to get there.”

A high-priority cause for Groundswellers is voter identification efforts—what progressives would call voter suppression—and when Groundswellers developed a thread on their Google group page exploring the best way to pitch the right’s voter identification endeavors as a major voting rights case was pending in the Supreme Court, the coalition’s friendly journalists joined right in. Dan Bongino, the ex-Secret Service agent and 2012 Senate candidate, kicked off the discussion [40]: “We need to reframe this. This narrative of the Left has already taken hold in MD. The words ‘Voter ID’ are already lost & equated with racism. Maybe a ‘free and fair elections initiative’ with a heavy emphasis on avoiding ANY voter disenfranchisement combined with an identification requirement which includes a broader range of documents.”

Sheryl Kaufman, communications director for Rep. Jim Bridenstine, chimed in: “‘OBAMAGRATION’—I love it!! Communicates the similarity with Obamacare.”

In response, Tapscott suggested, “How about ‘Election Integrity’?” And Gaffney weighed in: “I like it.” Fitton noted that Judicial Watch had an “Election Integrity Project.” Boyle proposed, “Fair and equal elections,” explaining, “Terms ‘fair’ and ‘equal’ connect with most people. It’s why the left uses them.” Then came True the Vote’s Anita MonCrief: “We do a lot under the Election Integrity Banner. Does not resonate with the people. Voter Rights may be better. We really have been trying to get the messaging right.”

Minutes later, Breitbart‘s Mike Flynn tried to change the conversation [41], noting that Boyle earlier in the week had reported that Obama’s daughters had been vacationing in the Bahamas while the White House had suspended tours due to the sequester. “The Obama White House has never been so exposed to public criticism as they are right now, because of their decision to cancel WH tours,” Flynn wrote. “Everything should be focused on that front.” He declared, “We have to be willing to march to the sound of the guns.” (Earlier in the week, Boyle had posted his story on the Obama daughters on Groundswell’s Google group page, noting, “I think this fits in nicely with that politics over public safety theme…Enjoy.”) Ignoring Flynn’s missive, Engelbrecht, the president of True the Vote, wrote, “We bill ourselves as an Election Integrity Initiative and have found it strikes the right tone.”

In a response to a request for comment regarding his participation in Groundswell’s message-making, Flynn emailed, “We have reporters covering lots of meetings in DC, as I’m sure you do as well. As you know, it provides critical background to know what’s happening on the Hill.” In a subsequent email, Flynn insisted, “[N]either Boyle nor I have spent 1 minute on any messaging. We haven’t spent any time creating talking points.” Flynn added, “[W]e are journalists with a point of view. We are open about that. We attend meetings of conservatives. Where we are allowed, we attend meetings of leftist activists.” Boyle did not respond to requests for comment.
“We All Lament the Difficulty We Have Persuading Americans”
In between the weekly meetings, Groundswellers keep on scheming, frequently using their Google group to share ideas and need-to-know information. The material is often routine: a John Bolton op-ed [42], a press release opposing [43] the nomination of the EPA administrator, a call to rally support [44] for a Rand Paul filibuster. Often the material reveals the group’s ideological excesses, such as a PowerPoint supposedly proving that John Brennan, the Obama national security adviser who has become CIA chief, is soft on radical Islam. In one post, Ginni Thomas encouraged Groundswell members to watch Agenda: Grinding America Down, a documentary [45] that claims that progressives (including Obama) seek “a brave new world” based on the “failed policies and ideologies of communism” and that an evil left is purposefully “destroying the greatest country in all of world history.” MonCrief posted an email noting that the bombs that exploded at the Boston Marathon were “similar to Bill Ayers’ Weather Underground nail bomb.”

But Groundswellers constantly brainstorm via their Google group in search of a magic talking point, or a silver bullet of messaging. On April 24, Keli Carender, the national grassroots coordinator of Tea Party Patriots, posted a message to the Google group, writing, “We should have a unified name for the immigration bill so that as the other side is calling it ‘reform,’ we present a unified front against that notion. If we’re all calling it different things, their ‘reform’ message will win. We only combat the idea that it is reform if we hammer back with one different phrase/name.” She tossed out a few ideas: “Schumer-Rubio bill,” “anti-security bill,” and “amnesty bill.” Sheryl Kaufman, the communications director for Rep. Jim Bridenstine, chimed in that she was fond of a phrase derived by MonCreif: “‘OBAMAGRATION’—I love it!! Communicates the similarity with Obamacare.”

When Campaign for America’s Future, a progressive group, sent out an email regarding the sequester headlined “Don’t let Republicans destroy the economy,” Carender sent a message to Groundswell members via the Google group: “What about a ‘stick with sequester’ (or similar) mantra from our side?” Responding to Carender’s note, Peter List of LaborUnionReport.com wrote, “Most Americans don’t understand sequesters. We need to be more clever than the Left on this…Something amusing and easy for LIVs [low-information voters] to understand. Maybe a tie in to Humpty Dumpty (the economy) and all King Obama’s men (‘tax increases’) not being able to put Humpty Dumpty back together again. (I’m open to anything…and just made that up.)”

At another point, List emailed Ginni Thomas an idea for an anti-Obama ad [46] that he thought could go viral:

A 15 sec internet [YouTube ad] featuring ethnically diverse children on a merry-go-round [soft music]…
Nuclear explosion.
Two bullet points on the facts.
Call to action:
Tell President Obama & Congress not to cut our nation’s defense.

Thomas posted the note for all in Groundswell to see. “Brilliant idea,” she commented. “…Taker?”

Several months after Groundswell kicked off, Steven Sutton, vice president of development for the conservative Leadership Institute and a former chief of staff to several House GOPers, proposed a “strategic message development project” for the outfit. “What is needed,” he wrote [47], “is an umbrella thematic message under which each specific issue can be magnified and maximized. For those familiar with it, this is an extension and development of the Leesburg Grid [48] (which the Left has co-opted and now uses extensively, and the Right has ignored and allowed to fall into disuse.)”

Sutton suggested using four main themes: Obama and liberal policies fail; Obama and liberal policies make things worse; there is a lack of leadership in the White House; and Obama “puts politics ahead of people/our country/America.” These themes, he contended, “are best used sequentially, rather than randomly/haphazardly/isolated…The most important thing is to think thematically and drive these messages.” Sutton went on:

Issues matter. Details matter. Substance matters. But theme matters more. Substance matters only as it helps to reinforce the themes.

We all lament the difficulty we have persuading Americans. After all, we have the facts, figures, and data to prove our points. Why can’t we persuade? There are many tactics we can use to help persuade (telling stories, finding victims, tempering tone). But these tactics pale in comparison to the importance of providing a context…a theme…to help people organize their thoughts and opinions.

Groundswell has set itself up as the theme lab for the true-red activists of the conservative movement. Fearing that some hydra of the left has long been running wild, vanquishing the right, and bringing the nation closer to utter ruin, the members of Groundswell have birthed a hydra of their own.

Additional reporting by Kate Sheppard [49].

Links:
[1] http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2013/07/groundswell-rightwing-group-ginni-thomas
[2] http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2013/07/groundswell-ginni-thomas-war-karl-rove
[3] http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2013/07/ginni-thomas-groundswell-conflict-interest
[4] http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2013/07/groundswell-right-wing-strategy-group-members-photos
[5] http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2013/07/groundswell-secret-tape-boehner-issa-benghazi
[6] http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2013/07/groundswell-declares-war-karl-rove
[7] http://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/meet-craig-shirley-and-diana-banister-the-rights-pitch-perfect-conservatives/2013/07/21/63cea20e-dffe-11e2-b94a-452948b95ca8_story.html
[8] http://www.motherjones.com/documents/739843-redacted-gs-mtg-notes-3-27-2013-google-groups
[9] http://www.motherjones.com/documents/739869-redacted-groundswell-mtg-notes-3-27-2013-google
[10] http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2004/01/grover-norquist-soul-new-machine
[11] http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/washington-whispers/2012/07/02/new-financial-forms-show-clarence-thomass-wife-continued-to-lobby-against-healthcare-in-2011
[12] http://www.commoncause.org/site/apps/nlnet/content2.aspx?c=dkLNK1MQIwG&b=4773617&ct=9039331
[13] http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2010/07/journolist-daily-caller-sarah-palin
[14] http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Journalism/2010/06/29/Reward—100-000-for-Full-JournoList-Archive–Source-Fully-Protected
[15] http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/mar/5/putting-politics-over-public-safety/
[16] http://www.judicialwatch.org/press-room/weekly-updates/politics-over-public-safety/
[17] http://www.redstate.com/tag/putting-politics-over-public-safety/
[18] http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/06/26/Immigration-agents-ask-public-lawmakers-to-oppose-bill-on-eve-of-expected-vote
[19] https://twitter.com/dbongino/status/350043418094870528
[20] http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2013/06/24/sen_ted_cruz_compares_senate_immigration_bill_to_obamacare.html
[21] http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/03/tom-perez-justice-department-trayvon-martin
[22] http://www.motherjones.com/documents/739816-redacted-gs-notes-and-action-items-from-meeting
[23] http://www.motherjones.com/documents/739865-redacted-groundswell-mtg-notes-3-20-2012-google
[24] http://features.blogs.fortune.cnn.com/2012/09/20/the-fast-and-furious-gun-walking-scandal/
[25] http://www.motherjones.com/documents/739889-redacted-groundswell-notes-and-action-items-from
[26] http://www.motherjones.com/documents/739852-redacted-fwd-country-club-republicans-link-with
[27] http://growthopp.gop.com/rnc_growth_opportunity_book_2013.pdf
[28] http://www.motherjones.com/documents/739855-redacted-epa-nominee-questions-google-groups
[29] http://www.motherjones.com/documents/739871-redacted-groundswell-mtg-note-april-3-2013-new
[30] http://www.motherjones.com/documents/739790-information-action-item-google-groups-2-27
[31] http://www.motherjones.com/documents/739525-information-google-groups-2-14
[32] http://www.motherjones.com/documents/739831-redacted-who-is-going-to-put-an-end-to-the
[33] http://www.redstate.com/2013/02/27/who-is-going-to-put-an-end-to-the-mccaingraham-circus/
[34] http://washingtonexaminer.com/mark-tapscott-one-dinner-does-not-a-great-divider-unmake/article/2523601
[35] http://www.motherjones.com/documents/739833-redacted-links-fr-mark-tapscott-obamacare-hhs-co
[36] http://www.motherjones.com/documents/739821-redacted-links-fr-mark-tapscott-obamacare-hhs-co
[37] http://www.motherjones.com/documents/739828-redacted-information-opportunity-obama
[38] http://dailycaller.com/2012/09/18/emails-reveal-justice-dept-regularly-enlists-media-matters-to-spin-press/
[39] http://www.motherjones.com/documents/739827-redacted-we-can-get-information-out-fast-at
[40] http://www.motherjones.com/documents/739867-redacted-13-re-groundswellgroup-fwd-obama-takes
[41] http://www.motherjones.com/documents/739798-redacted-11-re-groundswellgroup-fwd-obama-takes
[42] http://www.motherjones.com/documents/739774-redacted-ambassador-boltons-op-ed-on-president
[43] http://www.motherjones.com/documents/739758-information-cei-press-release-mccarthy-redacted
[44] http://www.motherjones.com/documents/739830-redacted-action-rand-paul-filibuster-now-google
[45] http://[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SH8LkIqu1c8
[46] http://www.motherjones.com/documents/739609-re-groundswellgroup-fwd-idea-on-sequestration
[47] http://www.motherjones.com/documents/739611-sutton-redraft-for-041013
[48] http://www.yourpatriot.com/Leesburg_Diagram.aspx
[49] http://www.motherjones.com/authors/kate-sheppard

The Disastrous Consequences of Raiding Public Pensions

Dismantling the Social Contract

by DARWIN BOND-GRAHAM

Detroit’s bankruptcy and a high profile lawsuit in San Jose highlight a national effort led by fiscal conservatives to undo the basic promise embodied in public employee pensions – a guaranteed, defined retirement benefit. If they succeed in unraveling public pensions as has been done to retirement benefits offered by the private sector they might also be erasing one of the most robust counter-cyclical infusions of cash into the economy keeping us from the brink of another crisis.

In Detroit emergency manager Kevin Orr is attempting to cut the pension obligations the city has promised to pay thousands of retirees. He is arguing that a pension is equivalent to bonded indebtedness, and that retirees should take a haircut so that banks can recoup higher interest on their bonds. In San Jose workers are battling the city’s Mayor in court over a ballot measure approved last fall that, if upheld, would circumvent collective bargaining and require public employees to make larger contributions to their retirement fund. Known as Measure B, the law would impose other unilateral changes to San Jose’s retirement plan, ultimately lowering the compensation of employees.

[pullquote] The erasing of pensions—like the dismantling of other safety net income provisions—is typical of the socially stupid “short-term” thinking favored by the corporate rich and their hirelings. [/pullquote]

In numerous other states and cities both liberal and conservative politicians and corporate-backed lobbies are attempting to roll back public pensions either by cutting existing obligations, as is the case in Detroit and San Jose, or by reducing future benefits for new hires.

This anti-defined benefit pension campaign, if successful, could have devastating long-term impacts on the economy. Here’s why.

One of the main causes of the Financial Crisis of 2008 was over-burdensome debt used to finance consumer spending. For decades most Americans have seen the real value of their wages drop. But as consumers became poorer they didn’t cut back on buying cars, houses, electronics, and other goodies. This is partly because the financial system proliferated complicated and risky securitized bonds and credit derivatives to expand the possible debt load on the bottom half of income earners. All of the alphabet soup of securitized debt, CDOs, CMOs etc., freed up hundreds of billions of dollars for the creation of new mortgage, credit card, and other debt. Many of the loans extended through this laissez faire regime of credit creation were predatory, designed to exploit low-income borrowers, but so long as the housing bubble continued to inflate, serious harm was contained. With millions of Americans still in command of purchasing power the economy chugged along, but it was an illusion of prosperity. The incomes of most consumers continued to plummet.

In fact, the reduction of defined benefit pension coverage in the private sector is part of the overall decline in workers’ incomes over the past thirty years which has led to higher levels of consumer debt and less ability to sustain demand in the economy. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, in the early 1990s 35 percent of workers in the private sector were covered by a defined benefit pension system. This level was even higher in the 1970s. Today the number of workers in the private sector with a defined benefit pension has dropped to just 18 percent. This translates into billions less in income for workers after they retire, meaning billions that aren’t injected into the economy in the form of consumer purchases.

Massive levels of private debt and dwindling income to sustain this debt caught up with us in 2007. Combined with speculative gambles by the banks and insurance corporations the system crashed. Many Americans cut back their spending and the crisis worsened.

The so-called recovery that has been underway since about early 2012 has seen prices of everything from corporate stocks to residential homes bounce back, but incomes for many Americans are not rebounding. The underlying structural cause of the economic crash hasn’t been addressed. Workers are still being paid at levels far below the level of previous decades while much of the national income pie is being devoured by the top one percent. Pension payments in the private sector continue to fall as new workers are offered only defined contribution plans, or in many cases nothing at all.

In Keynesian language, there is no force to sustain aggregate demand. Without consumer demand for basic goods there won’t be industrial investment. Without investment there won’t be new jobs and increases in worker productivity, and the incomes of most Americans will continue to decline in real terms. The cycle spins downward without some sort of intervention to lift the majority into income security.

Consider what would happen now if the pension hawks were to get their way and dramatically scale back the retirement benefits that state and local governments have promised their employees. The crisis of declining incomes for the majority of Americans would dramatically worsen. Millions would endure real pay cuts and in turn reduce their household budgets, and the economic system would choke.

According to the US Census’s survey of pensions, there are about 19.4 million public employees who are members of a public employee retirement system. About 8.6 million of these individuals are currently drawing benefits from the 3,400 state and local pension funds of all fifty states, and thousands of counties and cities.

Each month these pension systems pump $60 billion into the US economy in the form of retirement checks cut to their former employees, and also in the form of early withdrawals. These millions of pensioners spend the majority of this cash on consumer goods, healthcare, housing, food, and travel. It’s a total economic stimulus of about $230 billion a year – almost a quarter trillion in income for the middle class to expend.

The geographic distribution of US public pension funds ensures that these dollars are circulated widely in every region of the nation. Retirees in California, New York, Texas, and Florida obviously expend enormous shares of the total flow of pension income. There are over a million retired California public employees collecting and spending their pensions today, but even tiny Wyoming counts 22,000 pensioners on its rolls. As labor scholar Katherine Sciacchitano has written, “far from just supporting retirees, defined-benefit pensions contribute to economic recovery by providing a long-term, stable source of counter-cyclical spending—spending that continues even during economic downturns.”

Public employee pensions are a key source of income for millions of middle class Americans who sustain a big slice of the US economy simply by spending their retirement checks each month. If pension hawks are successful in Detroit, San Jose, and elsewhere, if the attack on pensions translates into a successful dismantling of this part of the American social contract, then it’s likely that the share of income flowing to the bottom 90 percent of the nation would collapse even further. The result would be even more severe economic inequality. Over the long-term, and combined with other causes of income inequality, it would mean economic stagnation, and perhaps even lead to a deflationary spiral.

Darwin Bond-Graham, a contributing editor to CounterPunch, is a sociologist and author who lives and works in Oakland, CA. His essay on economic inequality in the “new” California economy appears in the July issue of CounterPunch magazine. He is a contributor to Hopeless: Barack Obama and the Politics of Illusion

The Age of Regression

How We are Impoverished, Gentrified and Silenced … and What to Do About It

by JOHN PILGER

London.

I have known my postman for more than 20 years. Conscientious and good-humoured, he is the embodiment of public service at its best. The other day, I asked him, “Why are you standing in front of each door like a soldier on parade?”

“New system,” he replied, “I am no longer required simply to post the letters through the door. I have to approach every door in a certain way and put the letters through in a certain way.”

“Why?”

“Ask him.”

Across the street was a solemn young man, clipboard in hand, whose job was to stalk postmen and see they abided by the new rules, no doubt in preparation for privatisation. I told the stalker my postman was admirable. His face remained flat, except for a momentary flicker of confusion.

In Brave New World Revisited, Aldous Huxley describes a new class conditioned to a normality that is not normal “because they are so well adjusted to our mode of existence, because their human voice has been silenced so early in their lives, that they do not even struggle or suffer or develop symptoms as the neurotic does”.

Surveillance is normal in the Age of Regression — as Edward Snowden revealed. Ubiquitous cameras are normal. Subverted freedoms are normal. Effective public dissent is now controlled by police, whose intimidation is normal.

Young people play football against a boarded-up pub in Gorton, Manchester. Absolute poverty among children rose by 300,000 in the last year. Photograph: Christopher Furlong/Getty Images

The traducing of noble words like “democracy”, “reform”, “welfare” and “public service” is normal. Prime ministers who lie openly about lobbyists and war aims are normal. The export of £4bn worth of British arms, including crowd control ammunition, to the medieval state of Saudi Arabia, where apostasy is a capital crime, is normal.

The willful destruction of efficient, popular public institutions like the Royal Mail is normal. A postman is no longer a postman, going about his decent work; he is an automaton to be watched, a box to be ticked. Huxley described this regression as insane and our “perfect adjustment to that abnormal society” a sign of the madness.

Are we “perfectly adjusted” to this? No, not yet. People defend hospitals from closure, UK Uncut forces bank branches to close and six brave women climb the highest building in Europe to show the havoc caused by the oil companies in the Arctic. There, the list begins to peter out.

At this year’s Manchester festival, Percy Bysshe Shelley’s epic Masque of Anarchy – all 91 verses written in rage at the massacre of Lancashire people protesting poverty in 1819 – is an acclaimed theatrical piece, and utterly divorced from the world outside. Last January, the Greater Manchester Poverty Commission disclosed that 600,000 Mancunians were living in “extreme poverty” and that 1.6 million, or nearly half the city’s population, were “sliding into deeper poverty”.

Poverty has been gentrified. The Parkhill Estate in Sheffield was once an edifice of public housing – unloved by many for its Le Corbusier brutalism, poor maintenance and lack of facilities. With its Heritage Grade II listing, it has been renovated and privatised. Two thirds of the old flats have been reborn as modern apartments selling to “professionals”, including designers, architects and a social historian. In the sales office you can buy designer mugs and cushions. This façade offers not a hint that, devastated by the government’s “austerity” cuts, Sheffield has a social housing waiting list of 60,000 people.

Parkhill is a symbol of the two thirds society that is Britain today. The gentrified third do well, some of them extremely well, a third struggle to get by on credit and the rest slide into poverty.

Although the majority of the British are working class – whether or not they see themselves that way — a gentrified minority dominates parliament, senior management and the media. David Cameron, Nick and Ed Milliband are their authentic representatives, with only minor technical difference between their parties. They fix the limits of political life and debate, aided by gentrified journalism and the “identity” industry. The greatest ever transfer of wealth upwards is a given. Social justice has been replaced by meaningless “fairness”.

While promoting this normality, the BBC rewards a senior functionary almost £1m. Although regarding itself as the media equivalent of the Church of England, the Corporation now has ethics comparable with those of the “security” companies G4S and Serco which, says the government, have “overcharged” on public services by tens of millions of pounds. In other countries, this is called corruption.

Like the fire sale of the power utilities, water and the railways, the sale of Royal Mail is to be achieved with bribery and the collaboration of the union leadership, regardless of its vocal outrage. Opening his 1983 documentary series Questions of Leadership, Ken Loach shows trade union leaders exhorting the masses. The same men are then shown, older and florid, adorned in the ermine of the House of Lords. In the recent Queen’s Birthday honours, the general secretary of the TUC, Brendan Barber, received his knighthood.

How long can the British watch the uprisings across the world and do little apart from mourn the long-dead Labour Party? The Edward Snowden revelations show the infrastructure of a police state emerging in Europe, especially Britain. Yet, people are more aware than ever before; and governments fear popular resistance – which is why truth-tellers are isolated, smeared and pursued.

Momentous change almost always begins with the courage of people taking back their own lives against the odds. There is no other way now. Direct action. Civil disobedience. Unerring. Read Percy Shelley – “Ye are many; they are few”. And do it.

John Pilger’s new film, Utopia, will be previewed at the National Film Theatre, London, in the autumn.

ADDENDUM

Extra million people in absolute poverty since coalition came to power

Department for Work and Pensions data shows median income is at lowest level for a decade due to pay freezes and austerity

Larry Elliott and Heather Stewart
The Guardian, Thursday 13 June 2013

Young people play football against a boarded-up pub in Gorton, Manchester. Absolute poverty among children rose by 300,000 in the last year. Photograph: Christopher Furlong/Getty Images

Britain has suffered a “lost decade” in living standards after a second year of sharp falls in inflation-adjusted pay pushed incomes back to levels last seen in the early 2000s, according to official figures released on Thursday.

Data from the Department for Work and Pensions showed that two successive years in which real incomes dropped by 3% per annum wiped out modest gains made in the previous eight years and pushed an extra 1 million people below the absolute poverty line.

The DWP’s annual report on households living below average income showed median income at £427 a week in 2011-12. When adjusted for inflation, this was slightly below the £429 in 2001-02 and well down on the £454 peak in median income in 2009-10.

Pay freezes and “economic restructuring” during the deep and the prolonged slump were the main causes of the fall in living standards, the DWP said.

The figures showed that absolute poverty among children rose by 300,000, with two-thirds of those living in households with one or more earners.

Alison Garnham, chief executive of Child Poverty Action Group, said: “Despite all the talk about ‘scroungers’ and generations of families never working, today’s poverty figures expose comprehensively the myth that the main cause of poverty is people choosing not to work.

“The truth is that for a growing number of families, work isn’t working. The promise that work would be a route out of poverty has not been kept as wages stagnate and spending cuts have hurt low-income working families.”

Falls in income affected those on high, low and middle pay, leaving income inequality unchanged between 2010-11 and 2011-12. Using the relative poverty yardstick, the number of children living in households with incomes of less than 60% of the national median remained unchanged at the lowest level since the mid-1980s.

Anita Tiessen, deputy executive director of Unicef UK, pointed out that the figures predate said: “The number of children living in poverty in the UK is likely to be even higher than the government’s statistics suggest. In the time period covered by today’s figures, major austerity measures – like council tax benefit cuts and the introduction of the bedroom tax – had not yet come into force, so this data does not reflect their probable harmful impact on children’s wellbeing.”

The IFS said the fall in real incomes would have been smaller had an alternative to the Retail Prices Index been used to make the inflation-adjusted comparisons. Even so, it added, real incomes in 2011-12 would have returned to 2004-05 levels.

More detailed analysis of the government’s figures by the Institute for Fiscal Studies reveals a stark generational divide in the way incomes have been affected since the onset of recession. Older people – those in their 60s and 70s – have fared best, and have actually seen their average incomes rise, by 2%-3%, between 2007-08 and 2011-12.

Those in their 20s have been the worst-affected age group, reflecting the fact that unemployment rates for younger workers have been relatively high. Their average income declined by as much as 12% between 2007-8 and 2011-12, after adjusting for inflation.

The IFS said this pattern continued a long-term trend in the run-up to the crisis. People in their 20s saw their incomes stagnate from 2001 onwards as wages flatlined, while rising spending on pensions helped to insulate the elderly.

The fresh evidence that younger people have been hit hardest by the crisis is likely to rekindle arguments about whether the elderly have got off lightly.

David Phillips, senior research economist at the IFS, said substantial changes in the welfare system had helped to reduce relative poverty rates among both pensioners and children over the past fifteen years. Once their lower housing costs are taken into account, pensioners are now at less risk of falling into relative poverty than working-age adults.

“This is in many ways a triumph of social policy. But these figures also confirm that it is young people who have suffered most as a result of the recent recession and who are now at risk of falling further behind. It is important that policymakers and politicians understand these profound changes to patterns of low incomes and respond accordingly.”

Bradley Manning: Another Day in the U.S.A.:, Another Political Prisoner

Inside the New Strategy Group Where Right-Wing Activists and Journalists Coordinate Messaging

Guest Eds: Varieties of Violence

The Disastrous Consequences of Raiding Public Pensions

The Age of Regression