The modern industrial democracy requires modern techniques of propaganda in order to function. This was the belief – both articulated and implemented – by the elite in the early 20th century. Out of this belief grew the functions of modern state-capitalist democracies, the public relations industry, and consumer society, all designed to “engineer the consent” of the masses to the system of control and domination. While coercion and state terror are useful in establishing control and maintaining order, “engineering consent” to the system establishes a much more lasting and stable control. This is the fundamental reason why the most advanced propaganda systems in the world exist in the most advanced nations of the world.

The changing tide of “political awakening” spreading the globe, including the advanced nations, has caught the attention of the public relations industry. The CEO of one of the top PR firms spelled out in a recent article the two main challenges for both governments and public relations in a time of political awakening: that people are no longer depending upon them for information, and that a “new type of democracy” is emerging, where young people are demanding a say in the way their society functions, based upon “dialogue” and “community.” Welcome to the public relations of political awakening.

Listen to the podcast show here (Subscribers only):

SUBSCRIBE

This site depends exclusively on readers’ support. Please help us continue by SUBSCRIBING, and by ordering our EXCLUSIVE BFP DVD .

Getting Out the Vote, at Public Expense

Prevailing wage laws govern worker compensation on government-funded construction projects.  They direct that workers be paid “prevailing wages.� This may not sound like such an evil thing, but these laws end up boosting construction costs significantly, and restrict opportunity for many construction workers. 

There are competing views about the value of these laws from “good government� organizations. But at the end of the day, prevailing wage laws look like good examples how the well-connected few use government to serve their own ends, at the expense of the many. 

State and federal government finances have gotten to the point where people are arguing how close to Greece the United States has become.  Prevailing wage laws have been part of the gas in the burner under our Boiling Pot.  Fortunately, there are some good groups working for the repeal of these laws.

Words and Deeds

Public policy often turns into wordsmithing.  Words are chosen, words are applied, and words can “gain currency” and become commonly used.

Public policy advocates frequently use words artfully and strategically.  This tendency can evolve into a form of lying, even in lawmaking.  For example, titles to statutes are often rife with creative spin, including legislation like the PATRIOT Act, the No Child Left Behind Act, and FDICIA (the “FDIC Improvement Act”).

So what does the word “prevailing” mean, when discussing prevailing wage laws?

First, let’s go to the dictionary.  You have to be careful here because of the distinctions between the noun and adjective forms for “prevailing” and the verb “prevail.”

The Oxford English Dictionary (OED) is an authoritative source. In the context we are looking at, “prevailing” is an adjective, describing the noun “wage.”  The OED entry for the adjective includes two senses.  Here is the first sense: Read more È

Once upon a time an evil witch visits a kingdom and poisons the central well with a potion that drives people mad. The next morning all who drink from that well go crazy. The king, however, knew about this in advance, and didn’t drink from the communal well. The next day, those who drank the poisoned water came to the king and accused him of being the crazy one. The king, aware of what had transpired, was faced with a dilemma: drink from the well and lose his sanity like the rest of his subjects, but remain king; or don’t drink, remain sane, but be swept from power by those who would view his very sanity as madness.

Today in our nation those who refrain from drinking from the well poisoned by the establishment witches are categorized, marginalized, and labeled extremists, crazies, conspiracy theorists, and other adjectives along the same lines:

The political candidate who choose to run as a ‘people’s candidate,’ not the establishment candidate representing this special interest or that foreign interest’s agenda, is referred to as an extremist.

Those groups who fight for accountability and demand justice are dismissed as radicals.

Those in government who dare to come forward, speak up, and tell the truth are labeled as disgruntled whistleblowers.

Those activists who dare to ask for ‘real’ investigations in matters such as 9/11 are grouped and stuffed in a bucket as insane conspiracy theorists.

We have the witches of the establishment pouring the poisoned concoction into the communal wells. Maybe a little bit of pseudo patriotism mixed with a fair amount of fear-mongering laced with dependency-inducing barbitals topped with fluffy fantasy puffs. Maybe three portions of false security shaken with two portions of false prosperity hallucinogenic elixir blended with a shot of apathy-enhancing liquor. Maybe all of the above and more.

Equally if not more importantly we have the poison-water bearers. After all, the objective of poisoning the majority is too important to be left to chance. What if some decide to collect rainwater instead of going to the well? What if some chose river water over well water? You see, for the poisoned well plot to work, most if not all should drink from the poisoned wells, so what better way to ensure than having water bearers deliver to most if not all. The mainstream poison-water-bearers do just that: take the water poisoned by the establishment witches, put it into easy-to-swallow portions and easy-to-drink containers, and then deliver it to as many people as they can. Think establishment witches’ 9/11-national security state-wars concoction, and then think New York Times and Washington Post. You see how it works? Right. You take the establishment poisons, mainstream media poisons-bearers, and you get a whole a lot of poisoned people acting crazy as hell. And if by any chance you have refrained from drinking, then you better be ready to be singled out, pointed to, and called a nut and a crazy.

In a recent article at LWR Tom woods addresses this issue extremely well: Read more È

It was a rainy April day in 2004, and I was in the office of one of my professors at the university’s Public Policy Graduate Department. I was having one of those defeated and disillusioned moments that kept recurring during that time period. I think you would have found it justifiable: I had been slapped with two separate gag orders via two separate invocations of state secrets privilege, I had just witnessed the Congress being hit with another gag order in my case via retroactive classification issued by the Justice Department, we were at war in Iraq based on lies, the PATRIOT ACT was in full swing, secret kidnapping and detention operations by our paramilitary were taking place all over the world, congressional corruption and revolving door scandals were popping up one after another…So, you see, all this and being almost at the end of my masters program specializing in US public policy, where what we were taught didn’t match reality on the ground (US politics and government) whatsoever, gave me a certain degree of justification for feeling  the way I felt that day.

Sitting across from my professor I threw out the questions: Why can’t I see a single instance of practices indicative of our so-called system of checks and balances? Isn’t it more like three illusionary branches but actually one system serving the interests of a very few? Isn’t our nation headed towards a police state; fast and furiously? How do all these in-theory-only fanciful policy concepts apply to real-politics on the ground? …

My professor smiled and nodded. After letting me vent, he calmly replied:

“You are young. You have to look at what’s been happening and place it in historical context. If you look at the US political climate over the last century you’ll see this Pendulum Trend. Things get really bad for civil liberties and good governance for a few years, sometimes even for a decade or more, then, things swing back the other way, and you see Renaissance-Like changes towards the other direction. We go through a hawkish period with wars, and then, we get into a more pacifist mode. We get a conservative administration and lose some of our welfare gains, but a few years later we get a liberal government and put in place new welfare programs…Things don’t stay the same. It’s been only three years or so since 9/11. Very soon people will get over the initial shock and fear, and they’ll push out the current national security state of government…This is the cyclical nature of US politics…�

I looked up at him, and asked:

“So you are saying this Pendulum will swing the other way? All by itself? So we just sit tight and wait for this pendulum to swing the other way?�

He shook his head, and replied:

“It’s a bit more complicated than that, but yes, time takes care of some of that. Other actors outside the state will play their role…you know, various NGOs, etc. Changes in the economy will be another ingredient…of course, the media…the Bush administration will be replaced, and most likely, it will be replaced by the other party, bringing in a liberal oriented administration… So, yes, give it some time and you’ll see the Pendulum swing the other way…�

Tell you what: I have heard this ‘Pendulum Swing’ story-theory many many times since; especially from academians, tunnel-vision analysts, crusty politicians, and to a certain extent, from the general public – those with a bit higher education who consider themselves politically involved and savvy. The more I study history, the further I delve into our real governance record, the more I look at the last half century’s graph on fluctuation of the real ingredients (here at BFP we call these the real diseases, the macro causes)…well, the more I get pi..ed with this utterly nonsensical and false yet widely-held notion of ‘just wait for the ‘Pendulum Swing.’ Read more È

According to the latest reports the degree of allegiance to Israel and its lobby has taken center stage in two Chicago election campaigns for a congressional seat. As far as the two candidates, the incumbent Jan Schakowsky and the Republican Joel Pollak, are concerned, this race and the issues are not about the tanking economy, over a trillion of dollars in deficit or unemployment, neither it is about our disastrous state of civil liberties, quagmire state of our wars, or speedily declining foreign standing and dignity. No.  The number one issue for both candidates is the level of allegiance to the State of Israel, the approval rating from Israel’s number one US lobby AIPAC, and the degree of religiosity in Judaism. The main question and top competition arena in Schakowsky v. Pollak is ‘Who does and will do more and better to represent and protect the Jewish interest?’ And so far our current representative, Ms. Jan Schakowsky seems to be way ahead (the emphasis are all mine;-):

Pollak tends to carry a map of the Middle East with him on the campaign trail, and to present it to the voters. Last week he visited the reform synagogue of B’nai Jehoshua Beth Elohim in Deerfield, Illinois, which hosted a debate between the two candidates. He spread the copy of the Google map in his possession and announced to the audience: “My focus tonight will be Israel.”

…

Pollak’s main obstacle is that Schakowsky was labeled ‘kosher’ by the pro-Israel community, and the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, a prominent lobby group, has praised her work.

…

I’d say Schakowsky is way ahead since her closeted ties and certain long-term commitments go beyond AIPAC, and extend to other Israeli and Turkish subsidiaries all operating under the main lobby’s umbrella.

Do you remember the cover-page story on Jan Schakowsky’s questionable loyalties and skeletons last November? Don’t be hard on yourself if you don’t have a clue since the Israel-Loving mainstream media made sure it stayed quiet and censored. The AmCon Magazine dared to explore the topic after my under oath testimony in Schmidt v. Krikorian case:

So the FBI was monitoring these connections going from a congressman to a congressman’s assistant to a foreign individual who is connected with intelligence to other intelligence people who are located at different embassies in Washington. And all of this information is in an FBI file somewhere?
EDMONDS: Two sets of FBI files, but the AIPAC-related files and the Turkish files ended up converging in one. The FBI agents believed that they were looking at the same operation. It didn’t start with AIPAC originally. It started with the Israeli Embassy. The original targets were intelligence officers under diplomatic cover in the Turkish Embassy and the Israeli Embassy. It was those contacts that led to the American Turkish Council and the Assembly of Turkish American Associations and then to AIPAC fronting for the Israelis. It moved forward from there.

…
GIRALDI: So the investigation stopped in Washington, but continued in Chicago?

EDMONDS: Yes, and in 2000, another representative was added to the list, Jan Schakowsky, the Democratic congresswoman from Illinois. Turkish agents started gathering information on her, and they found out that she was bisexual. So a Turkish agent struck up a relationship with her. When Jan Schakowsky’s mother died, the Turkish woman went to the funeral, hoping to exploit her vulnerability. They later were intimate in Schakowsky’s townhouse, which had been set up with recording devices and hidden cameras. They needed Schakowsky and her husband Robert Creamer to perform certain illegal operational facilitations for them in Illinois. They already had Hastert, the mayor, and several other Illinois state senators involved. I don’t know if Congresswoman Schakowsky ever was actually blackmailed or did anything for the Turkish woman.

…

I think it would be wise to also concentrate on Rep. Jan Schakowsky’s convicted husband, Bob Creamer. After all, this is Chicago! The following is from what I wrote a while back titled ‘Chicago! Not the Musical, but the Action-Suspense Docudrama!’

In March 2004 Schakowsky’s husband, lobbyist Robert Creamer, who was also executive director of the Illinois Public Action Fund, was indicted in federal court on 16 counts of bank fraud involving three alleged check-kitting schemes in the mid-1990s, leading several banks to experience shortfalls of at least $2.3 million. Later he pleaded guilty to tax violations and bank fraud for writing rubber checks and failing to collect withholding tax from an employee. Here is a report in USA Today:

Creamer, 58, a prominent Chicago political consultant, was accused of swindling nine financial institutions of at least $2.3 million while he ran a public interest group in the 1990s.Creamer told reporters Wednesday there was “no doubt that my actions a decade ago were very foolish and placed myself, my family, the organization and many of those who worked with me at considerable risk.”The indictment alleged Creamer caused a series of insufficiently funded checks and wire transfers to be drawn on accounts he controlled as executive director of the Illinois Public Action Fund. According to the indictment, he allegedly then used the inflated balances to pay the group’s expenses and own salary.

And here is more:

The husband of U.S. Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-Ill.) will spend five months in prison for committing bank fraud as part of his efforts to keep afloat a nonprofit group that he ran. U.S. Senior District Judge James Moran handed down the punishment on Wednesday to Robert Creamer, who also will serve 11 months under house arrest.

The sentence fell far short of the three-year prison term that prosecutors were seeking for Creamer, who pleaded guilty last year to writing a series of bad checks worth millions of dollars to numerous banks to generate cash — a scheme known as check-kiting.

…

Now, Rep. Schakowsky served on the organization’s board during the time the crimes occurred. She happened to sign all the IRS filings along with her husband during this almost decade long of … basically embezzlements. She was fully aware of her husband’s additional income of $100,000 from these fraudulent funds. Yet, this woman, who happens to be a Representative, claimed she had no idea, that she had not noticed, that she had not known or suspected.

I don’t know about you but no matter under which one of the two scenarios – she didn’t know or she knew and went along – this woman should have been kicked out of her congressional seat. Let’s take the first scenario:

If she is so dumb and stupid as to sign all these joint IRS documents and it doesn’t register that there are unaccounted for millions of dollars, she is not competent to be a congresswoman. PERIOD! If she is so irresponsible and intelligence-wise challenged to serve on this organization’s board, sign all the minutes and papers and bank dealings, and yet doesn’t realize millions of dollars are coming out of nowhere, then she is not capable and mentally unfit to occupy her current congressional seat, and should be removed. PERIOD! So here is the question for Schakowsky’s constituents: If she is telling the truth shouldn’t they be voting this uber gullible, stupid woman out of office? Read more È

 

The Electoral College shall be abolished. Article 1, Section 2, Clause 1; Article 1, Section 3, Clause 1 and Article 2, Section 1, Clause 2 shall be amended to provide for random computer  selection of all Federal Elective offices from Internal Revenue Service tax rolls of citizens within the appropriate Congressional District, State and Nation respectively according to existing Constitutional requirements. This amendment shall supersede the Fifteenth, Seventeenth and Nineteenth amendments.

Proposed Constitutional Amendment

As I look back over my experiences as a voting citizen since 1972, I have viewed with increasing alarm the growing disconnect between the citizenry and the leaders and representatives we elect. I have watched the increased growth and power of a Political Class disconnected from the needs of the citizenry as well as the alarming increase and importance of money in our electoral system. This corruptive influence of money on elections has further isolated the aforementioned political class by allowing a defacto form of two-tier citizenship. One class of the wealthy and corporate citizens who have real influence on government, another, lower class of regular citizens like you and me who have little or no influence on the actions of our government. Over the course of those decades, I have seen the Congress repeatedly try and either fail to enact significant campaign finance reform or have it’s efforts frustrated by contrary legal decisions that enshrine that unequal influence on our elections. This view was most recently reinforced by the Supreme Court’s activist ruling in their recent decision on Citizens_United_v._Federal_Election_Commission.

As a result of these actions, I have been forced to conclude that the pernicious influence of money on politics has become a clear and present danger to the functioning of our Constitutional Democratic Republic. I have further been forced to conclude that the elective system we have currently in place no longer provides for Real Representative Government responsive to the needs of the citizenry at large. I have, therefore, long pondered what changes can be made to restore citizen control of and real representation within that government. With the recent Supreme Court decision throwing out over 100 years of legal precedent, I do not see Public financing of elections as a credible path to reform. It is time to consider radical solutions to this problem. Since the acknowledged intent of the framers was to ensure that representatives to our government would accurately reflect the citizenry at large, what is needed is a mechanism to restore and reinforce that reflection.

My mechanism for reform would abolish all federal elections for legislative and executive offices and replace that mechanism with one based on random computer selection for all current federal elective offices from Internal Revenue tax rolls. All existing Constitutional requirements for office would remain in force. Using myself as an example, as a 56-year-old native-born citizen with no felony convictions from the 2^nd Congressional District in New Mexico, I could be selected as the 2^nd District Congressman, Senator from New Mexico, Vice President or President. Companion laws would be passed based on existing statutes governing National Guard Service and Jury Duty. The mechanism would work as follows. Read more È

Joe Lauria relates the latest developments in the United Nations, including the controversies involving the elections in Afghanistan, the removal of Peter Galbraith, and the liability of having an American as the second man in office. He discusses the recent UN report on the Taliban’s funding, including heroin related funds and associated outcomes, the chronic and widespread corruption within the Afghan government, and President Obama’s dilemma when it comes to Af-Pak. The interview also includes his perspective on factors contributing to the fading away of the traditional roles of the press in the US, the media blackout on ‘deep politics,’ shortcomings of amateur news blogs, and more!

Joe Lauria is an author, foreign affairs correspondent and investigative reporter. He has covered the United Nations for 19 years for numerous newspapers, including The Wall Street Journal, the Boston Globe, the London Daily Telegraph, the Montreal Gazette and the Johannesburg Star. Joe is a member of the Sunday Times of London’s investigative unit. He is co-author of A Political Odyssey, a look at America’s defense industry and the false threats it thrives on.

Here is our guest Joe Lauria unplugged!

Interview with Joe Lauria [ 1:06:13 ] Play Now | Play in Popup | Download

This site depends exclusively on readers’ support. Please help us continue by contributing directly and or purchasing Boiling Frogs showcased products.