Regarding Robert Creamer:
Served 5 months in prison (and 11 months in house arrest) for tax evasion and bank fraud
While in prison, he wrote a book that later served as a blueprint for Democrat proposals for universal health care.
Calls for the “democratization of wealth” in America, and for “progressive control of governments around the world”
Advocates amnesty for illegal aliens
Born in 1948, Robert Creamer is the husband of Democrat Rep. Jan Schakowsky. He formerly served as executive director of the Illinois Public Action Fund (where his wife was the program director), and subsequently as a leader of Citizen Action/Illinois. He was also a lobbyist for George Soros’s Open Society Institute. Today Creamer heads the Strategic Consulting Group, a political consultancy whose list of clients includes ACORN, the Service Employees International Union (SEIU), the AFL-CIO, the United Steelworkers Union of America, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, and dozens of other leftist or Democratic Party state organizations.
Pursuant to an FBI investigation, Creamer in 2006 was indicted for bank fraud and tax evasion. During his trial, he received some 200 letters of support from such notables as Richard Durbin, Carol Browner, Jesse Jackson, and David Axelrod. Creamer ultimately was sentenced to five months in federal prison plus eleven months of house arrest. Upon his sentencing, he publicly pledged: “For the rest of my life I will continue to do whatever I can to work for social and economic justice.”
While incarcerated -- or on “forced sabbatical,” as he called it -- Creamer wrote a 628-page political manual titled Stand Up Straight! How Progressives Can Win (published in 2007). In the Acknowledgements section of the book, Creamer stated that his political views had been deeply influenced by “the legendary community organizer” Saul Alinsky.
Stand Up Straight! advanced the notion that the Democratic Party could win a permanent majority in Congress by doing the following:
passing a national health care bill, thereby turning more people into wards of an ever-expanding government, and of the party that works to grow government; and
giving amnesty to all illegal immigrants, thereby creating, virtually overnight, a large new constituency of Democratic voters.
The author conceded that his desire “to reshape the structure of one-sixth of the American economy” (i.e., the health care sector) was contingent upon the Democrats being able to control 60 votes in the U.S. Senate, and upon the election of a “progressive Democrat” to the White House -- conditions that could, in Creamer's estimation, be achieved by the year 2009. Notably, his book was effusive in its praise of then-Senator Barack Obama.
Creamer's book advocated a “public plan” that would guarantee every U.S. resident's “right” to health care; this plan eventually would serve as a model for the “public option” in subsequent legislative proposals by Congressional Democrats.
In addition, Creamer laid out a “Progressive Agenda for Structural Change,” which included a ten-point plan to set the stage for implementing universal health care:
“We must create a national consensus that health care is a right, not a commodity; and that government must guarantee that right.”
“We must create a national consensus that the health care system is in crisis.”
“Our messaging program over the next two years should focus heavily on reducing the credibility of the health insurance industry and focusing on the failure of private health insurance.”
“We need to systematically forge relationships with large sectors of the business/employer community.”
“We need to convince political leaders that they owe their elections, at least in part, to the groundswell of support of [sic] universal health care, and that they face political peril if they fail to deliver on universal health care in 2009.”
“We need not agree in advance on the components of a plan, but we must foster a process that can ultimately yield consensus.”
“Over the next two years, we must design and organize a massive national field program.”
“We must focus especially on the mobilization of the labor movement and the faith community.”
“We must systematically leverage the connections and resources of a massive array of institutions and organizations of all types.”
“To be successful, we must put in place commitments for hundreds of millions of dollars to be used to finance paid communications and mobilization once the battle is joined.”
“To win,” added Creamer, “we must not just generate understanding, but emotion—fear, revulsion, anger, disgust.”
Beyond the narrow specifics of health care, Creamer in his book advocated the “democratization of wealth” in America and “progressive control of governments around the world.”
Creamer also identified immigration as an issue that “will have an enormous impact on the battle for power between the progressive and conservative forces in American society.” He said:
“If the Democrats continue to stand firmly for immigrant rights, the issue will define immigrants’ voting loyalties for a generation. If we are successful, a gigantic block of progressive votes will enter the electorate over the next 15 years—a block that could be decisive in the battle for the future.”
Mirroring his approach to health care, Creamer stressed the importance of persuading religious leaders to lobby, on moral grounds, in favor of amnesty and expanded rights for illegal aliens.
Stand Up Straight! was endorsed by a number of leading Democrats and their political allies, including: Greg Galluzzo, director of the Gamaliel Foundation; SEIU president Andrew Stern, who said the book would “hopefully inspire more people to act”; political strategist David Axelrod, who said it “provides a blueprint for future victories”; Democrat operative John Podesta, who called the book a “straight-up shot in the arm for progressives”; political commentator Arianna Huffington, who said it would help “return America to its progressive roots”; and Congressman John Lewis, who said the book would help “create our society’s next historical movement.”
In 2008 Creamer worked for the Obama presidential campaign, training volunteers at “Camp Obama.”
Today Creamer writes periodically for the Huffington Post. On November 19, 2009, he penned a piece that said: “If we succeed in winning health insurance reform we will have breached the gates of the status quo. We will demonstrate that fundamental change is possible. Into that breach will flow a wave of progressive change.”
On November 24, 2009, Creamer attended a White House state dinner -- along with high-level Obama advisors like Andrew Stern and David Axelrod -- despite the fact that ex-convicts are usually barred from such events.
In a December 2009 interview, Creamer said the following with regard to Senator Joseph Lieberman's opposition to government-run healthcare:
"The problem with Lieberman is .... he has kind of the suicide-bomber kind of advantage. He doesn't care if he blows the whole house down. The best option for him, to a healthcare bill, is no bill; that's fine [with him]. He doesn't care if there's no bill, because the insurance industry is happy to have no bill. And he is happy -- gleeful -- to try and punish the left wing of the party that he believes wronged him."
When the interviewer interjected that Lieberman was "a vindictive, spiteful, little, miserable man who is taking a lot of money from the insurance industry," Creamer said: "Absolutely miserable."
“Let her and Falsehood grapple; who ever knew Truth put to the worse in a free and open encounter?”--Milton,Areopagitica
The following words appear on the page preceding the "Contents" page of Saul D. Alinsky's
RULES FOR RADICALS .
Lest we forget at least an over-the-shoulder acknowledgment to the very first radical:from all our legends, mythology, and history (and who is to know where mythology leaves off and history begins -- or which is which), the very first radical known to man who rebelled against the establishment and did it so effectively that he at least won his own kingdom --Lucifer.
* * * * *
* * * * *
Utahns Against Common Core
Common Core Violates 3 Federal Laws--July 11, 2012
Common Core as currently implemented directly violates or comes to the very edge of the line of these three federal laws. Particularly the last one below is in process of being violated as states are required to incur costs of this implementation that are not funded by the federal government (AKA taxpayer money).
From the General Education Provisions Act (20 USC § 1232a) -- See Below
“No provision of any applicable program shall be construed to authorize any department, agency, officer, or employee of the United States to exercise any direction, supervision, or control over the curriculum, program of instruction, administration, or personnel of any educational institution, school, or school system, or over the selection of library resources, textbooks, or other printed or published instructional materials by any educational institution or school system, or to require the assignment or transportation of students or teachers in order to overcome racial imbalance.”
From the Department of Education Organization Act (20 USC § 3403(b))
“No provision of a program administered by the Secretary or by any other officer of the Department shall be construed to authorize the Secretary or any such officer to exercise any direction, supervision, or control over the curriculum, program of instruction, administration, or personnel of any educational institution, school, or school system, over any accrediting agency or association, or over the selection or content of library resources, textbooks, or other instructional materials by any educational institution or school system, except to the extent authorized by law.”
From the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 as amended by the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (20 USC 7907(a))
“Nothing in this Act shall be construed to authorize an officer or employee of the Federal Government to mandate, direct, or control a State, local educational agency, or school’s curriculum, program of instruction, or allocation of State and local resources, or mandate a State or any subdivision thereof to spend any funds or incur any costs not paid for under this Act.”