ASKING NOT WHAT OUR COUNTRY CAN DO FOR US, BUT WHAT WE CAN DO FOR OUR COUNTRY! AGENTLEMAN
We are not against Capitalism and profit, but against its potential for abuse.
We are not against any religion, but against its manipulative use as a political weapon.
We are not against democracy, but declarations of not being patriotic when we disagree.
We are not against the democratic process unless the corporate world uses it against us.
We are not against the American Dream, but tired of being excluded from it.
We are not against those who have obtained wealth, but against those who would keep us from joining them.
We are not against defending this most grand country of ours, but the use of our military for corporate interests and most assuredly, against private armies.
We are not against national defense, we’re against spending on weapons of destruction, when our children need education, our infrastructure is falling apart and the quality of life in America deteriorates.
We are not against our beautiful America, but against the lost of the American ideal and dream that other countries in existence much longer have yet to achieve.
We are not against a strong America, we don’t believe that it can exist without respect for all who are American.
We are not against anyone making profits, but against making profits at the expense of and the detriment to, the health and well-being of American families no matter the composition.
We are not weak. We are not traitors. We are not unpatriotic. We are not elitist.
We are Democrats by way of the political process by choice.
We are proudly Liberals because we were taught caring for each other is an American ideal.
We are fiercely Progressive not for those came before, but all of those in the future yet to come this way.
This is our America as well and we will fight just as fiercely to take it back because we love America too!
© 2014, agentleman.
Welcome to the Incorporated States Of Koch; Please stand by to be assimilated January 01, 2017 … A Gentleman
NOT FOR PUBLIC VIEWING: ASSIGNED GROUPS ONLY!
As you may or may not know we own two of the three branches of government by way of the judicial and legislative and expect to wrap the executive branch between now and 2016. These will be the changes implemented at that time. Please understand we have decided private enterprise is the true barometer of a ‘Free Market’ democracy and so private enterprise will now control these aspects of the American society moving forward:
- The complete abolishment of the following cabinet departments; Environmental Protection Agency, United States Department of Labor and Industries, Department of Energy, the Internal Revenue Service and the Department Of Veterans Affairs.
- Replace the following cabinet departments as follows; Department of Agriculture responsibilities turned over to Monsanto Company, Department of Education turned over to the National Association of Charter School Authorizers, Department of Energy and the Department of Transportation turned over to Exxon Oil Company, Department of Commerce abolished and duties turned over to the United States Chamber Of Commerce, Department of Treasury duties turned over to the Federal Reserve, Department of Defense and Homeland Securities duties turned over to Blackwater Inc./Xe Incorporated, Health and Human Services/Social Security duties to the National Organization of Life and Health Insurance Guaranty Associations.
- Overturn the following legislations by executive order; Affordable Care Act, Lilly Ledbetter Act, Voting Rights Act of 1965, Equal Pay legislation, Roe Vs. Wade, Women Voting Rights, Family Leave Acts, End Medicare and Medicaid, American with Disabilities Act, Abolish any and all gender protections and rights related to the LGBT protections, Civil Rights Act of 1964, 40 hour work week, all child labor protection laws. The fourteenth and Twenty-Seventh Amendments could be abolished as well.
- No income taxes on salaries higher than 1 million per annum, 40% on all other income brackets, abolish minimum wage laws nationwide, shutdown all scientific research and development government projects nationwide not connected to national security and defense.
- United States of America will be declared a Christian Nation, therefore prayer will be required before the following; the school day, all events open to the public, all businesses work day, public displays of Christian scenes, rituals and practices will be allowed as per request.
- All persons of Black/African descent will be interned in Guantanamo Bay as of 1 January, 2017 until further notice as labor resources will require, all Latinos will be deported to country of origin, United States will annex Canada and Mexico per National Securities requirements, institute English as principle language and martial law as required.
- Declare electric automotive, solar, and wind technologies illegal and shutdown any and all like operations in on the North American continent, remove all restrictions on oil drilling and open up all national territories for exploration.
- Abolish the right to ‘Free Assembly’, make it illegal to protest in public spaces and forums, allow ‘Free Press’ that meets standards of United States requirements and set them, abolish term limits nationally,
- Dissolve Social Security and allow ‘Free Enterprise’ with fund management experience to access to trust fund to determine if and how funds will be distributed.
- All civil liberty organizations and labor unions will be declared illegal and banned immediately and served with cease operations orders.
This basically is the ultimate hostile takeover of the United States government in the mode of the way we operate on the ‘Street’. As stated above, ‘Free Enterprise’ will rule the day in our democracy moving forward. Agencies and cabinet departments that previously interfered with that natural order will be abolished. The corporations responsible for those departments will fill cabinet positions as Congress approves them.
Some cabinet departments are being turned over to well established businesses listed on the Fortune 500 as having the expertise that set them apart in a way that will move America forward as never before. We will no longer allow principles long ago established by a truly competitive market place without constant interference by regulations and requirements and taxes to hinder America’s true place as an exceptional leader of the free world.
Charter schools are the future of America! No longer will our children have to be bombarded with liberal ethos and ethics that impede their learning their true value in our country. Prayer will open up their hearts and minds to the values of a great Christian nation that we can become. We don’t need all that science shit filling kids minds up with a bunch bullshit crap that eventually impact free markets. The marketplace is America and we are the marketplaces of the world! No entity understands this better than Wall Street; so let them run our treasury and commerce Departments. As for Social Security, hey they set it up and if they can’t protect it, it’s on them not us if somehow its lost in the marketplace. Our Wall Street titans have proven themselves as successful men, we have faith they can do this for America! Who knows transportation better than Exxon Oil, enough said! We already have a great company in Blackwater that fully appreciates the state of affairs in the world when it comes to security and understands that dangers lie out there and need to be looked after; America’s Homeland and national security issues will be safe in their hands and make us profit too.
All of these rights and privileges as a citizen is a bunch of malarkey. Who promised this shit, our forefathers stated people of position, landowners and the like was to run things in this great country’s beginning because we’re educated enough to know what is in the best interest of mankind, not just because we were born here. White man has developed the free world, we’re not about to turn it over and go quietly into the night, no way. This is our time, our place and our show so no one is going to grow in numbers large enough to put us out to pasture. We are declaring a country on this planet just for God’s White man!
Internment will be temporary as we’ve many requests before even starting this campaign to bring back slavery, so the blacks will be put back in their rightful place here in America. You’d be surprised how many come from the north. Annexation will be necessary to quell any notions of who is in control of the continent. Don’t concern yourselves with international fallout; if Putin can go back in time with the Ukraine, he wouldn’t dare challenge us on this move. I know folks are saying if Clinton runs in ’16, it’ll be over for us for a long time, don’t sweat the small stuff, we already own them. You saw how they caved when we sic’d the Heritage Foundation on her ass during the healthcare fiasco back during his term, just letting her in will be enough to squash and control her and any party rebellion and its smooth sailing from that point on.
This will be more seamless than most think as people have proven to be too lazy to come out in numbers large enough to stop us from midterm forward if they can’t do so when they find it to be convenient even if it is in their best interest. If you think about it we should have full employment for all the White males in America within a year…
David H. Koch
© 2014, agentleman.
A GENTLEMAN’S VIEW CHALLENGE TO PROGRESSIVE MOVEMENT: A Platform for 2016 Presidential election;
If we continue to do things the same way, they most certainly won’t change…
This is the National Agenda Of The Progressive Party.
- Economic Justice: Prosperity should be accessible to everyone, not merely the few.
- Civil Rights: Every individual’s civil rights must be protected; discrimination and harassment based on race, ethnicity, gender, religion, sexual orientation, or physical and developmental ability should be banned.
- Health Care: Every individual should have affordable, quality health care.
- Education: It is essential that we invest in quality public education for all.
- Environment: We must commit to restoring and protecting our environment.
- Reproductive Freedom: Women and men – not politicians – deserve the right to make personal decisions about their reproductive health in accordance with their own personal and moral beliefs.
These are some specifics that address the issues of today’s reality and the stated Progressive agenda:
1. This country pays American taxpaying dollars subsidizing Fortune Five Hundred Companies during the last year to the tune of 63 Billion dollars. My understanding of the whole purpose of being one of elite prestigious companies on this list besides policies that make Wall Street happy is the ability to a) pay all employees a wage good enough to afford one wager earner per family as to allow real child rearing to take place in America and to do this without having United States subsidizing your employees with food stamps, to pay their fair share of corporate taxes if they have enough money to pay obscene bonuses to their CEO’s, to bring jobs home to America instead of utilizing sub standardly supported employees overseas. Meet those requirements and make them the standard then maybe some relief can be considered but during the last ten years of war in which much profit was made, very little was paid to support the patriotic work of our military much less the support the infrastructure updates needed all around this great nation by those companies making ever so much more profit. These savings will be the foundation funding education discussed below in item #8.
2. Immediate shutdown of all corporate subsides for foreign companies and any American Companies or business entities making profit during this support, manufacturing/operating overseas for avoidance of tax responsibilities (i.e. Apple). This should be about being an American citizen first an recognized American Business entity, proudly willing to participate in forwarding the American cause and Ideals. 50% of this savings should directly be put to education in addition to the savings from item #1 and would not be an added tax on any corporation or individuals to fund.This is simple, show profit, pay huge bonuses you don’t need United States government financial tax payer subsidized support for those benefits to the business or individuals. THIS ARGUMENT WILL NO LONGER BE ACCEPTABLE WITH PROGRESS: ‘Removal of subsidies equals tax increase’.
3. Refinance all outstanding mortgages at 3% and forgive related debt underwater and otherwise to include interest and penalties, give all financial institutions impacted an one time charge off without addition subsides for those outstanding balances. The point here is not to reward those who shouldn’t have taken part in the bad mortgage programs, but give a chance to homeowners who can afford to and not punish them as we did not the bankers. Let us be honest; many people will gain advantage from these saving including some responsible for causing this damage in the first place, so be it.
4. Forgive all student debt to include all interest and penalties, Banks were paid to stay in business while all others suffered, so no charge off for this loss period! The idea is to use avenues of revenue in place today and free up personal household debt. Take the government out of the business of profiting from educating its citizens which America should gladly welcome. See item #8.
5. Mandatory solar on all federal buildings by end of first term (2021). This is a no brainer when it comes to directly setting the tone for Uncle Sam’s responsible and representative behavior and policy about climate. The United States government has a mandate as a national security issue to take any action necessary to reduce this governments carbon footprint production, this and the next item starts us in that direction.
6. Electric government motor pool by 2025 for passenger vehicles, seeking full electronic transportation motor pool by 2040. Again making a statement that Uncle Sugar will take a conscience effort to a much smaller carbon footprint with the government’s motor pool and impact on climate.
7. Single payer modification made to the Affordable Care Act, Complete medical coverage for women’s health that allows for full range and control of choices. This would be the right thing to do to a system stolen from the opposition with the mission of giving to the client (health care patient) as little as possible for their money as put together by the Heritage Foundation in opposition to the Hillary Clinton Health Care plan.
8. Free full academic/vocational college education for all naturalized citizens who desire such education; vocational education and/for advancement can stand in its stead 10 year time limit to completion. See #2 for cost for implementing this educational national push.
9. Minimum wage standard at federal of 22 dollars an hour. $10.10 is not a ‘real living wage’ and an insult that doesn’t address family’s ability to have one parent at home, or childcare costs for single parents. If we claim to be about family we need to invest in the reality of what it takes to have and run a family today.
10. Fully subsidize purchases of electric personal passenger automobiles for 10 years . (Vehicles must meet standard of fully electric operational capability and can not be hybrid) This would be like the homes for vets after world war 2, with the intent of moving as many people as desired to convert to green mobility to be able to do so.
All of this he/she could do by executive order, two for each of Her/His first week in office. These executive orders would directly impact the financial status of the middle and lower strata Americans across a broad spectrum of households in a way that would immediately stimulate economic growth and activity for continued expansion by freeing up money that was being paid to continue to be buried under all this debt. Wall street was taken care of without begging Congress to get off their asses and do what they were elected to do and that is legislate instead of the traitorous behavior this country has witnessed to date. This would adjust the playing field for awhile, there is still much work to achieve a level one. This is where I fail to see the boldness of today’s Progressive Movement…
Pick a point, the economy, make a stand, suggest practical solutions, then put people on the spot, arguing with a fool only proves there are two, we have five years of two parties of fools arguing… Any of my followers who can suggest an even stronger platform, I will post their suggestions, I just thought we should at least attempt to care about and take care of the home front first. These suggestions attempts to address the financial difficulties everyone but the people who cause the catastrophe in the first place are experiencing. If we are not doing anything to give back/restore/build some trust with those who been devastated by the impact of this recession then the rest is straight bullshit! These 10 items address actions that can be taken presently and will positively impact many Americans across the spectrum no matter the party and that would be a good thing for America not just for Wall Streets Billionaires…
Shut down Federal Reserve or offer 75%+ tax as alternative, nothing less because we must admit to an Hedge Fund rape experience going on here. Wall Street Investment Managed Hedge Fund Banking destroy’s America’s financial stability by stealing off the top of all money printed by the United States government to finance their larcenous activities. They strip-mine corporations for personal profit, stifle innovation by dictating company policy by performance standards that suit their goals of personal gain and by doing so crush small businesses innovations and startups. This though presented to be the contrary, is not safe, honest or beneficial to a ‘true’ free market capitalistic society for personal profits reign supreme over country or citizenry gain.
I paused in adding this for the Reserve as it will be the most difficult mechanism in place to dispose of because of illegality of its activities and how much Wall Street emissaries will fight its dissolution defending free enterprise and capitalism to death, namely anyone suggesting their demise) They have stated through their complaints of over taxation that they don’t want to participate any more than the 15% that are presently taxed at, they don’t want people without their perception of ‘skin’ (equal wealth level) in the ‘game’ to participate in the political process. To them gambling with the resources of the world is nothing but a game no matter what the damage may be in reality. Dollars equals votes equals enslaved mankind kissing Wall Street and corporate ass for all eternity, sadly if they don’t love this country, if they feel they are superior, if they really believe that all those millions didn’t come from us, we must learn to proceed by all legitimate means to progress forward. I will replace this soon, please stand by. The main point here to to take some action that doesn’t require begging the Congress for every little thing in order to get something done…
A Lesson From Ecuador: “Health is a right guaranteed by the state and whose fulfilment is linked to the exercise of other rights, including the right to water, food, education, sport, work, social security, a healthy environment and everything that promotes well-being. The state shall guarantee this right by implementing economic social, cultural, educational and environmental policies. It shall guarantee permanent, timely and non-exclusive access to programmes, actions and services promoting and providing comprehensive healthcare and reproductive health. The provision of healthcare services shall be governed by the principles of equity, universality, solidarity, interculturalism, quality, efficiency, effectiveness, prevention, and bioethics with a fair gender and generational approach.” President of Ecuador statement about the citizens of his country which we could learn from…A Third World Country like that.
© 2013 – 2014, agentleman.
Journalist Jo Becker has a new book out on the marriage equality movement. The revolution began, it appears, in 2008. And its Rosa Parks was a man you would be forgiven for knowing nothing about, Chad Griffin. Here’s how the book begins – and I swear I’m not making this up:
This is how a revolution begins. It begins when someone grows tired of standing idly by, waiting for history’s arc to bend toward justice, and instead decides to give it a swift shove. It begins when a black seamstress named Rosa Parks refuses to give up her seat on a bus to a white man in the segregated South. And in this story, it begins with a handsome, bespectacled thirty-five-year-old political consultant named Chad Griffin, in a spacious suite at the Westin St. Francis hotel in San Francisco on election night 2008.
After that surreal opening, the book descends into more jaw-dropping distortion. For Becker, until the still-obscure Griffin came on the scene, the movement for marriage equality was a cause “that for years had largely languished in obscurity.” I really don’t know how to address that statement, because it is so wrong, so myopic and so ignorant it beggars belief that a respectable journalist could actually put it in print. Obscurity? Is Becker even aware of the history of this struggle at all? Throughout the 1990s, marriage equality had roiled the political landscape, dominated the national debate at times, re-framed and re-branded the entire gay movement, achieved intellectual heft, and keylegal breakthroughs, such as the landmark Hawaii case that vaulted the entire subject from an idea to a reality. The man who actually started that revolution was Dan Foley, a straight man from the ACLU, who filed the key lawsuit. Foley does not make Becker’s index. Why would he? If the revolution only began in 2008, he is irrelevant. The courage and clarity it took to strike that first blow is nothing for Becker compared with that of two straight men, David Boies and Ted Olson, and one gay man, Chad Griffin, who swooped into the movement at the last moment and who were, not accidentally, Becker’s key sources for the entire tall tale.
The intellectual foundation of the movement is also non-existent in Becker’s book – before, wait for it!, Ken Mehlman and Ted Olson brought Republican credibility to the movement. Yes, that’s her claim. My own work – penning the first cover-story on theconservative case for marriage equality in 1989, a subsequent landmark re-imagining of the gay rights movement in 1993, and a best-selling book, Virtually Normal in 1995 – is entirely omitted from the book, along with the critical contributions from other conservatives and libertarians, from Jon Rauch and Bruce Bawer to John Corvino and Dale Carpenter. I suspect even Olson and Mehlman will reject Becker’s ludicrous thesis, if challenged on this point. But for Becker, all of this work contributed nothing but further obscurity. The astonishing achievement of turning what was once deemed a joke into a serious national cause and issue happened in the 1990s and then more emphatically after George W. Bush’s endorsement of the Federal Marriage Amendment in 2004. But for Becker, an obscure late-comer, Griffin, had a “unique ability” to leverage legal cases into a political rallying cry. This is so wrong and so contemptuous of the people who really did do that work I am at a loss for words.
More staggeringly, the critical, indispensable role of Evan Wolfson in pioneering this cause is actually treated with active contempt in the book. He is ludicrously portrayed by Becker as an obstacle to change, a remnant of a previous generation, a man who had led the marriage movement nowhere. This is where the book becomes truly toxic and morally repellent. I’ve been a part of this movement for twenty-five years, either as an activist speaker/writer or as a close observer on this blog for the last decade and a half. What Becker writes about Evan and the movement is unconscionable, ignorant and profoundly wrong. Evan had the courage to create this movement, and empower it with legal rigor and strategy, when it was far, far less popular than it is now. Without him, quite simply, the movement would not exist for Griffin to now outrageously attempt to claim credit for. Yet this book sweeps Wolfson aside as an actual obstacle to progress because he was concerned that the Prop 8 case was a high-risk high-reward legal strategy that would not be the slam-dunk for national marriage equality that Boies and Olson believed it would be.
And here’s the thing: Evan was right about that. The Prop 8 case succeeded only in striking down California’s ban, and not changing the entire world, and it rested entirely on the legal and intellectual infrastructure Evan and I and others had been building for two decades. If Boies and Olson had been right, we would have federal marriage equality right now. But they weren’t and we don’t. Now I supported the case because I believed that it could add to the educational effort to expose the weakness of the arguments of those opposing equality – and – wh0 knows? – might even end marriage discrimination. But when I say “add”, I mean exactly that. Legal arguments take time to percolate up and about. And the Prop 8 case was deeply dependent on the cases that preceded it. It wasn’t a panacea, and was less potent than the Windsor case in changing America as a whole. So while I’m certainly no opponent of Boies and Olson, and was thrilled to have them on board, it is simply bizarre to argue, as Becker does, that the marriage equality movement didn’t really exist until they and Griffin allegedly “re-branded” it.
Perhaps the most critical legal events in this long struggle took place in New England. Getting actual marriage equality in one state, Massachusetts – and then exporting it to an entire region – had always been our Holy Grail and was indispensable to our long-term success. There were many architects of that vision – but one stands out to anyone with any knowledge of the matter. That’s Mary Bonauto, the woman who won the right to marry in Vermont in 1997 (only to be foiled by the legislature), and who made marriage in Massachusetts happen. To quote Roberta Kaplan, who argued the Windsor case in front of the Supreme Court, “No gay person in this country would be married without Mary Bonauto.” Yet in Becker’s book, she too is shunted aside, and airbrushed out of history. In fact, any figure of any note apart from Boies and Olson and Griffin are excised in this book in Stalinist fashion as if they didn’t exist.
For me, then, the key question about this book is how on earth such a distorted and ahistorical and polemical attack on the architects of the marriage equality movement can have been written. Becker could have presented the material in this book merely as the experience of a few people who came very late to the movement – a small snapshot of the last few years through the eyes of a small group. But she doesn’t. She credits them with the entire movement, and treats all those before as obstacles to it. That’s such a distortion you have to wonder how it came about.
The answer, I think, is access-journalism. It’s clear from the notes in the book that an overwhelming amount of the material comes from the sources she embedded herself with. Other figures with real knowledge of the movement barely get a phone call. (Wolfson got one peremptory one late in the day; I got none.) In other words, this is access-journalism at its most uncritical and naive worst. There is no indication that Becker has any clue about anything that happened before 2008, and every indication that thereafter, she simply parroted the spin of those she had access to. And so the book is best seen not as as act of journalism, but as a public relations campaign by Boies, Olson and Griffin to claim credit for and even co-opt a movement they had nothing to do with until very recently. It’s telling that the Human Rights Campaign – an organization that opposed aggressive efforts to pioneer marriage equality until the early 2000s – is now sending out emails touting Becker’s book for its preposterous hagiography of its executive director. Money quote about the NYT magazine excerpt:
[It] details HRC President Chad Griffin’s pivotal role in guiding the Obama administration to publicly endorse marriage equality during the 2012 election cycle, including a conversation he had with Vice President Biden just days before his famed interview with David Gregory on “Meet the Press.” …
Griffin helped found the American Foundation for Equal Rights, recruited the bipartisan legal dream team of Ted Olson and David Boies, and challenged the discriminatory Proposition 8 in federal court—racking up momentous legal victories for the marriage equality movement.
Sure, Griffin (because of his ability to raise money) had access to Biden and asked the right question. Good for him. But Biden could easily have ducked it and Obama had long since decided to come out for equality before the election anyway, so the only proximate effect of this insider access was to accelerate the process. Other influences on the president – a beloved high school teacher, his kids, his reading, for example – are disregarded in order to cast Griffin as the key figure. The creaking of the narrative machinery to present this turn of events is so grating and breathless it all but discredits itself. And a remarkable coda to this hagiography is the fact that Griffin and Boies and Olson are actually sponsoring the author’s book party! And why would they not? A book that is essentially a stenography of their self-regard is something they should celebrate. Whether the NYT feels the same way about one of their reporters having her sources throw her a party is another matter.
The trouble with this kind of embedded journalism is not that what it details is an inaccurate portrayal of the situation from the viewpoint of the characters it is championing. It is the rank failure to inquire into any other views of the matter and to be informed about the history of the movement. It is the lazy, uninformed decision to buy the self-serving narrative of a few, interested sources as the objective narrative of history. Then you have the sales job: a decision to hype the book by claiming that these characters’ late-coming contributions to the effort somehow rescued a movement that was stalled. And, yes, that is emphatically the argument of the book – not just that Griffin helped things along but that all those before him, including the heroes who pioneered this struggle, were irrelevant losers and laggards. Whatever else this is, it is not reporting in any balanced or fair meaning of the word.
And of course it also raises a core question about Griffin. This book obviously reflects his own view of himself as the Rosa Parks of this movement. And that marks him as an extreme outlier in it. One thing that has characterized the marriage equality movement from the get-go has been a collective decision to give credit widely and broadly for a movement that began in the grass roots and succeeded because of some key figures but also thanks to tens of thousands of people, gay and straight, who stood up for equality in places far less welcoming than executive suites in San Francisco. No single individual has decided to claim personal credit for all this until now – let alone smear, insult and write out of history the vast coalition that made this possible. I’ve long supported Griffin’s welcome attempt to shift HRC from apathy to action on marriage. But the idea that he can now be hailed as the uniquely indispensable figure and all his predecessors and critical allies mocked as irrelevant is grotesque. He is in that sense a harbinger of something genuinely new. He has decided to coopt all the work done before him and alongside him as something he uniquely achieved by himself.
That’s not leading this movement. That’s an attack on its integrity, its countless authors, and its generosity of spirit. It will only divide this movement, rather than unite it. In fact, it already has.
© 2014, agentleman.
Garth Ancier, David Neuman And Gary Goddard Accused Of Sexual Abuse In New Lawsuits
by ANTHONY McCARTNEY
MORE: Bryan Singer Michael Egan Garth Ancier Sex Abuse Garth Ancier Gary Goddard Sex Abuse David Neuman Sex Abuse Gary Goddard David Neuman Bryan Singer Lawsuit
Plaintiff Michael Egan III, 31, takes questions from the media during a news conference in Beverly Hills, Calif., Monday, April 21, 2014.
BEVERLY HILLS, Calif. (AP) — A man who has accused “X-Men” director Bryan Singer of sexually abusing him when he was a teen sued three more entertainment industry figures on Monday claiming they also molested him.
The allegations in the latest lawsuits filed by Michael Egan III are substantially similar to his legal action against Singer. That lawsuit accuses the director of abusing him between the ages of 15 and 17 in Los Angeles and Hawaii.
Monday’s lawsuits were filed in federal court in Hawaii against former Fox television executive Garth Ancier, theater producer Gary Wayne Goddard, and David A. Neuman, a former television executive with Current TV and Disney. Ancier and Goddard did not respond to phone and email messages seeking comment.
Neuman could not be reached for comment. Phone numbers associated with him have been disconnected, and he did not immediately respond to a message sent through the social networking site LinkedIn.
The lawsuits were filed in Hawaii under a law that temporarily suspends the statute of limitations in civil sex abuse cases.
Singer’s attorney Marty Singer has denied the director abused Egan, calling the allegations defamatory. He has said the director was not in Hawaii when Egan says he was abused and was instead working on production for the first “X-Men” film.
None of the men have been criminally charged and the statute of limitations for any such charges has passed.
Ancier was the founding programmer at the Fox network, later going on to create programming for The WB, and was a top executive at NBC Entertainment.
Egan, 31, appeared at a press conference Monday alongside his mother, who tearfully described her efforts to report alleged abuses to the FBI in 1999 and 2000.
Bonnie Mound said she wrote several letters to FBI agents in Los Angeles and Washington, D.C., urging them to take action. She questioned why those letters and information her son provided in interviews with an agent did not result in criminal charges.
The FBI has said it could not discuss specifically what Egan told them, However, the agency denied last week that it had ignored any information about Singer.
“The suggestion that the FBI ignored a minor victim, or evidence involving the sexual victimization of a child, is ludicrous,” FBI spokeswoman Laura Eimiller said in a statement. She reiterated the statement after Egan’s press conference Monday.
Mound denied her son’s lawsuits were motivated by anything other than holding the defendants accountable.
“It’s not about money,” Mound said, breaking down in tears.
Egan said he spent several years masking his pain by drinking. He stopped drinking within the past year, entered therapy and sought out a lawyer who would pursue a case.
The AP does not typically name victims of sex abuse but is naming Egan because he is speaking publicly about his allegations.
Egan’s attorney, Jeff Herman, said he had spent six months investigating before filing the lawsuits but acknowledged he didn’t have all the investigative files or Singer’s records that might show the director wasn’t in Hawaii during the timeframe. Herman said he has asked Singer’s lawyers for those records.
Egan claims he was lured into a sex ring run by a former digital entertainment company executive, Marc Collins-Rector, with promises of auditions for acting, modeling and commercial jobs. He was put on the company’s payroll as an actor and forced to have sex with adult men at parties within Hollywood’s entertainment industry, the lawsuit said.
Collins-Rector pleaded guilty in 2004 to transporting five minors across state lines to have sex.
Phone numbers listed for Collins-Rector have been disconnected and attempts to reach him for comment last week were unsuccessful. Records maintained in Florida, where Collins-Rector is required to register as a sex offender, show that in 2008 his last known address was in the Dominican Republic.
Lawyer Of Bryan Singer’s Accuser: More ‘Hollywood Insiders’ Will Be Named In Sex Abuse Suits | by Ryan Buxton
The lawyer representing Michael F. Egan III, who has accused “X-Men” director Bryan Singer of sexually abusing him when he was underage, told HuffPost Live on Friday that more recognizable Hollywood figures involved in sexually assaulting young men will be named next week. “There’s more Hollywood names. These are other men who Mike alleges were part of these pool parties in California and then also flew to the parties in Hawaii, where they sexually abused Mike. They’re Hollywood insiders,” said attorney Jeffrey Herman. Herman told host Ricky Camilleri that he and his client have not yet named all parties involved because they need to take “certain procedural steps” before filing additional lawsuits in Hawaii. Herman expects the new names will be made public Monday, though he said under Hawaiian law he has until Thursday to file suit against the other “sexual predators.
” AN ‘ORGANIZED AND ONGOING OPEN SECRET’
Since Egan’s lawsuit became public this week, Herman said he has been amazed by what he’s discovered about the widespread nature of sex abuse in Hollywood and the unspoken knowledge of such conduct. “I’ve seen a lot of things — [defending victims of sexual abuse] is all that I do — but I don’t know that I’ve ever seen a more organized and ongoing open secret,” he said. “I’m getting regular contacts from people saying, ‘Oh, you should hear what’s happening over here.’” Herman added that he’s been told about numerous “vile” rings of sexual predation, some of which overlap. But “the commonality of this is they’re all men in Hollywood, all men using their positions of power and influence to sexually exploit children,” he said.
‘I’M NOT GOING TO BE BULLIED’
Singer’s attorney has shot back against Egan, Herman and their allegations, declaring on Friday that receipts, telephone records and production schedules can prove Singer was not in Hawaii at the time Egan claims he was assaulted. Singer’s lawyer also vowed to file a countersuit for “malicious prosecution.” Herman said he plans to move forward with Egan’s suit no matter what Singer’s representatives say. “I’m not going to be bullied, I’m not going to be intimidated by someone threatening to do something to me because I’m representing a victim,” he said. “I am the voice of these victims who have been silenced.”
© 2014, agentleman.
White Supremacist’s Genocidal Paranoia: Inside the Mind of the White Man March Founder
Kyle Hunt, of the White Man March, is scared of an “anti-white diversity agenda”—and other rancid delusions.
Kyle Hunt is a reclusive man, paranoid enough to log my IP details when I contact him. He’s also the Massachusetts-based founder of the White Man March, which “involves coordinated pro-white activity around the world. The purpose is to spread information through activism, but also to make a statement that white people are united in their love for their race and in their opposition to its destruction.” Though its website claims it has no centralized leadership, it is obviously Kyle’s brainchild and seemingly his alone. Through it, he sells (white) T-shirts emblazoned with “Diversity is a codeword for white genocide.” The subtext of this is not too hard to work out, but I wanted to hear the sugar-coated sour press release.
“The anti-white ‘diversity’ agenda involves government-sponsored racism against white people in the form of affirmative action and ‘diversity’ quotas, which requires employers and colleges to give preference to less qualified non-whites,” Hunt said. “With fewer opportunities, white people are able to make less money and are now having much smaller families. The anti-white ‘diversity’ agenda also stipulates that there can be no all-white countries anywhere, and there can be no all-white areas within the confines of those formerly all-white countries. Massive immigration and forced assimilation, along with persistent race-mixing propaganda, will inevitably lead to the destruction of a racial group. This is genocide. The White Man March will continue,” he added, “on the third Saturday of every month until the anti-white genocidal system is destroyed.”
Kyle refuses to speak on the phone. It must be via electronic correspondence or not at all. This was not ideal, especially given someone who clearly thrives on uncontested rhetoric. I acquiesced because something unbidden told me to, on the condition we may go back and forth as much as I’d like. I did wonder why he won’t pick up the phone. I had seen him give a peer at Vice, David Schilling, the same line with a bizarrely different excuse.
“In addition to doing many interviews, I am busy running a variety of different Web properties, including a social network, a broadcasting network, an online publication, and a social movement. In addition to this, I have to scrounge together some money to keep me going and complete some of my paintings.”
When Kyle sent his initial answers back to me, he had pointedly emboldened my questions in what he described as “Commie Red.”
“Though you might not be a card-carrying communist,” he said, “your questions indicate to me that you are certainly a cultural Marxist.”
* * *
Masked ethnic nationalism had been enjoying a nice stay as a dot-point in the “dark enlightenment” of the so-called neo-reactionary movement, but bigotry is never content to be itemized. Say hi to nuwe racism, and the composite ire-ony of using the Afrikaans for “new” here seems so complexly black and white as to transcend meta. Hyper-aware there is less and less room on earth for old hate, nuwe racists dress their prejudice in conspiracy and pseudoscience and call it “pride.” Pride is a much more appealing sin than wrath, and allows them to, heinously, plead victimhood just as they pursue a policy of victimization. It is like punching someone and getting angry at them for hurting your fist.
Still this does not stop VDARE, Pioneer Fund and men like Kyle from becoming accidentally unified. When pressed on the admittance he is “a spiritual man” and not a religious one, he said, “I let no man or organization stand in between me and the divine. I strive toward sacred honor and glory in all that I do. I can only hope that one day, when my time here has come to an end, the Valkyries will find me worthy.”
Neo-paganism, check. Kyle imagines himself some kind of all-odds hero of the bad-odds white race, envisioning this article as a grandiose Portrait of a Man titled “Kyle Confronts Cultural Marxism.” He insisted as much. He insisted on a lot. He insisted I do not capitalize the “J” in “Jew,” and that I do capitalize the “w” in “whites.” Like many racists hiding behind a veneer of faux-intellectualism and the appropriated-unrelated (how I mourn the perversion of the Celtic cross), he does not want to tend to reality where it does not provide a soapbox. A milk crate in this instance, I guess. I wanted to know what he would do if all our skins were gray and he could not divide anyone with his eyes.
“Stupid question. Are you a hipster or something?”
I decided to nudge his superiority complex into asserting itself in a way I suspected would work: This was silly. I am genuinely interested in what you think of the concept of “race” as a social construct. Please reconsider your answer.
“I find it ‘silly’ to even purport that race is a social construct or only skin-deep. An African man with white skin (which happens with albinism) would still have a very different skull shape, hair and eye color, nose structure, body type, intellectual abilities, and higher testosterone levels than a European man. Also, though an Asian man might naturally have a similar skin color as a European man, he will still likely have different hair, eye shape and color, nose structure, intellectual abilities, and a shorter body than a European man. I don’t even need to get into the cultural differences, which are the result of our unique histories and the innate biological and spiritual differences between the different peoples of the planet. Though humans are all of the same species,” he continued, “the different races (sub-species) exhibit distinct and important variations on a genetic level. Maybe you should try applying your arguments to dogs, wolves, and dingoes which are all the same species (Canis lupus). Compare a Chihuahua with a grey wolf and then you can tell me about how breed is just a social construct.”
Neopaganism, check, racial realism à la David Duke and Jared Taylor, also check. Much as I love dogs, Homo sapiens are not dogs.
* * *
“I am here to light an inferno in the minds of men.”
Kyle likes to pepper his salt with inflammatory but hollow rhetoric. All things considered, it started to make me think of Hitler. He was quick to profess an admiration for the man, though allegedly only for his capacity as a statesman.
“Adolf Hitler was a far greater man than Stalin, Churchill and FDR combined. Hands down. He stands head and shoulders above any of the so-called leaders of today. The main reason most people fear Adolf Hitler is because they have been inundated since birth with deceitful Holocaust propaganda and kosher Hollywood movies.”
Of course, no one “resisting white genocide” ever really admires Hitler solely as a statesman.
“Asians have fair skin, but no one in his or her right mind would call Asians white. When Jews are questioned about any of their atrocious actions, vicious anti-white quotes, or general criminal behavior, they scream ‘anti-Semite.’ Semites are not white! It is pretty confusing because one minute we are told that Judaism is a religion and then the next minute, it’s a race. Jews can pretend to be ‘white’ when it suits them and then turn back into a persecuted minority when shekels or security are at stake. For example, Jews dominated the transatlantic slave trade and then blamed the whole practice on white Europeans by using their control of the media and academia. Everyone loves to talk about white supremacists, but I never hear anything about the Jewish supremacists,” he’d raged, ready with another ill-gotten quote. “As the Israeli Sephardic leader Rabbi Ovadia Yosef once said, ‘Goyim [non-Jews] were born only to serve us. Without that, they have no place in the world; only to serve the People of Israel. Why are gentiles needed? They will work, they will plow, they will reap. We will sit like an effendi [master] and eat.’”
Continually and without pause, Kyle makes the classic mistake of the racist, nuwe or old: the convenient presumption that world and spiritual leaders speak for every person their station claims to represent. “German” does not equal “Nazi,” and this courtesy is not one with limits. Yosef was a far-right extremist. He died in October last year, and is not particularly missed by Jews or anyone. The irony is he had at least one thing in common with Kyle.
“John F. Kennedy remarked that, ‘Hitler will emerge from the hatred that surrounds him now as one of the most significant figures who ever lived … he had in him the stuff of which legends are made.’”
Trying to reconfigure archaic historical quotes to apply to contemporary contexts is a favorite pastime of the modern bigot. Kyle’s trotting out of John F. Kennedy with Swiss timepiece reliability was hard to ignore. He does not parlay Thomas Jefferson’s “all men are created equal” speech with the same verve, for some reason. I mentioned that JFK seems a strange choice for Kyle’s lexicon given he granted amnesty to Mexican immigrants and advocated, in however small a way, for black civil rights.
“I do not support JFK’s policies whatsoever, but his words regarding Adolf Hitler should go to show that we are presented with a false and misleading narrative regarding World War II. Hitler did not despise non-whites at all, but simply wanted a nation free from oppression and dedicated to the furtherance of the Germanic people. Most people today do not realize that over 2 million non-German foreigners and other ethnic minorities served in Hitler’s armed forces, which created the most culturally, ethnically, and religiously diverse military in Western history.”
And children manned the Waffen SS’s guns because the Deutsches Heer’s dead had started to outweigh its living. Revisionist history, check. True conviction is purpose-built to stand up to extreme duress, but in times of said duress, these “convictions” are revealed for what they are: hate. Elements of the psyches that favor this thinking often point to personal and more repressed wellsprings, but that is about as speculative as the concept of white genocide itself. When asked what he might do if he discovered what constitutes, by his own rhetoric, non-white “racial impurity” in his bloodline, at first Kyle replied, “I would smoke a blunt, drink a 40, listen to Miley Cyrus, and twerk all night long.” I asked him to rethink this answer. Implying he was being childish worked well.
“Honestly, I would never allow a small percentage of non-white blood to stop me from advocating for white interests.”
* * *
When the White Man March did march for the first time on Saturday, March 15, 2014, it was not the cataclysmic worldwide event first envisioned. Contrary to Kyle’s assertion that “it went well,” it did not go well. At least, not for Kyle and the handful of other men who appeared to rattle their nuwe racist declarations at uninterested passersby. Fewer than 10 people reportedly showed up to stampede in Cincinnati. You could not hear them coming from miles away, let alone meters.
“The media outlets that disparaged our efforts are both implicitly and explicitly anti-white, so it would be ridiculous to think that they would paint us in a favorable light,” Kyle would later huff to me. “The fact that they covered the White Man March and helped spread our message is a huge victory, as we have been ignored for far too long.”
His any-publicity-is-good-publicity glee made me start to balk.
“I really wanted to piss off the anti-whites,” he went on. “I am resisting the ongoing genocide of my people. Why don’t you ask Jamie Foxx, Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, Eric Holder, Barack Obama and all the big media bosses if they are willing to take responsibility for ‘the knockout game’ and the increasing black mob violence after they have continuously incited anti-white hatred? ‘I kill all the white people in the movie – how great is that?’ Oy vey, ‘Saturday Night Live’ has the funniest jokes! That Lorne Michaels is a real mensch.”
I had stopped balking. Better the subterranean bridge-dweller you know; better cultural Marxism than cultural hegemony.
© 2014, agentleman.
Maddow Asks: ‘Why do We Overlook Right-Wing Violence and Refuse to Call it Terrorism?’ The Answer: Because They’re White
Domestic terrorism is an oxymoron when white folks are involved. It’s something those “other people” do. The shooting deaths of three people near Kansas City by the noted Neo-Nazi Frazier Glenn Miller has refocused the public’s attention on the violent tendencies of the White Right in the United States.
On the Tuesday edition of her MSNBC show, Rachel Maddow concluded a segment on the Republican Party’s deep denial about (and active protection of) its violent “Patriot” and militia wing by asking the following question: why do we overlook right-wing violence and refuse to call it terrorism? By Chauncey DeVega
The answer to Maddow’s question is simple. “We” don’t talk about right-wing domestic terrorists and other extremists because “they” are largely white and male.
The language used by Rachel Maddow—and how it undermines the scurrilous Right-wing lie that there is such a thing as a “liberal media”—helps to demonstrate the above claim. Once more, a “liberal” news analyst talks around the obvious and is afraid to connect the words “white” and “male” and “conservative” in their discussions of white violence, murder, mayhem, and treason.
Domestic terrorism is an oxymoron in America when white folks are involved. Whiteness imagines itself as kind, benign, safe, neutral, normal, and good. “Terrorism” is something those “other people” do, i.e. the Muslims, or some other ambiguous cohort of black and brown people who “hate American values”. Whiteness and the white racial frame are possessed by an acute sense of historical amnesia as well. The most dangerous domestic terrorist organization in the history of the United States was the Ku Klux Klan, a group that killed thousands of black Americans during the 19th and 20th centuries.
Again, Whiteness has the ability to transform and shift empirical reality for its owners and those invested in it.
Whiteness also grants white people in America the freedom to always be a blameless individual. By implication, white people, by virtue of their racial group membership, are incapable of ill deeds as a group. White people who do bad things are just “bad individuals”.
Patterns of violence by white people, most notably mass shootings by white men, apparently tell us nothing about Whiteness or white masculinity. Patterns of behavior that should be the basis of a critical inquiry about white culture (a logic that when applied to black and brown people inevitably returns to questions of “pathology” and “bad genes”), is a question that cannot be asked by the mainstream media, or in “polite” circles, as it is considered impolitic.
Because white people imagine Whiteness as normality, to even explore the relationship between race and domestic terrorism is an intolerable offense or social sin that fuels the howls of white conservative victimologists and their knee jerk claims of “reverse racism” and “bigotry” against gun loving American “patriots”.
Whiteness is also a type of mass psychosis, one that is predicated on a rubric that those people now considered white (see: the Boston Massacre suspects) can have their racial identity revoked retroactively if they commit acts which are not in accordance with how White America envisions itself as viewed through its own narcissistic gaze.
Ignoring the various pathologies of Whiteness as exhibited by White domestic terrorists is just one more example of how Whiteness hurts white people through a slavish devotion to the profound lie that to be a member of the racial group arbitrarily defined as “white” is to thus be preternaturally good and harmless.
The bodies of many white children have been laid out at room temperature on the funeral slab because of that “innocent” white lie.
In 1860, “Ethiop”, an African-American social critic and satirist asked “what shall we do with white people?” The murderous escapades of Frazier Glenn Miller, the growth of white militias, the violent and seditious rhetoric of the Republican Party in the Age of Obama, Birtherism and other types of deranged and paranoid political fantasies on the White Right, and mass shootings and well as other terrorist acts by white men, reinforce the need for asking that question in the present moment.
Of course, there will be no “national conversation” in the United States about “white cultural pathologies”.
How can there be when white people, by definition, are the embodiment of the universal and supreme individual, one for which accountability and questions about “bad culture” are anathema and impossible to consider?
© 2014, agentleman.
Who Are the Koch Brothers and What Do They Want?
By Sen. Bernie Sanders
As a result of the disastrous Citizens United Supreme Court decision, billionaires and large corporations can now spend an unlimited amount of money to influence the political process. The results of that decision are clear. In the coming months and years the Koch brothers and other extraordinarily wealthy families will spend billions of dollars to elect right-wing candidates to the Senate, the House, governors’ mansions and the presidency of the United States. These billionaires already own much of our economy. That, apparently, is not enough. Now, they want to own the United States government as well.
Four years ago, the Supreme Court handed down the 5-4 ruling in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission. A few weeks ago, they announced another horrendous campaign finance decision in McCutcheon v. FEC giving even more political power to the rich. Now, many Republicans want to push this Supreme Court to go even further. In the name of “free speech,” they want the Court to eliminate all restrictions on campaign spending – a position that Justice Thomas supported in McCutcheon – and a view supported by the Chairman of the Republican National Committee. Importantly, as a means of being able to exercise unprecedented power over the political process, this has been the position of the Koch brothers for at least the last 34 years.
The Koch brothers are the second wealthiest family in America, making most of their money in the fossil fuel industry. According to Forbes Magazine, they saw their wealth increase last year from $68 billion to $80 billion. In other words, under the “anti-business,” “socialist” and “oppressive” Obama administration, their wealth went up by $12 billion in one year.
In their 2012 campaigns, Barack Obama and Mitt Romney each spent a little more than $1 billion. For the Koch brothers, spending more than Obama and Romney combined would be a drop in their bucket. They would hardly miss the few billion dollars.
Given the reality that the Koch brothers are now the most important and powerful players in American politics, it is important to know what they want and what their agenda is.
It is not widely known that David Koch was the Libertarian Party vice-presidential candidate in 1980. He believed that Ronald Reagan was much too liberal. Despite Mr. Koch putting a substantial sum of money into the campaign, his ticket only received 1 percent of the vote. Most Americans thought the Libertarian Party platform of 1980 was extremist and way out of touch with what the American people wanted and needed.
Fast-forward 34 years and the most significant reality of modern politics is how successful David Koch and like-minded billionaires have been in moving the Republican Party to the extreme right. Amazingly, much of what was considered “extremist” and “kooky” in 1980 has become part of today’s mainstream Republican thinking.
Let me give you just a few examples:
In 1980, Libertarian vice-presidential candidate David Koch ran on a platform that called for abolishing the minimum wage. Thirty-four years ago, that was an extreme view of a fringe party that had the support of 1 percent of the American people. Today, not only does virtually every Republican in Congress oppose raising the $7.25 an hour minimum wage, many of them, including Republican leaders like Mitch McConnell and John McCain, are on record for abolishing the concept of the federal minimum wage.
In 1980, the platform of David Koch’s Libertarian Party favored “the abolition of Medicare and Medicaid programs.” Thirty-four years ago, that was an extreme view of a fringe party that had the support of one percent of the American people. Today, the mainstream view of the Republican Party, as seen in the recently passed Ryan budget, is to end Medicare as we know it, cut Medicaid by more than $1.5 trillion over the next decade, and repeal the Affordable Care Act. According to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, “Under the Ryan plan, at least 40 million people — 1 in 8 Americans — would lose health insurance or fail to obtain insurance by 2024. Most of them would be people with low or moderate incomes.”
In 1980, the platform of David Koch’s Libertarian Party called for “the repeal of the fraudulent, virtually bankrupt, and increasingly oppressive Social Security system.” Thirty-four years ago, that was an extreme view of a fringe party that had the support of 1 percent of the American people. Today, the mainstream view of the Republican Party is that “entitlement reform” is absolutely necessary. For some, this means major cuts in Social Security. For others who believe Social Security is unconstitutional or a Ponzi scheme this means the privatization of Social Security or abolishing this program completely for those who are under 60 years of age.
In 1980, David Koch’s Libertarian Party platform stated “We oppose all personal and corporate income taxation, including capital gains taxes … We support the eventual repeal of all taxation … As an interim measure, all criminal and civil sanctions against tax evasion should be terminated immediately.” Thirty-four years ago, that was an extreme view of a fringe party that had the support of 1 percent of the American people. Today, 75 Republicans in the House have co-sponsored a bill that Paul Ryan has said “would eliminate taxes on wages, corporations, self-employment, capital gains, and gift and death taxes in favor of a personal-consumption tax.”
Here is what every American should be deeply concerned about. The Koch brothers, through the expenditure of billions of dollars and the creation and support of dozens of extreme right organizations, have taken fringe extremist ideas and made them mainstream within the Republican Party. And now with Citizens United (which is allowing them to pour unlimited sums of money into the political process) their power is greater than ever.
And let’s be very clear. Their goal is not only to defund Obamacare, cut Social Security, oppose an increase in the minimum wage or cut federal funding for education. Their world view and eventual goal is much greater than all of that. They want to repeal every major piece of legislation that has been signed into law over the past 80 years that has protected the middle class, the elderly, the children, the sick and the most vulnerable in this country. Every piece of legislation!
The truth is that the agenda of the Koch brothers is to move this country from a democratic society with a strong middle class to an oligarchic form of society in which the economic and political life of the nation are controlled by a handful of billionaire families.
Our great nation must not be hijacked by right-wing billionaires like the Koch brothers.
For the sake of our children and our grandchildren, we must fight back.
© 2014, agentleman.