Contempo Magazine Blog

 By Dr. Tony Magana

The Democrats plan to counter citizen outrage at recent town hall forums on health care? Dupe young college students into employment at less then minimal wage and with fake health benefits.

Recently the left has complained that the high degree of public dissatisfaction demonstrated at town hall meetings held by members of Congress during the August recess to discuss the Democratic hodge-podge of reforms was not a grass roots movement but instead was “astro-turf”. This is a term they created to describe participants of whom they accuse conservative organizations of planting.

Rather than try to start their own “grass roots movement’ it appears the Democratic response will involve using paid staff, instead of a real grass roots volunteer effort, to try to save the progressive health reform movement from crashing. Today a real revelation was made apparent on the website, Craiglist. A coalition of progressive activist groups is advertising jobs that pay $6000 for a two month period of time for becoming a paid activist. The jobs were created by the Fund for Public Interest and are located in 50 offices across the country and in Washington DC. Leadership positions they claim will work with paid staff to carry out door to door drives, fund raising, organize coalitions, and news conferences.

The Craigslist listing is linked to a website called Jobs That Matter. An impressive list of organizations including the Sierra Club and the Human Rights Campaign that raise millions of dollars each year from America’s prosperous progressive elite such as movie stars promise great pay and experience for doing social good. The ad does not mention anything about volunteerism or community service.

On the surface, this appears to be a wonderful opportunity for college students or recent college graduates to get paid for political activity, but the promise did not turn out to be real for Christian Miller. From 2002 to 2006 he was employed as a “canvasser” in Los Angeles raising money for prominent organizations including the Sierra Club, Greenpeace, and Save the Children. Employee dissatisfaction according to his account lead to a move by employees to try to unionize in 2005 which was resisted successfully by the Fund for Public Interest. They tried to get help from the sponsoring organizations like the Sierra Club but instead just found a cold shoulder. According to Miller, the Fund would not pay wages for mandatory worker training sessions and other events with mandatory attendance resulting in actual pay amounting to less than the minimum wage.

J.D. Castigilione was employed as a “Canvass Director” in Washington DC office. His experience was very similar to that of Mr. Miller. Although the “Fund” promised an income of almost $20,000 per year in reality that was almost impossible to achieve.

In 2002, several employees in Los Angeles complained that they were not being reimbursed for out of pocket expenses and denial of promised health benefits. Tamara Rettino suffered a severe kidney infection during her employment only to find that the health coverage promised by the Fund did not exist. Only after she threatened a lawsuit did the Fund finally pay her medical bills. That same year, Directors Brande Jackson and Dan Binaei made a request to the state labor board to unionize. Their request was greeted by an immediate termination.

Going back many years the Fund for the Public Interest has been involved in controversy over how it treats employees. Former employees have complained that they have not been paid for overtime, were disallowed from forming a union, and did not received health care benefits that were promised. A lawsuit has been filed on the behalf of former and current employees in Northern District Federal Court of California to “recover overtime and related claims”. The law firm involved confirmed no settlement of the abused workers claims has been reached. Despite these complaints the liberal organizations that contract with the Fund have never taken any action to force the Fund to improve conditions and pay for its employees.

The ultimate hypocrisy is that after accusing conservatives of improper activism the left is now desperately going to rely on an organization with a clear cut history of abuse including denial of health benefits to its own employees as the champion of health reform.

Thanks for reading Contempo Magazine blog which discusses issues for McAllen, the Rio Grande Valley, and America from a conservative Hispanic point of view. Tony Magaña grew up in McAllen Texas, attended Texas A&M University, served as an officer in Army Reserve, and holds a doctorate from Harvard University. The co-founder of Contempo Magazine has participated in Valley business for over 20 years. He is a member of the National Association of Hispanic Journalists and also writes for the American Daily Review. Follow him on twitter http://twitter.com/contempomagazin

Copyright 2009, Dr. Tony Magana. Some rights reserved.
To reproduce or distribute, visit: drtonymagana.icopyright.com

 By Dr. Tony Magana

A new White House plan to collect “causal speech and emails” originating from private citizens opposed to President Obama’s health care proposal is generating considerable controversy after being brought to light by Senator John Cornyn (R-TX). Denials by WH Press Sec. Gibbs conflict with WH policy and Democratic website practices.

The communications director for the White House’s Health Reform Office, Linda Douglass, and White House Director of New Media, Macon Phillips, incited the beginning of a scandal on August 4 when they posted on the official White House website a request to collect information from the public on disinformation put out by opponents of health care reform spread through emails or even “casual conversation”. They requested that anything “fishy” be sent to the an official government email address interestingly named “flag@whitehouse.gov”

Subsequently, Senator John Cornyn (R-TX) sent a letter to the White House today concerned that the new White House plan was an intent to collect information on political opponents that is historically unprecedented and contrary to normal political discourse and free speech. He raised concerns that IP addresses, names, and addresses collected by the government of those who are opposed to the President’s proposal could be misused. These communications he points out would be classified as private and referring them to the White House is more than inappropriate.

When asked about this at today’s White House press conference, the Press Secretary Gibbs initially blurted out “nobody is collecting names” and lamely explained that they often use the White House website as a tool to “debunk things that are simply not true” because they are after all the standard of truth. But in the same press conference, follow up questions, brought out  immediate contradictions to Mr. Gibbs pronouncement. Under federal law requiring an archive be keep of all White House records, all information sent to the White House must be officially collected. Reporters asked if the government had a duty to let private citizens know that their private speech or communications were being sent to the government? Mr. Gibbs dismissed that notion as irrelevant because in his words there is no evidence of a “government conspiracy”.

During the weekend of June 6, 2008 the current White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs intentionally and in a pre-meditated fashion lied to the White House press corp leading them to board a flight to nowhere. Mr. Gibbs said that the agenda of Barack Obama was and in the future would be a sufficient justification for telling lies.

This was not the end but only the beginning of a White House policy of deception. Seasoned White House reporter, Patrick Gavin with Politico (a somewhat liberal news outlet) just this week wrote an article about Mr. Gibb’s “methods of evasion”. In this article which includes quotes from other White House reporters who echo that Mr. Gibb’s evasiveness is extraordinary. The writer even gives over thirty specific examples where the White House has wished to maintain the President’s “privacy” even though this President promised an an new era of transparency.

The main political internet tool of the White House and the Democratic National Committee is a website called Organizing for America. The privacy policy specifically stated on the website contradicts the statements made by President Obama’s political appointees in the White House on how information gathered through the internet is handled for political purposes.

The website says “We may also make personal information available to organizations with similar political viewpoints and objectives, in furtherance of our own political objectives.” This puts into complete clarity the belief held by the Obama administration that any information gained could be used for political gain.

A further disclosure is even more revealing. Using spy-ware technology and IP address collections, the Democrats admit that they use this internet portal in way that could collect and maintain very personal information. Curiously, although they say they have no malevolent intent, they also warn that other third parties might have access to personal data.

The concerns raised by Senator John Cornyn are serious and have more than ample evidence supporting their importance. The use of casual speech and private communication to smear individuals for political gain was last seen during the Joe McCarthy black listings. Given Obama’s declining popularity one cannot help but wonder if the desperate Democrats now feel that the end justifies the means in pursuing a new type of political gangsterism.

The ultimately authority on truth vs. disinformation should be the American public not the President, the Congress, or the pundits. Can Press Secretary Gibbs and President Obama be trusted in their benign explanations of the intent on collecting private information about individual Americans? Will Americans now have to fear that what they say casually at a party or write in an email to a friend will end up on some official black list at the White House?

Thanks for reading Contempo Magazine blog which discusses issues for McAllen, the Rio Grande Valley, and America from a conservative Hispanic point of view. Tony Magaña grew up in McAllen Texas, attended Texas A&M University, served as an officer in Army Reserve, and holds a doctorate from Harvard University. The co-founder of Contempo Magazine has participated in Valley business for over 20 years. He is a member of the National Association of Hispanic Journalists and also writes for the American Daily Review. Follow him on twitter http://twitter.com/contempomagazin

Copyright 2009, Dr. Tony Magana. Some rights reserved.
To reproduce or distribute, visit: drtonymagana.icopyright.com

By Dr. Tony Magana

Recent events in Venezuela should remind us about the importance of protecting freedom of the press both abroad and at home.  President Chavez is putting in place a Fairness Doctrine to control the media similar to those proposed by liberals in the United States like Congressman Hinchey (NY) and Speaker Pelosi.

This weekend 34 privately owned radio stations in Venezuela were shut down on the order of President Hugo Chavez because in his words, the government is going to “democratize the airwaves”. The Socialist supporters of Chavez complain that private enterprise and the international media are conspiring to give false information to the people.

This is only the beginning as the Chavez government is currently considering closing up to 200 more stations through out the country. Additionally, according to Reuters News Service, the Venezuela chief prosecutor is planning to draft new laws that would send anyone, who in the government’s opinion is spreading “false information that harms the interests of the state”, to prison.

The freedom of the press guaranteed by the Constitution of the United States is rarely found in other countries even democracies. Our neighbor to the south, Mexico practiced rather severe restriction of freedom of the press under the ruling party, PRI, until they were thrown out of the Presidency in 2000. More recently however, there have been increasing numbers of murders or other crimes against journalists in Mexico. In addition many arbitrary rules have been created to strictly regulate political advertising on television and radio in way that has returned significant power to the PRI , who now has regained a plurality of elected representatives in the Mexican Congress.

Unfortunately, it is not only Mexican politicians who want to control the press but even in America there are some calling for new restrictions. Congressman Maurice Hinchey (D-NY) has become the leading advocate for a movement to restrict the American press. Ever since talk radio attacked President Bill Clinton following the Monica Lewinski scandal, the radical left has openly sought to shut down conservative media.

Up until 1987, there was in place an FCC rule called the “Fairness Doctrine” which required that broadcasters provide opposing views of issues in order to keep their broadcasting licenses. Hinchey is sponsoring legislation that would allow federal regulators to arbitrarily determine the balance and fairness of debate and also control who would own media outlets throughout the country. Hinchey’s reasons for doing so amazingly seem to echo those of Hugo Chavez.

To further protect the Constitutionally guaranteed right of the freedom of the press the Broadcaster Freedom Act of 2009 was introduced in January of this year. The bill’s sponsors are Republican Senators Jim DeMint (SC) and John Thune (SD) as well as House members Mike Pence (IN) and Greg Walden (OR).

The sponsors warn that the real goal of re-instituting the Fairness Doctrine is to allow the government to cherry pick what issues it wants to call “controversial” and thus stop their discussion by conservatives. The rules as written in the legislation by Congressman Hinchey could allow a liberal slanted government to call liberal issues not controversial effectively stymieing any opposition. If adopted, for example, Christian radio stations might have put on atheists to counter religious broadcasts.

The current freedom of the press allows the American public to listen to many different sources of information and opinion. Although the printed press is in decline it has been replaced by a massive cyber-world of ideas on the internet and 24 hour news cable networks. The American public can hear leftist idealism on Link television, MSNBC, or read it on the Huffington Post, Daily Kos, and the king of the American media, The New York Times, which remains the most read news website in the world. They can compare this by looking or reading Fox News or the Wall Street Journal and others like this blog. The only conclusion that can be drawn about the intentions of Congressman Hinchey and his associates like Speaker Nancy Pelosi is that they want to have control like Hugo Chavez.

Government control of the media can be more powerful than any army because it can control the flow of information that allows a free society to make good decisions in government. Our government must publicly condemn the actions of Hugo Chavez and even more importantly cast aside any dispersions of reinstating the Fairness Doctrine. If America loses the precious value of the freedom of press at home and does not denounce it abroad that will only give further license to more severe actions by Hugo Chavez and his political clones.

Thanks for reading Contempo Magazine blog which discusses issues for McAllen, the Rio Grande Valley, and America from a conservative Hispanic point of view. Tony Magaña grew up in McAllen Texas, attended Texas A&M University, served as an officer in Army Reserve, and holds a doctorate from Harvard University. The co-founder of Contempo Magazine has participated in Valley business for over 20 years. He is a member of the National Association of Hispanic Journalists and also writes for the American Daily Review. Follow him on twitter http://twitter.com/contempomagazin

Copyright 2009, Dr. Tony Magana. Some rights reserved.
To reproduce or distribute, visit: drtonymagana.icopyright.com