Ideological Entrepreneur

capt818

This node somewhat neglected: see also Flack and hack, PR, pundit, astroturf, Pension Plan, hackademics, political operatives

promoted to primary; evil pending

danger that this node just becomes a proxy for RWI

Both terms are significant; entrepreneur seems laudable, but maybe not quite so much when we consider the target rich environment;  plus we hve the RWInfrastructure preparing the ground, so it's just a matter of extracting the resources money from pious widows and businessmen

If you're a connected lobbyist (ex-pol or staffer) corprations will give you big bucks to rig the system in their favor.

If you're nobody, you can build grassroots fronts (newest incarnation like Sam Adams Alliance leverages social networking.

Get ideology for free or even profit in the incubators.

<div><div style="font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">=</div></div><div style="font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">aha 1/20 new pension tag:</div><div style="font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">RWI is a [target-] rich ecosystem [JOK seeks targets proxy?]; ideological entre look for niche; revolving door part of  this system, also incubator which might expose young ppl to ideas and opportunities/funding otherwise not; pension plan also signals to ideol entre new incubator recruits that it's a hood/smart bet because fail does not matter, we got your back / gig; [fe given mktpklace meritocrisy BS]</div><div style="font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><div style="font-size: medium;"></div></div>just saw reference to gary aldrich leveraging his notoriety so he could become a "professional conservative" mma
---f brown takeover superpacThomas Freiling serves as Executive Director and Treasurer of Takeover Super PAC.  He formerly served as Executive Director of Patriot Super PAC, one of the country’s largest “Tea Party” PAC’s; VP at Salem Communications (Nasdaq: SALM); Managing Director at Eagle Publishing, Inc. (Regnery, Human Events); founder and CEO at Xulon Press, Inc. He also served on the campaign and legislative staff of James M. Inhofe (R-OK), and has authored books on Ronald Reagan, Abraham Lincoln, and George W. Bush.
https://web.archive.org/web/20150223230620/http://takeoverpac.com/take-action/candace owen youtube <div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">amplified by kanye</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">youtube monetized, HQ attack b/c woman thot blocked, rt has used better/1st? echo/escalator?</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">alt rt uses effectively see RAM and red elephant, alt right alt lite is about rebrandeding neo-nazi brownshirts --> polo khakis; [preppy]</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">trump boosts/gives opening/permission more mainstream legitimacy</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">===</div>

---

stoner;

IDEOLOGICAL ENTREPRENUER is a pretty loose term, as it can take many different forms in the RWI, sucking off the eternal teat of the the pension plan.  Vigurie (direct mail) might be an/the early pioneer, but we can probably say that most of the Goldwater generation were true believers [1952 RR created seeds of 64?].  May not be so true for hired guns/flacks like Milloy, Ebell and Dr Evil Berman.  Ebell was initially a staffer for Shadegg, but quickly went through the revolving door.  Milloy gets degree in biostats at Johns Hopkins University School of Hygiene and Public Health, then two law degrees, but never did either. Got his start in early 90's with Jim Tozzi MBS (ex-RR OMB) secondhand smoke risk assessment, then president of his own organization called the "Regulatory Impact Analysis Project, followed soon thereafter by Junk Science. ETS was pioneering battleground for doubt (lost on Surgeon General warning, then big court case 11/98)

==Ideolentredoc

7/18/14

Milloy

Ebell

Stone

Beth Whelan

Amy Moritz Ridenour

Roger Stone

(why not Rove, Atwater,

Norquist? Abramoff Ailes?)

It is hard to roll back

environmental legislation, since people tend to like clean air and

water, safe fod, abd at least the idea of going to Yosemite.

Thusthe right has to settle for “reform” (generally loopholes for

donors), and falingthat, cut funding for enforecement (or put people

in charge who won't do it, some success in Reagan but huge in Bush43,

where they muzzled the scientists who protested as well). Enter John

Graham, who pioneered a completely new strategy, a second front:

blocking regulations from being enforced

[[ INSERT johngragam

7/18/2014

As RFK2 as well as another

book document in groteque detail, the Bush43 administration was far

and away the most anti-environmental in history/imaginable. However,

it would not have been possible without the groundwork, ideological

and beaurocratic/institutional set up by the Reagan administration.

We all recall the bumperstickers "I Know Watt's Wrong"

which forced the resignation of the head of the Dept of Interior who

declared Jesus would return when the last tree was cut down [as an

aside, a major argument here is that moderation is key, so

information and correction are key; having said that, Bill Moyers

apologized for drawing attention to that remark was a mistake because

it correctly portrayed his attitude, merely got minor detals wrong

about where/when it was said].

However, the real damage

was not done by Watt (or even his Bush43 equivalent Gale Norton

[husband also gig/rancher giveaway of We the People's natural

resources for a pittance] but rather by John Graham

laid the groundwork for many ideol entre

hack/hackademics to follow; infiltration of Ivy League [cia?], OMB

risk analysis paralyzed enviro (esp?) regulations.<p style="margin-bottom: 0in; border-top: none; border-bottom: 1.10pt double #000000; border-left: none; border-right: none; padding-top: 0in; padding-bottom: 0.03in; padding-left: 0in; padding-right: 0in">

M.A.

in Public Affairs (1980), Duke University.

Thesis:

"The Value of a Life: What Difference Does It Make?"<p style="margin-bottom: 0in; border-top: none; border-bottom: 1.10pt double #000000; border-left: none; border-right: none; padding-top: 0in; padding-bottom: 0.03in; padding-left: 0in; padding-right: 0in">

PhD

Dissertation Carnegie

Mellon University 297 (1983)A

quantitative analysis of the frequency and severity of occupant

injuries from motor vehicle crashes indicates that the problem

deserves attention by public policy makers. The efficacy and

cost-effectiveness of various occupant-protection policies are

estimated. Results from time-series and cross-sectional models of

highway safety suggest that crash-survivability standards adopted in

the late 1960's by the Federal government have saved the lives of

thousands of automobile occupants. The full potential of the

standards has not been realized because few motorists wear available

safety-belt equipment. A behavioral analysis of belt-use decision

making casts some doubt on the hypothesis that nonuse of belts is a

product of rational, utility-maximizing behavior. Passive restraints

such as air bags and automatic belts have been proposed as

technological alternatives to manual belts. A stochastic benefit-cost

model of passive-restraint regulation is estimated with subjective

data elicited from crash-protection experts.

Results from the model indicate that passive restraints are likely to

be cost-beneficial unless a relatively low monetary value is assigned

to lifesaving.

The concluding chapter discusses several specific policy

recommendations for Federal and state decision makers, with explicit

attention to questions of administrative law, public acceptance, and

political feasibility.Post-Doctoral Fellow

(1984), Environmental Science and Public Policy, Harvard School of

Public

Health. Advisors:

Professors Donald Hornig, Marc Roberts, and Howard Raiffa===

wikibits:born 1956

Dr. Graham earned his B.A.

(politics and economics) at Wake Forest University (1978) where he

won national awards as an intercollegiate debater. He earned his M.A.

degree in public policy at Duke University (1980) before serving as

staff associate to Chairman Howard Raiffa’s Committee on Risk and

Decision Making of the National Research Council/National Academy of

Sciences. His Carnegie Mellon University Heinz College Ph.D.

dissertation on automobile safety was cited by the U.S. Supreme Court

in a pro-airbag decision in 1983 [meaning?]and again in 1985 by

Secretary of Transportation Elizabeth Dole. Subsequently, his first

academic position was at the Heinz College.

[some fed reg gigs?]

From 1990 to 2001 Dr.

Graham founded and led the Harvard Center for Risk Analysis (HCRA).

By raising over $10 million

in project grants and philanthropic contributions, Dr. Graham helped

support eight new faculty positions and dozens of post-doctoral and

doctoral students. By 2001 HCRA had become internationally recognized

for analytic contributions to environmental protection, injury

prevention, and medical technology innovation.

In 1995 Dr. Graham was

elected President of the Society for Risk Analysis, an international

membership organization of 2,400 scientists and engineers. Dr. Graham

reached out to risk analysts in Europe, China, Japan and Australia as

he helped organize the first World Congress on Risk Analysis

(Brussels, 2000).

. Prior to his role at

OMB, Dr. Graham was a tenured Professor of Policy and Decision

Sciences at the Harvard University School of Public Health.

The White House Office of

Management and Budget (OMB) from 2001 to 2006. As the

Senate-confirmed Administrator [fight?] of the Office of Information

and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA)

Previous to his

appointment as dean, he served as dean at the Frederick Pardee RAND

Graduate School at the RAND Corporation in California [basically

built a new Harvard org? $3.4.million? Then parlayed into

currently/ is dean of the

Indiana University School of Public and Environmental Affairs.?

joined 2008

The Manhattan Institute's

Senior Fellow and Director of the its Center for Medical Progress,

Paul Howard, spoke at the 2011 American Legislative Exchange Council

Annual Conference in a Workshop titled "Rationing By Any Other

Name: Medicare's Independent Payment Advisory Board." He co-lead

the panel with the Pacific Research

Institute's Director of Health Care Studies,

John Graham.[4]

OIRA: "Graham is the

de facto boss of all regulatory programs for the entire government --

any change in enviro rules must pass through his strangling hands. An

avowed enemy of pollution regulations, he previously headed a

quasi-academic front group that consistently issued reports claiming

that environmental protections are too costly for industry -- not a

surprising stance since he and his 'risk-assessment' center were

financed by more than 100 corporate entities, including the American

Petroleum Institute, Dow, Dupont, Exxon, Monsanto, and 3M."[8]

sourcewatch: ["

Opposition to Graham's

nomination

John Graham's appointment

to the OIRA was hotly contested by scientists, doctors, public health

professionals and environmental, consumer and labor organizations, as

well as many of his own academic peers, who questioned his science

and his ethical practices. His application of cost-benefit analyses

to industrial pollution is controversial and tends to favor polluters

by systematically overstating the costs of regulation to industry and

underestimating the cost to those affected. As founding director of

the Harvard Center for Risk Analysis, his acceptance of funding from

America's largest corporate polluters, including Dow Chemical,

DuPont, Monsanto, Alcoa, Exxon, General Electric and General Motors,

was considered a conflict of interest. No environmental or consumer

group is represented on the center's advisory board.

Graham has argued that

smog protects people from too much sunlight, dioxin might reduce

cancer in some cases, safe housing codes can kill people and

pesticides on foods are a trivial problem that does not constitute a

health hazard. In addition, "he claims that our choice of

environmental regulations contributes to the death of 60,000 people

under a theory he calls 'statistical murder'." [2]

A letter signed by 53

academics from across the country opposed Graham's nomination and

questioned his credibility and scientific integrity. They stated:

"Professor Graham's controversial risk management methodology

discounts the real risks of well-documented pollutants such as dioxin

and benzene, and makes use of extreme and highly-disputed economic

assumptions. Professor Graham has shown his willingness to over-ride

health, safety, environmental, civil rights, and other social goals

in applying crude cost-benefit tools far past the point at which they

can be justified by existing scientific and economic data...

Moreover, Professor Graham has publicly rendered many opinions on

complex and imperfectly understood scientific phenomena, such as the

etiology of cancer and other diseases, despite his lack of a degree

in the hard sciences. " It concluded: "Graham's work has,

overall, demonstrated a remarkable congruency with the interests of

regulated industries. In contrast, the position at OIRA requires a

much more even-handed approach." [3]

Graham's role as

regulatory gatekeeper

As administrator of the

OIRA, John Graham has much more discretion than it would appear at

first glance. He serves as the nation's regulatory gatekeeper,

passing judgment on all major national health, safety, and

environmental standards. Acting as "a sort of 'regulatory czar'

who can block any new regulation, whether arsenic standards for

drinking water, worker-protection rules or the public's right to know

about toxic chemicals," Graham's position is a crucial one for

overseeing essential consumer protections.[4] He has further extended

his influence by appropriating the authority to carry out laws

entrusted by Congress to heads of agencies such as the EPA.

Given his history of

favoring industry and weakened government regulations, Graham's

record since he took the post of administrator is not surprising. In

ways that are always beneficial to industry, he has strong-armed

agencies to weaken programs and promoted changes in scientific and

economic assumptions that pervert the regulatory process. The list of

Graham's pro-industry regulatory changes is extensive. A sampling

includes: the purging of a backlog of violations against the Clean

Air Act, adoption of a developer-financed study that claims wetlands

emit more pollutants than they absorb, and elimination of OSHA

ergonomics regulations that protected Americans from repetitive

stress injuries.

According to Robert F.

Kennedy, Jr. chief prosecuting attorney for the Hudson Riverkeeper

and the senior attorney for Natural Resources Defense Council, under

Graham's supervision "[the] Environmental Protection Agency has

halted work on 62 environmental standards, the federal Department of

Agriculture has stopped work on 57 standards, and the Occupational

Safety and Health Administration has halted 21 new standards. The EPA

completed just two major rules--both under court order and both

watered down at industry request--compared to 23 completed by the

Clinton administration and 14 by the Bush Sr. administration in their

first two years." [5]

As predicted by many of

his colleagues at Harvard, Graham's "persistent pattern of

conflict of interest, of obscuring and minimizing dangers to human

health with questionable cost-benefit analyses, and of hostility to

governmental regulation in general," has proven highly

detrimental to the health and safety of the very citizens his office

was designated to protect. [6]" end sw]

Strategic Ignorance:vs

Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., "Crimes Against Nature,"

Origin of the meme nanny

state? We do not need to test chemials before used (p 23). Key

enermy of Precautionary Principle, which he likens to hypochondria?

16,000 dirty plants of all

types grandfathered p24 let Gov. Jeb Bush dump wastewater into drink

aquifer;

hazardous waste (sludge?)

ok for farms and playgrounds 24 strat ignor

Graham: 17K$ to save life

via mamogram, but $19m benzene, so regulatory murder of 60K ppl

(another meme, DDT?)

extorted Philip Morris for

25K$; ~ dioxin reg; cell phone drive deaths ok b/c up productivity 52

CT Whitman mixed

environmental record as NJ governoer, but supported court order that

allowed EPA set air st'ds w/o consult j graham 58

John Graham:

Regulation in general

is a kind of moderation; the market treats the planet's life support

system as an “externality” to be ignored; moreover, moderation

exists in checks and balances, but OMB allows exec to invisibly veto

environmental regs based on bogus risk analysis (which makes profit

again the main criterion. Does so under guise of

rational/mathematical, “sound science” (god-term) vs

“statistical murder” (demon-term).

The New Right

“insurgency” (Goldwater/RR) always claimed they were kept out of

the liberal universities, and thus were forced to do their

scholarship in CTT. Lord knows plenty of rightwingers got gigs as

economists, especially at the University of Chicago (where they

screwed up and let Greg Palast in).

However, the Kochs were

not content with ersatz CTT and began infiltration of academia

itself, principly at GMU.

<li>Academic

Units: In addition to bogus conferences

and CTT’s with academic trappings but which are actually an

end-run around academic rigor, conservative funders such as Koch

and Scaife have heavily endowed legitimate universities, such as

the University of Chicago, George Mason

University and Pepperdine (Scaife, the

latter notably a sinecure for Starr). Koch funds and is on the

board of GMU’s Mercatus Center.

    [note two different law schools, one anti-green FOIA?] Re-running

a play from the Reagan administration, “In 2001, the Office of

Management and Budget asked for public input on which regulations

should be revised or killed. Mercatus submitted 44 of the 71

proposals the OMB received .

</li><li>

</li><li>INSERT

</li><li>end

insert]]

</li><li>

</li></ol>

</ol>

Ronald

Reagan

"bible" from heritage:

Mandate

for Leadership became blueprint

(presumably fre market fundamentalism; virulently ant-environmental)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mandate_for_Leadership

Coors in Kitchen Cabinet funded Heritage. Zelig Meese also

"distinguished

fellow and holder of the Ronald Reagan Chair in Public Policy"

[note academic trapping]

Reagan paid $125,000 to give a stock speech for GE on

the wonders of the free market system, which he honed to perfection;

(RR

had been president of Screen Actors Guild, [helped Pink Lady best

Tricky Dick, once an admirerer of FDR] but named names at HUAC

(secretly FBI informant?]

got

gig to nominate Goldwater 1964

Applauded

by right for attacking anti-war protesters at UCB :Bloody Thursday”

so be it. Three punctured lungs (fixed bayonets in picture) 13 hit

by buckshot, one young man killed, shot on rooftop. His tough stance

helped him beat more popular Democrat Jesse Unruh.

Jimmy Carter elected as part of Post-Watergate

reforms, but putting solar panels on White House, asking people to

wear a sweater (perhaps he could have picked a more stylish example),

tho Mr Rogerish?) was somehow Un-American. Plus rescue helicopters

crashed in a sand storm, so US ready for slick [Holywood?] ad Morning

in America, and Operation Manhood in Grenada(Rambo 1982) . Some

evidence that his campaign made a deal to keep the hostages in

Teheran, and in fact they were released timed to coincide with

inauguration (five minutes)

Right

Nation: R

Reagan believed in space aliens and appted Commerce sec Malcolm

Baldridge b/c he roped cattle for fun, opposed Civil Rights acts. 50

members of anti-detente Committee on the Present Danger appted

 admin. increased spending but no cuts, so upped debt by $1.5

trillion[also seen 3 trill, despite largest tax hike in history (BC

only on top 1.2 %?].RR

dereg thrifts cost $1 billion  Big Lies p 76

He

fired 10K air traffic controllers even though it one of few unions

to support him (RR had been president of Screen Actors Guild, [helped

Pink Lady best Tricky Dick, once an admirerer of FDR] but named names

at HUAC (secretly FBI informant?]. Regean promoted Rehnquist and

appted Scalia.under b2 coc guy ~v refs head of osha (their legal arm

got roberts and alito confirmed) 266RR

met w/ PR guys from Philip-Morris, AT&T, Hill

&Knowlton,

GM, Alcoa US Chamber

of Commerce, who  gave

him list of JVC civil servants to sack (p 261) . Tghe difference is

the RR listened to them and did what they wanted, but Bush 43 gave

them jobs and let them do what they wanted; however,

Michael

Baroody fil NAM lobbyist nom b2 head consumer product safety comm but

howled down) 267.

Wise Use Sagebrush Rebels

William

Perry Pendley served as deputy assistant secretary for energy and

minerals at the Department of Interior</a>

<a name="firstHeading1">[[nice

sum from demented:</a>Similar

to the anti-Agenda 21 and Tea Party protests of today, Wise

Use has

a parallel history of fomenting dissent at the behest of private

industry’s interests with overblown, nonsensical, and apocalyptic

language against any and all environmental regulations.

It is the same international, socialist, enviro-Nazi conspiracy

rhetoric and coordination tactics, and the same names that are seen

today. Rather than battles over stream restoration and endangered

species, the focus has now turned toward urban planners and zoning

regulations.

Also

known as “Multiple Use,” or “Shared Use” in Canada, [LM

europe?] the Wise Use movement is a collection of private

interests—mining, timber, ranching, construction, agriculture,

chemical manufacturers, and oil and gas companies—who have been

battling with the federal government over natural resource rights and

regulations since the days of Teddy Roosevelt.

Ever

since the Mining Act of 1872, private resource industries have had

free use of federal lands in many locations to mine, log, and graze

cattle with little or no payment to the government. When the

government tries to regulate access to those federal lands—be it by

blocking stream access to ranchers, closing off mountain roads to

loggers, or regulating pollution in the vicinity of a mining

operation—legal, political, and sometimes physical conflicts have

erupted over whether these actions constitute a “taking.” If

an environmental regulation is defined as a taking, rather than the

EPA fining polluters for not regulating their emissions properly,

polluters could sue the government for the loss of potential income

from said restriction. Such a decision would set a precedent that,

applied across many mining operations, oil refineries, and chemical

plants, would mean billions in government payouts.

In

the seventies, this dissent against government control of public

lands led a number of ranching groups to form the Sagebrush

Rebels. The

Sagebrush Rebels were allied to fight the implementation of the

growing environmental movement who had won numerous legislative

victories in the late sixties and seventies: the Wilderness Act,

Roadless Area Review and Evaluation Act (RARE), National

Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), Federal Land Policy and Management

Act, and National Forest Management Act. These policies were put in

place to restrict access to government-owned lands and resources that

were being used for free or for far below market value while being

maintained by the government. The Sagebrush Rebel alliance was able

to push their pro-ranching, logging, and mining agenda into the White

House with the election of Ronald Reagan in 1980.

The

story of Wayne

Hage is

the prototypical example of this battle over government land

regulation. A public lands rancher, he grazed his cattle on

government-owned lands until the government blocked access to a water

source used to feed his cattle. Hage sued the government under

takings law for their restriction and eventually won. His

twenty-plus-year legal struggle won him $14 million in damages plus

interest, and he became a late symbol of the Sagebrush Rebellion and

ranchers’ rights.

Because

there is so much at stake, any struggle over government regulation

anywhere in the country—from an easement used to create a bike

lane, a zoning regulation on housing construction, or an attempt to

designate a river as “wild and scenic”—could become legal

precedent or a rallying point about the injustices of governmental

interference and therefore a front line in the conflict over property

rights. Throughout the nineties, natural resource industry interests

took to this fight by funding front groups to help foment dissent

against park rangers, environmental activists, or anybody that stood

in the way of anything but one hundred percent private use of park

lands.

Groups

with innocuous-sounding names like “Friends of the Rivers” worked

with right wing think tanks like the John Birch Society, the Heritage

Foundation, and the Heartland Institute under the

philosophy of Lyndon Larouche to claim a grand socialist plot by the

UN. Calling environmentalists “watermelons” (green on the

outside, red in the middle), they declared all EPA gestapo

regulations to be part of an interconnected global hippie conspiracy

aimed at destroying U.S. industry and a new paganism that “sacrifices

people and worships trees” in order to recruit members and make

money. In their view, ozone depletion was a concocted myth meant to

justify land seizures. According to these groups, climate change is

also a myth, trees cause smog, and toxic waste cleanup is a misuse of

public financing.

Those

same think tanks, funded by the natural resource industries, provided

boilerplate legal language for politicians to employ across different

states and local governments. Pro-bono legal organizations, like

Pacific Legal Foundation and Mountain States Legal Foundation, were

funded by the same natural resource companies and would seek out and

represent individuals with disputes against the government over

takings law. A

1984 Yale Law Journal analysis criticized them for not actually

serving the public interest as required for 501(c)(3)

designation. More

often than not they were found to be serving the interests of their

oil and ranching industry board members in lawsuits against

environmental regulations.

The

tactics of Wise Use are thoroughly documented in David

Helvarg’s groundbreaking book The Battle Over the Greens.

In it, Helvarg details the same ideology and tactics at the heart of

the Tea Party and anti-Agenda 21 movements to come. In many ways,

these later groups are merely an extension of Wise Use being led and

reinforced by the some of the same actors.  It is the same

technique of strategic fearmongering at the local level for private

interests. Or as Helvarg explains, “the strength of

anti-environmentalism is not in its membership rolls but in its

ability to mobilize a network of core activists to intervene in and

politicize local conflicts, creating a perception of power that they

hope can be used as a springboard for further expansion.”

Long

before the Tea Party accused Obama of being an “Alinsky radical,”

groups like Bill Grannell’s People for the West!, Charles Cushman’s

National Inholder’s Association, and Ron

Arnold’s Center

For the Defense of Free Enterprise used the techniques of Saul

Alinsky to blame the preservationist elite for the ills of rural

Montana. Bill Grannell even took Alinsky’s classes in Chicago

before going on to use Alinsky’s tactics for the interests of

ranching groups. Instigating instant riots at town meetings, spamming

government fax lines, phone lines, and talk radio call-in shows, and

threatening a UN takeover of all private property were some of the

common tricks of the trade.

Financial

backing for Wise Use would decline because of associations with

militias in the wake of the Oklahoma City bombing and the election of

a pro-industry president in George W. Bush, but it didn’t

disappear. It would eventually make a new resurgence with the

Tea Party and its short-lived attempt to alter the 2010 Congressional

elections while denouncing the looming threat of Agenda 21. end

demented]]

Morell Act 1862 (land grant colleges) for

homesteaders, assumed railroad would sell land, but much not good for

farming, and Teddy set aside more at the urging of conservatinists,

so Herbert Hoover offered to states, but they declined because much

of it overgrazed, they feared it would be a liability, so BLM set up.

Then in  1976

of the Federal

Land Policy and Management Act (FLPMA)

set up to make land availabe but also preserve

it, but any regs seen as onerous if not worse. Since reagan

administration did nothing to hamper access to land, Wise Use

/Sagebrush fizzled out, but fear that Bush 41 would actuially be the

environmental president he vowed, rekindled 1988. it aligned with

militia movement, which turned out to be bad PR after 1995 Oklahoma

bombing (inspired by Turner Diaries).

[“Wise-use

activists went on to confront the Nature Conservancy, the Sierra

Club, and local environmental activists, sometimes with

vigilante-style tactics ranging from telephone death-threats to arson

and shootings. In Washington, Idaho, Montana, and New Mexico, a

number of wise-users even united with the militia movement.That

alliance proved their undoing: Following the deadly 1995

attack on the Murrah Federal Building in

Oklahoma City by militia associates Timothy McVeigh and Terry

Nichols, wise use lost much of its industry backing and went into

decline.Today

wise-use veterans and their lawyers and lobbyists are back, working

for the son of the president they once detested. Among prominent

appointees in the administration with wise-use backgrounds is

Interior Department secretary Gale Norton, who began her career

at the Mountain States Legal Foundation back when it billed

itself as the "litigation arm of Wise Use."Mountain

States was the brainchild of Reagan's notoriously anti-environmental

Interior secretary James Watt. (After being forced to resign, Watt

told a group of ranchers that "if the troubles from

environmentalists cannot be solved in the jury box or at the ballot

box, perhaps the cartridge box should be used.")](Helvarg

).

Watt

dominion theology, "subdue"

nature is duty; sold off public assets atfire

sale prices : GAO 26  "I

do not know how many generations we cancount

on till the Lord returns"  greens

are plot to delay energy

development and

"weaken America" , a "left-wing cult which seeks to

bring

down the type of

gov't i believe in" 26 proto-Agenda 21?

1980

coors etc spearheaded Sagebrush

Rebellion (corp

and rw) turned ctt into

pol power 25

RR: I am a S rebel"

Coors

picked assoc Anne Gorsuch for epa; hubby

cattle baron to head BLM, tho haddeclared

to shut it  25 rfk. heritage wants

to "strangle the envionmental movement...the greatest single

threat to the Am economy" (rfk 24) Gorsuch tried to shut down

SuperfundGorsuch

cut budget 30% so no new laws or enforcement; killed

Superfund at start,

became a welfare pgm of corp lawyers 26 appt

lobbyist to run deptsCoS

timber lawyer, enforecenmt chief ex-exxon

by 1981 1.1 mil

signatures on petition to get rid of Watt; after out, 25 counts

felony, perjury, concealment and obstr of justice. Gorsuch

and 23

others forced to

resign, sweetheart deal w/ coors (her #2 Rita  LaVelle

jailed perjury and

obstruction of justice).  26 blow

to sagebrush but regrouped at

aug '88 nugget hotel reno and renamedWise

Use." arnold:

our goal is to destroy, to erradicate the env movement. we

want you to be able

to exploit the environment for private gain, absolutely" p 27  <a name="cite_ref-7">[In

a 1986 visit to New Zealand, sponsored by the Agricultural Chemical

and Animal Remedies Manufacturers, Arnold

described himself as the "Darth Vader for the capitalist

revolution" and defended the use of the carcinogenic chemical

2,4,5-T. He

claimed that chemical manufacturers wanted to make sure their

chemicals were used safely. [8]

…</a> he realized

the potential financial rewards of opposing environmentalism:<dl>

"For

us" said Mr. Gottlieb... "the environmental movement has

become the perfect bogeyman." [15]

ex-con?</a></dd></dl>

<a name="Toronto_Star"> ...When

a small group, Green Anarchists, organized a tour in 2002, Arnold

latched on to their support of people such as the

imprisoned'Unabomber'

Ted Kaczynski as

a 'political prisoner' to call for the FBI's

Domestic Terrorism Program to investigate the group. Arnold told

the Conservative

News Service (CNS)

that the tour:</a><dl>

"presents

probable cause for investigation. You do have people here

recommending violence, murder, property damage, everything you can

think of." [19]</a></dd></dl>

<a name="cite_ref-19">The

following year Mr. Arnold, long considered a fringe player, landed

a role as an "expert consultant on ecoterrorism" to a

University of Arkansas Terrorism Research Center project to study

terrorism cases in the US. The project was funded to the tune of

$343,885 by the National Institute of Justice (NIJ). [20]</a>

] RFK says a number

of shifts/convergences: Moonie (Christian, anti-Communist, 1991 The

New Order best-selling novel depicts the

federal government as tryingto wreck family and take guns.

Watermelon metaphor and other factors open door to alliances with

neo-Nazi, militias etc (rfk)College Republican Ralph Reed (lobbyist?)

had been colonizing the Evangelicals for a while, (also selling how

to astroturf) so for the first time attracts industry/corporate money

(plus church as ground GOTV troops, so start getting their candidated

elected, Newt 1994 (Bush 43 gov tx?)

1992 high water mark

because far from being the eco Prez they feared, Bush41 picked up

their anti-green extremeist rhetoric to counger te Green Man Gore in

the campaign,though it did not save him. PR problem when connections

to Moon revealed (when/ why?)

Tom Delay:  "biblical

worldview"( RFK

30)TDelay:

DDT

as safe as aspirin",

~ESA; Columbine because schools teach evolution.
1/95

Delay?) invites 350 lobbyists to dismantle regs 30  learned from

Watt
disaster PR, so plant tree foto op and used free mkt rhet to

hide; Luntz
did PR (wrote Contract for Am[Armey?]) snuck riders

on key bills, "supermandate"
regulatory reform, ~

unfunded mandates etc but PIRG etc

caught them, 1
mil signatires, so moderate gop opposed; after

gov't shutdown Newt lost public
support. TD: “we lost the debate

on the environment" (how?)Bush

43 picked Dick Cheney ensured

Wise Use backing. go-to

guy for wise use  and oil in
80's; arranged /led

1st  veto of wilderness bill in hist under RR,

big win
psychol. 1992 to 2000 "distinguished advisor" to

Ctr for Def of Free Ent (WU)
Ron Arnold exec VP. Cheney also on bd

of Nat'l Legal Ctr for Public Interest, WU
CTT 31Inaug

day, andy card froze all clinton pending regs

wu #1 Norton, 2

Griles (mining lobby), mark rey (timber lobby); doj  asst
ag

for env and nat res  WUse leader Sansonetti p 32

EPA fisher and

horinko lobby.consult to Koch; Holmstead (lobbyist and WU
front

gp)

Presumably I have

covered Bush43 trainwreck elsewhere.

Pendley

revisionist/nostalgic history book

[Behind

the Sagebrush Rebellion of 2012 [feds tried to close road?]BY JODI

PETERSON HIGH COUNTRY NEWS JUNE

13, 2012In

late April, Arizona’s

Legislature approved a bill demanding that Washington, D.C., give

the state control over most of its federal land. Utah Gov. Gary

Herbert signed a similar measure in March. These bills are, of

course, highly unlikely to result in any actual transfer of

land; most legal experts think they’ll prove

unconstitutional, and decades of Supreme Court decisions firmly

support federal oversight of certain lands.The

rhetoric behind the measures is all about states’ rights, but they

would also boost corporate access to Western natural resources. “This

push is driven by the fossil fuel industry,” says Pete Maysmith,

executive director of Colorado Conservation Voters, “and it’s

been fascinating to see ALEC and

its agenda and funders more exposed.”ALEC

— the American Legislative Exchange Council — is funded by major

corporations such as Koch Industries, ExxonMobil, and Shell.

Nationwide, about 2,000 state legislators are members of the

conservative policy group, which furnishes them with model bills,

including the template for the current measures. ALEC

also supplied language for an unsuccessful 1995 federal Sagebrush

Rebellion Act that sought to transfer 422,200 square miles to the

states.

]

Cliven Bundy

---