Archive for September, 2011

Dear ___________________________,

They actually did it. Last week, the FCC published its net neutrality order in the Federal Register, stating that effective November 20 the federal government will begin regulating the Internet.

Americans didn’t want this. Congress rejected it decisively — it only had 27 sponsors last year. The courts rejected it — they said the FCC did not have the power to do this. And voters rejected it, defeating all 95 of the candidates who campaigned on the issue. That’s right a perfect zero for 95.

But unless the Senate votes to overturn this order before it takes effect November 20, we will start down the path to a government regulated and government controlled Internet.

Click here now to tell the Senate to STOP this outrageous power grab.

Under a special procedure called the Congressional Review Act, Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison is committed to forcing a Senate vote. Harry Reid can’t keep this off the floor, and it can’t be filibustered. We’ll need 51 votes to succeed.

This is a key test for the U.S. Senate. Will they stand up to one of Obama’s power grabs, or will they sit on their hands? And if they sit on their hands, why should voters re-elect legislators who refuse to legislate?

Click here now to tell the Senate to STOP this outrageous power grab.

Yours truly,

Phil Kerpen
VP Policy, Americans for Prosperity
Chairman, Internet Freedom Coalition

P.S. The whole history of this sordid net neutrality affair is covered in chapter 3 of my new book Democracy Denied, available October 18.


Read Full Post »

Johnson County Home Rule Charter Commission Meetings http://chartercommission.jocogov.org/meetings.htm

Minutes from August 15, 2011 meeting http://chartercommission.jocogov.org/minutes/Minutes%20081511.pdf

From pages 5 and 6

“Charter Commissioner Copeland asked about the process for redistricting.”

“Chief Legal Counsel Jarrett discussed the process, which includes looking at population figures every three years and studying the deviations.”

“Charter Commissioner Copeland asked how many times within the last ten years has the County redistricted.”

“Chief Legal Counsel Jarrett answered twice. The last redistricting occurred a few years ago.”

“Charter Commissioner Pirner asked if there is anything to stop the Board of County Commissioners from redrawing the lines.”

“Chief Legal Counsel Jarrett said there were some legal issues with it.”

  • Sec. 3.01 – Remove “if authorized”.
  • Sec. 3.02 and 3.03 – Consistency between qualifications of commissioners.
  • Sec. 3.03 – Consider if “within ninety (90) days” is necessary.

But 3.01 – 3.03 = ARTICLE III. Method of Election of County Commissioners

Clearly the recorded response does not address the recorded question.  So either the County Commissioners are accountable for providing the wrong documentation of the discussion or changed the minutes after approved by the Charter Commissioners for posting.

Kudos to Charter Commissioners Copeland and Pirner for trying. But just like Jurassic Park the predatorial dinosaurs of Overland Park are thriving.  Here’s a typical response to my requests for redistricting in February 2011.

The 2001 redistricting was done following the publics’ approval.  So the dominant Overland Park representation made sure that the pre and post redistricting favored Overland Park.  Currently 5 of the 7 County Commissioners have Overland Park roots, votes and funding while Overland Park represents less than 30% of the entire County population and declining.  If the Charter Commission moves forward with expanding the County Commissioners to 9 members, these Districts should at least be identified and publicized prior to the publics’ vote of approval.  Our research makes it clear that if these Districts are formed post Charter Ammendment public approval, the ratio will be 6  or 7 of the 9.

With all things considered, a reasonable person could easily conclude that attending the next Public Hearing scheduled for September 27 would be a waste of time.  The County Commissioners have collectively and united as one succeeded in derailing any attempt of improving “The most effective government is the one closest to the people.”  

“Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Anyone Who Threatens It”
Ken Dunwoody                                                                 GOD
Henpecked Acres                                                              
One Nation
14850 W. 159th St.
Olathe, Ks. 66062
kdunwoody2@aol.com www.NOlathe.com http://NOlathe.net http://NOjocoboco.net
View Sarah’s Story http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GUWuUvOZ7RY http://vimeo.com/23038312

Read Full Post »

Since 2006 the House has attempted to over turn the 2004 statute requiring that illegal aliens residing in Kansas be allowed to pay in-state tuition to Kansas Universities. Since 2009 Senate REPUBLICAN Leadership has blocked the House Bill from the Senate floor. This current session HB-2006 was again blocked in committee. What was the in-tuition of JoCo Republican Senators on repealing in-state tuition in 2008? https://nolathe.net/2011/04/17/intuition-of-johnson-county-republican-senators/ 






Sen. Terrie Huntington (House)




Sen. Thomas Owens (House)




Sen. Julia Lynn




Sen. Mary Pilcher-Cook


No Office Held


Sen. John Vratil




Sen. Robert Olson (House)




Sen. Raymond Merrick (House)



 Non-partison County Commissioners that support funding for illegal immigrants remain Eilert, Allen, Lindstrom, Peterson, Hayden, Osterhaus and Ashcraft. https://nolathe.net/2011/08/13/which-side-do-you-stand-on-commissioners/ 
“Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Anyone Who Threatens It”
Ken Dunwoody                                                                       GOD
Henpecked Acres                                                                    
One Nation
14850 W. 159th St.
Olathe, Ks. 66062
kdunwoody2@aol.com www.NOlathe.com http://NOlathe.net http://NOjocoboco.net
View Sarah’s Story http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GUWuUvOZ7RY http://vimeo.com/23038312

Read Full Post »

Quite deliberately, the Johnson County Board of Commissioners and Staff have redirected the Home Rule Charter Commission into an area of unknown territory.  The citizenry will have to live with the results for another ten years as a result.  The Home Rule Charter Commissioners are participating in this activity without pay and with a great sacrifice of their personal time.  It’s truly a shame that after many months of meetings and with only a few months left before they are required to make recommendations, the following is their highest priority for the next Public Hearing for comments.

“Consider supporting an amendment to the state statute to provide for protection of “whistleblowers” in connection with audits. KSA 45-221i governs the information that must be made available to the public and may be the appropriate statute use to correct this problem. An amendment to paragraph (5) something like the following might do the job: “Information which would reveal the identity of any undercover agent, any informant reporting a specific violation of law or any individual who provides information to a county, municipal or state auditor in connection with or related to the duties of such auditor.” This part of the statute already provides for the protection of the identity of undercover agents and informants reporting violations of law.”

A reasonable person could conclude this experiment led by politicians of SELF RULE is an abominable failure.  It starts with how the Charter Commissioners are selected.  Most if not nearly all are determined by other folks with a R or D after their name.  There are significant political agendas at play here and in general they appear to be satisfied with a disfunctional County government.

Also abundantly clear here is the absolute power of a few Overland Park current and former politicians.  All friends with a failed publicist and behind the scenes power broker.  Not to name names but let’s start with Dick Bond, John Vratil, Ed Eilert, Mary Birch, Steve Rose, Larry Winn II & III.  There is an assortment of others but less significant in their influence including the current Overland Park Mayor.

The ‘key stone’ in this fiasco lies directly with District Attorney Steve Howe who has the only authority to investigate wrong doing in a Home Rule Charter Johnson County.  He continues to refuse.  Wonder why?

All while the remaining six County Commissioners play “see no evil, hear no evil and say no evil” cuz that’s what they were told to do.  Maybe the real folks in Johnson County should vote to repeal The Home Rule Charter.

“Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Anyone Who Threatens It”
Ken Dunwoody                                                                            GOD
Henpecked Acres                                                                        
One Nation
14850 W. 159th St.
Olathe, Ks. 66062
kdunwoody2@aol.com www.NOlathe.com http://NOlathe.net http://NOjocoboco.net
View Sarah’s Story http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GUWuUvOZ7RY http://vimeo.com/23038312

Read Full Post »

Institute for Sustainable Communities

Gus Speth is one of ISC’s Directors:
He served from 1977 to 1981 as a Member and then for two years as Chairman of the Council on Environmental Quality in the Executive Office of the President. As Jimmy Carter‘s Council on Environmental Quality Chairman, he was a principal adviser on matters affecting the environment and had overall responsibility for developing and coordinating the President’s environmental program. In 1981 and 1982 he was Professor of Law at Georgetown University Law Center, teaching environmental and constitutional law.
In 1982 he founded the World Resources Institute, a Washington, D.C.-based environmental think tank; served as its president until January 1993. He was a senior adviser to President-elect Bill Clinton‘s transition team, heading the group that examined the U.S.’s role in natural resources, energy and the environment.
In 1991 he chaired a U.S. task force on international development and environmental security which produced the report Partnership forSustainable Development: A New U.S. Agenda. In 1990 he led the Western Hemisphere Dialogue on Environment and Development which produced the report Compact for a New World.
From 1993 to 1999, he served as Administrator of the United Nations Development Programme; he served as Special Coordinator for Economic and Social Affairs under Secretary-General Boutros Boutros-Ghali and also served as Chair of the United Nations Development Group.[1]

 “At the Sustainable Communities Boot Camp, ISC brought together nearly 150 people—including senior officials from 13 U.S. regions and the Obama administration—to help develop new regional development approaches that integrate social, economic, and environmental priorities.”

Speak to Inspire


Designing Effective Outreach Strategies

Social justice advocacy goals almost always require the support of some segment of the public in order to move forward. Therefore, significant attention needs to be paid to planning the appropriate outreach and communications effort.

Advocacy outreach begins with developing the basic messages of your advocacy campaign. These messages, their audiences, and the delivery of the one to the other, will influence your overall outreach strategy.

Just as the Nine Questions can assist you in planning your overall campaign strategy, pull them out again to guide your specific outreach efforts. Namely:

  1. What do we want? (Goals)
    What is it you want your audience to do once they’ve heard your message?
  2. Who can give it to us? (Target Audiences)
    Which segment of the public is in the best position to hear and act effectively upon our message? (NOTE: The “general public” is not a target audience.)
  3. What do they need to hear? (Messages)
    What is the best language, use of words, that will impact them powerfully and move them to action?
  4. Who do they need to hear it from? (Messengers)
    Who is this particular target audience most likely to listen to?
  5. How do we get them to hear it? (Delivery)
    What is the best medium to reach them (e.g., print, radio, television, email)?
  6. What have we got? (Resources; strengths)
    What resources do we already have at our disposal– good messages, graphic artists, web-savvy specialists, motivating speakers– that can help us achieve our communications objectives?
  7. What do we need to develop? (Challenges; gaps)
    Who do we need to bring in? What skills do we need that we don’t have? What organizational culture issues might hamper our efforts?
  8. How do we begin? (First steps)
    What are some things we can do right away to get the effort moving forward? Then what will we do after that?
  9. How will we know it’s working, or not working? (Evaluation)
    What mechanisms will we put into place to measure the impact of our message and our approach?

The Advocacy and Leadership Center offers a number of tips for using the media to advance your issue.

Message Framing: Strength by Association

A message’s content becomes exponentially more powerful when set in the right context. Every message is positioned inside an interpretive frame, a background set of signals made up of language, metaphors, visuals, and messengers, that tell an audience how to interpret what they hear.

Frames trigger meaning. They tap into the listener’s belief system and create instant filters. The moral and cultural models that are sparked by the frame cause the listener to disregard certain details and focus on others.

Ultimately, a frame triggers a deep, unconscious connection with a moral belief or cultural identity. The listener moves toward that deeper connection.

Advocates can make strategic use of frames to bring new power to their campaigns. Where the current frames for issues are less desirable for their campaigns, they can craft messages to bridge to more advantageous ones.

Audiences: Who has the power to make it happen?

Your audiences play the ultimate role in making the change you want to see happen. There are two types of audiences that your advocacy efforts will focus on:

  • Decision makers: Those that have the power of authority – formal and/or informal – to make or to block change.
  • Pressure makers: Those that have the power to influence or pressure decision makers or other pressure makers, and to raise public opinion of an issue.

In order to identify the right audiences and begin analyzing information about each of them, here are some things to think about:

  • What is at stake?

When fleshing out potential audiences that will make moves toward your goals, it is also important to think about whom and what will provide resistance. Both those who are negatively impacted by the status quo and those who want to maintain it all play important roles here.

  • How are changes made?

Both the formal and informal ways in which change is made and blocked are important considerations when identifying decision and pressure makers. Think about:

  • Decision makers: Who has the power and authority to make or block change? Who decides whether a problem is addressed or ignored? What are their duties? For what can they be held accountable? What are their limitations?
  • Pressure makers: Who has the influence with or connection to these decision makers?
  • Formal and informal structures: What are the decision making bodies? How are they organized? What is the relationship among different bodies and different levels?
  • Decision-making process: How does an issue become part of the problem solving agenda? Are there openings for public participation? Do decision makers consult with civil society when deciding among alternative solutions? If so, at what stages of the process? Through what mechanisms? Who has access to these mechanisms? Whose voices are sought out? Represented? Listened to? Considered important?

You can use our worksheet Identifying Relevant Audiences to assist you with these questions.

Once you’ve gained a broad sense of the individuals, groups and institutions that should be targeted, begin to hone in on your key audiences.

Key Audiences

Begin to focus in on your most important audiences. Ask yourself the following questions and gather as much information as possible from the worksheets provided:

  • Who holds a stake or an interest in the issue, and whether or how it is resolved?
    1. Start identifying audiences by exploring “What is at stake?” and “How are changes made?” (see the “Identifying Relevant Audiences” worksheet).
    2. Include anyone whose support or opposition needs neutralization (see the “Listing Your Audiences” ).
    3. See if you forgot anyone. Think about the many sectors of society at all levels (i.e. local state, national, regional, international).
    4. From there, divide your list into formal and informal decision and pressure makers (see the “Dividing Your Audiences”).
  • For each audience, how important are they to the issue? Why?
    Break up your audiences into three broad categories: Very important, important, and not important. The “very important” audiences will serve as your key audiences. Pay careful attention to your other audiences as their level of importance might change over time (see the “Ranking Your Audiences”).
  • For each key audience, do they support or oppose the change?

Further divide list into the following categories: strong supporters, moderate supporters, fence sitters (those who are uncommitted), moderate opponents, and strong opponents (see the “Evaluating Your Audiences”).


Information contributed by Charles W. in Virginia

Read Full Post »

What Is Sustainable Development?

What is Sustainable Development? According to its authors, the objective of sustainable development is to integrate economic, social and environmental policies in order to achieve reduced consumption, social equity, and the preservation and restoration of biodiversity. Sustainablists insist that every societal decision be based on environmental impact, focusing on three components; global land use, global education, and global population control and reduction.

Social Equity (Social Justice) Social justice is described as the right and opportunity of all people “to benefit equally from the resources afforded us by society and the environment.” Redistribution of wealth. Private property is a social injustice since not everyone can build wealth from it. National sovereignty is a social injustice. Universal health care is a social justice. All part of Agenda 21 policy.

Economic Prosperity Public Private Partnerships (PPP). Special dealings between government and certain, chosen corporations which get tax breaks, grants and the government’s power of Eminent Domain to implement sustainable policy. Government-sanctioned monopolies.

Local Sustainable Development policies Smart Growth, Wildlands Project, Resilient Cities, Regional Visioning Projects, STAR Sustainable Communities, Green jobs, Green Building Codes, “Going Green,” Alternative Energy, Local Visioning, facilitators, regional planning, historic preservation, conservation easements, development rights, sustainable farming, comprehensive planning, growth management, consensus.

Who is behind it? ICLEI – Local Governments for Sustainability (formally, International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives). Communities pay ICLEI dues to provide “local” community plans, software, training, etc. Addition groups include American Planning Council, The Renaissance Planning Group, International City/County Management Group, aided by US Mayors Conference, National Governors Association, National League of Cities, National Association of County Administrators and many more private organizations and official government agencies. Foundation and government grants drive the process. 

Where did it originate? The term Sustainable Development was first introduced to the world in the pages a 1987 report (Our Common Future) produced by the United Nations World Commission on Environmental and Development, authored by Gro Harlem Brundtland, VP of the World Socialist Party. The term was first offered as official UN policy in 1992, in a document called UN Sustainable Development Agenda 21, issued at the UN’s Earth Summit, today referred to simply as Agenda 21.

Read Full Post »

Revealing Quotes from the Planners

What is Agenda 21?

“Agenda 21 proposes an array of actions which are intended to be implemented by EVERY person on Earth ... it calls for specific changes in the activities of ALL people Effective execution of Agenda 21 will REQUIRE a profound reorientation of ALL humans, unlike anything the world has ever experienced ... 

Agenda 21: The Earth Summit Strategy to Save Our Planet (Earthpress, 1993). Emphases – DR

Urgent to implement – but we don’t know what it is! “No one fully understands how or even, if, sustainable development can be achieved; however, there is growing consensus that it must be accomplished at the local level if it is ever to be achieved on a global basis.”

The Local Agenda 21 Planning Guide, published by ICLEI, 1996.

Agenda 21 and Private Property “Land …cannot be treated as an ordinary asset, controlled by individuals and subject to the pressures and inefficiencies of the market. Private land ownership is also a principle instrument of accumulation and concentration of wealth, therefore contributes to social injustice.”  

From the report from the 1976 UN’s Habitat I Conference.

“Current lifestyles and consumption patterns of the affluent middle class involving high meat intake, use of fossil fuels, appliances, home and work air conditioning, and suburban housing are not sustainable.

Maurice Strong, Secretary General of the UN’s Earth Summit, 1992.

Reinvention of Government

“We need a new collaborative decision process that leads to better decisions, more rapid change, and more sensible use of human, natural and financial resources in achieving our goals.”  

Report from the President’s Council on Sustainable Development

“Individual rights will have to take a back seat to the collective.” Harvey Ruvin, Vice Chairman, ICLEI.

The Wildlands Project

“We must make this place an insecure and inhospitable place for Capitalists and their projects we must reclaim the roads and plowed lands, halt dam construction, tear down existing dams, free shackled rivers and return to wilderness millions of tens of millions of acres of presently settled land.” Dave Foreman, Earth First. 

© 2011 – Produced by the American Policy Center 70 Main Street, Suite 23. Warrenton, VA. 540.34l.8911 admin@americanpolicy.org • americanpolicy.org

Hide Agenda 21’s UN roots from the people “Participating in a UN advocated planning process would very likely bring out many of the conspiracyfixated groups and individuals in our society ... This segment of our society who fear ‘one-world government’ and a UN invasion of the United States through which our individual freedom would be stripped away would actively work to defeat any elected official who joined ‘the conspiracy’ by undertaking LA21. So we call our  process something else, such as comprehensive planning, growth management or smart growth. ”    J. Gary Lawrence, advisor to President Clinton’s Council on Sustainable Development.

Signed: Komrads Ed, Edward, Dave, Jason, Michael, Jim and Calvin.

Also noted http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/livability/state_of_the_practice_summary/research2011.pdf

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »