‘Rightwing Extremism in Action: Tea Party Houston’

May 2011
S	M	T	W	T	F	S
1	2	3	4	5	6	7
8	9	10	11	12	13	14
15	16	17	18	19	20	21
22	23	24	25	26	27	28
29	30	31

OUR LINKS

YubaNet
White House Blog
Watts Up With That?
The Union
Sierra Thread
RL “Bob” Crabb
Barry Pruett Blog

‘Rightwing Extremism in Action: Tea Party Houston’

26 May 2011

George Rebane

Here's an example of the asymmetry in the violent rhetoric and revolutionary fervor between the left and the right. This video makes clear the palpable violence and hatred of the right. Take a look at these rabid rightwingers; and check out the music that sets the mood. Is this their best shot?

And then check out a good representation of what has become identified as the rightwing credo. How does the self-declared midddle differentiate itself from these tenets?

Last night we saw the screening of 'A More Perfect Union', a compelling depiction of America's Constitutional Convention that produced the document which made us an enduring democratic republic. The film was presented at the NC Board of Realtors' Easterly Hall by those radical NC Tea Party Patriots. When the film ended it was hard to find a dry eye in the SRO hall. Gotta watch 'em like a hawk.

Posted in Critical Thinking & Numeracy, Culture Comments, Our Country

199 responses to “‘Rightwing Extremism in Action: Tea Party Houston’”

Mikey McD

30 May 2011

Thornton, I don’t know what conservatives you claim to know but all the conservatives I know just want to be left alone. We value liberty over government provided ‘security.’
What ‘category’ do you label yourself if not:”communist” or “socialist” or for that matter “liberal” “?- the shoe seems to fit.
The point that Crabb continues to miss is the fact that both the collectivists and capitalists belief that their ‘side’ would fair better in a GD.

LikeLike
Mike Thornton

30 May 2011

Can you define being “left alone” and what that means for the other folks that have to share the world with you?
The reason I ask this is because what being “left alone” means for many of the folks and corporations that use the term, is that they want to be “left alone” to make money by screwing things up for other people or to be “left alone” so they can privatize their profits while socializing their expenses and then their “freedom” winds up infringing on my “freedom” and my ability to be “left alone”.

LikeLike
George Rebane

30 May 2011

And folks, there you have the man’s summa, twisted and turned into one of the finest class warfare statements on RR. ‘What is mine is mine, what is yours is negotiable, because I can tell you how much of it you had to rob from us or put together by the sweat of our labor for which we have yet to be compensated.’
Or as a class warrior commentator on truthout.com just said – “The idea that working folks in America are stupid and fearful is promoted by chicken hawks and spoiled media talking faces. Wait until the violence starts and the tough come out and make a stand.”

LikeLike
Mikey McD

30 May 2011

“Left alone”:
Don’t FORCE me to pay into SS
Don’t FORCE me to pay into Medicare
Don’t FORCE me to pay for government sponsored ‘philanthropy’ (bailouts, kickbacks, pork, stimulus)
Don’t manipulate the markets from on high (END THE FED)
Allow me to CHOOSE what I eat (it is illegal for me to buy beef or milk from a neighbor!)
Don’t force crap like the Patriot Act on me.

LikeLike
RL Crabb

30 May 2011

It would be interesting to see how political parties would develop in a divided nation. One would guess that in the conservative sector, you would have the existing Republican party and a Libertarian party vying for influence. In the liberal sector you’d likely have the traditional Dems and a progressive party.
Frankly, I can’t see how I’d fit into either one without getting hung. In the liberal world they’d tax me into poverty and then put me on welfare to ensure my loyalty to the state. In the conservative world they’d build a hog rendering plant next to my house and tell me to f#*k off if I didn’t like it.
That’s why I like our current borders and imperfect system. At least there’s a LITTLE balance.

LikeLike
stevenfrisch

30 May 2011

What a bunch of nonsense these last several comments have been. THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS BEING LEFT ALONE. IT is an absolute impossibility– fantasy–unicorn riding —fairy tale.

LikeLike
Mike Thornton

30 May 2011

I’m just curious what “our” response to the “left alone” crowd is supposed to be if they go broke, get sick and wind up old and homeless with nobody to turn too?
Do we say: “Well you wanted to be ‘left alone’ now go off and die somewhere.”
And if they do that, does that mean “we” have to pay to pick up and dispose of the carcass? I just don’t no how that works in “Randland”?
I mean, it didn’t work for her…….

LikeLike
Dixon Cruickshank

30 May 2011

After you and Thorten have posted another 15,000 words I couldn’t thru –
The concept that neither of you seem to be able to grasp, is that throught history and the present world included – the left is much more prone to violence than the right – and no I don’t want to hear about some guy was supposed to be rightwing in Tucson in ’93 or some other cocamamy crap – its just the truth
If it wasn’t you wouldn’t need 10,000 words to try and obscure it – just say’in

LikeLike
Mikey McD

30 May 2011

Thornton/Frisch, with nanny’s like you being “left alone” is a fantasy. You are intent on controlling others, equalizing all (via ‘robin hood complex’), and demoralizing the remainders to become as unhappy as you. It’s not “Randian” (considering the “Don’t Tread on Me” flag’s date of inception). Freedom has been popular before, before Rand.
I will rely on God, church, family, self- you won’t have to deal with my carcass.

LikeLike
Mikey McD

30 May 2011

Compassion as exemplified by the left:
“Do we say: “Well you wanted to be ‘left alone’ now go off and die somewhere.” And if they do that, does that mean “we” have to pay to pick up and dispose of the carcass?…
Posted by: Mike Thornton | 30 May 2011 at 05:26 PM “

LikeLike
Mike Thornton

30 May 2011

It’s an honest question, Mikey.
On the one hand you say you don’t want to be forced to do these things.
I’m asking you what happens for the people who choose not to do so and then wind up destitute.
You can’t have it both ways and say “personal responsibility” unless everything turns to crap and then society has to pay the bill!
Isn’t that the epitome of being the kind of freeloading “moocher” that you seem to hate so much?

LikeLike
Mike Thornton

30 May 2011

Oh Dixon, give it a rest.
I know you’re used to only having to hear things you agree with and so this is a bit stressful and confusing for you, but it’s really all OK.
Take a deep breath and think some comforting thoughts….maybe waterboarding a few Muslims or kicking a WWII veteran out of his mobile home park, for inability to pay the rent or the electric bill or watch “Triumph of the Will”
That Leni Riefenstahl is a real mood lifter…..

LikeLike
Paul Emery

30 May 2011

George
It’s too bad that you summarily dismiss new ideas such as those expressed by Riane Eisler. Conservatives are indeed conservative which by, common definition means to conserve what is good and of value to them. Conservatives resist change. Anything that threatens their “stuff” is regarded as an attack upon some God given rights or something like that, therefore something like a progressive income tax system that is a threat to their affluence has more value to them than the possible value to the greater good of the community they are a member of. It’s all about the values we choose to live by. This is familiar territory on this blog so I’m not going any deeper into it.
Eisler believes that the most important work we can pursue is raising children, caring for the elderly or infirm and working to preserve the health of the earth that we all depend of for our existence.
The very thought of establishing an economic value to the work of raising children, for example, is rejected by conservatives out of hand with no thought or discussion . Too bad. What more important job can there be than the work of raising healthy families.

LikeLike
stevenfrisch

30 May 2011

It’s OK Paul, I have been trying to get these guys to understand the idea of internalizing the externalities (or valuing social and natural values) for a while now. They seek to ignore it because they do not believe it is in their self-interest.

LikeLike
Todd Juvinall

30 May 2011

The world has always been run by the Thortons and the Frisch’s in one form or another. Then along came America and a Constitution which contains a Bill of Rights to set men free from them. Their ilk have been whittling away at our freedoms for 230 years and with Obama they finally have help at the top. Well, in America as in many other countrys, the people with the most votes prevail. The voters have rejected them and will do so again in 2012 and that is the crux of this angst by the leftwingnuts. We have tried our best to keep you out of our pockets, out of our homes and out of our schools but you don’t listen. You will soon.

LikeLike
Mikey McD

30 May 2011

Paul,your disdain for successful people is hateful. In what fantasy land could someone believe that a man who successfully devotes his time to producing should pay considerably more to an inept government than another citizen who reaps the same benefits and services(or more)?
The successful would gladly pay more if their was value provided by the gov. As it is our tax funds are pissed away, leveraged and even worse they are used against us. Imagine how much more producers could give to charity if we got to keep more of what we earned?
The left are quick to discount the fact that successful people work long hours, risk 100% of their nest eggs, don’t get unemployment insurance, don’t get defined benefit pension plans (like public service union employees), put up with trillions of regulations, lose sleep at night worrying about their employees, etc. Then IF IF IF they are successful the tax man comes and smacks them over the head.

LikeLike
Mikey McD

30 May 2011

Obama the Dictator:
http://paul.house.gov/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1870:enabling-a-future-american-dictator&catid=62:texas-straight-talk&Itemid=69

LikeLike
George Rebane

30 May 2011

Paul, please allow a contrary view on Eisler’s ideas, it is not a rejection but a prudent hesitation. I and mine see these as collectivism in a new brocade, thin but with a twist of lace here and there in the attempt to make palatable what so many times has already lost favor. Nevertheless, I wish you and yours the joy of these ideas, to embrace them fully, to set your fortunes in them, and then communicate their delights to the rest of us. Be at peace that, should you all emerge unscathed from your tests and trials, you will have a no more a loyal legion join with your success than we who waited and watched. But please don’t delay your mission on account of our hesitation to throw in our time, talents, and treasures just yet. In the interval we will remain nearby to cheerfully effect a rescue should such need arise.

LikeLike
Paul Emery

30 May 2011

Well spoken Ron Paul. The illegal war in Iraq and the continuation of our presence in Afghanistan long after the appropriate response after 9/11 is truly a bi-partisan effort. The Dems see ready to sorta pull the plug in Afghanistan but they need Republican support. This is he latest vote as reported in Politico today.
“In the latest sign that support for military operations in Afghanistan is waning since the death of Osama bin Laden, the House rejected an accelerated U.S. withdrawal in a surprisingly close vote.
Twenty-six Republicans voted for the amendment from Jim McGovern (D-Mass.) as it failed, 204-215.”

LikeLike
Mike Thornton

31 May 2011

TJ writes:
“The world has always been run by the Thortons and the Frisch’s in one form or another.”
(a) You’ve got to be kidding. (b) If you really believe this, no wonder you say the crazy things you say. and (c) If the choice is the Frisch’ and the Thorntons vs. the Juvinalls and the Rebanes, I’m pretty sure the working people of the country will be a heck of a lot better off with us! That is, as long as Steve makes the policy and I host the radio show!

LikeLike
Todd Juvinall

31 May 2011

There is no way the working man would benefit from communism. It has failed all over the planet.

LikeLike
wmartin

31 May 2011

“Well spoken Ron Paul. The illegal war in Iraq and the continuation of our presence in Afghanistan long after the appropriate response after 9/11 is truly a bi-partisan effort.”…
It mostly just strikes me as a side effect of a too-strong executive branch.
Besides the extremely low likelihood of a modern Western democracy at pulling off successful counterinsurgency programs (Edward Luttwak writes pretty convincingly about this, it mostly involves our lack of ruthlessness), I think that merely giving the tools to a single man, with advisors of course, will probably result in their use.
It’s rather like the modern tendency towards government surveillance of it’s citizens. It’s become more possible over time and will be used if it exists, regardless of political affiliation. Whether we select Presidents in backroom deals like days of yore, or use the modern ‘American Idol’ mechanism, they’ll all use it if they got it.
In my mind, Ron Paul’s strongest argument is not so much the isolationist one, but the one involving the voting of Congress to actually bomb the bejeepers out of people. It’s a lot harder to get several hundred opinionated people to go for something like this.
My internal model of the modern American presidency scares the heck out of me. What I see is a man, who views himself as a quick study and uniquely gifted somehow, sitting in a room being given choices by domain experts. Occasionally, he points to the line item that feels right to him, it’s sort of like running the country via Magic 8-Ball. The more power you give this individual, the more arbitrary the results can be.
It’s a natural side effect of the current tendency towards centralizing power in this country, but I’m not sure people will like the results in the long run.

LikeLike
Mike Thornton

31 May 2011

I’m not quite sure how social “responsibility” equates to “communism”, but, oh well, that’s a great example of regressive totalitarian thinking.

LikeLike
George Rebane

31 May 2011

Good analysis wmartin. My only question is who do you consider are domain experts surrounding the President. The question is a bit loaded because by my lights Obama has surrounded himself with top advisers, very few of them with experience in their assigned fields (almost no one with private sector experience), who primarily are ideologically heavy policy wonks with years working as politicians and political operatives.

LikeLike
George Rebane

31 May 2011

MikeT, every form of governance first and foremost claims to be socially responsible. The progenitors of communism went to unusual pains to spell out how their form of collectivism would be of greatest benefit to mankind. I believe that Todd was just pointing out the great damage, especially to the working poor, that communism has done wherever it was implemented.

LikeLike
Paul Emery

31 May 2011

Republicans, here you go again. No budget cuts here. Talk about hypocrites.
“House Republicans unveiled a nearly $650 billion defense package Tuesday that would fully back President Barack Obama’s war funding requests…….
Core Pentagon spending would grow by $17 billion to $530 billion and an estimated $119 billion is provided for military operations overseas, chiefly in the Afghanistan and Pakistan theater.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0511/55928.html

LikeLike
Mike Thornton

31 May 2011

Been in any poor neighborhoods in capitalist America lately, George?
There are a growing number of disenfranchised communities that are slowly being ghettoized with little to no hope of positive change in the future. No jobs, no health care, substandard housing, no practical access to healthy food and the discontinuance of even basic services.
And while I’m not advocating for “communism”, we should point out that the standard of living for the average Cuban increased dramatically under the Castro regime (when compared to Batista) and who knows what would have happened had the US not engaged in a 50 year embargo of Cuba.
I think you’d be hard pressed to say that the lifestyle of the average Russian didn’t improve when compared to the Serf/Peasant culture that the Bolshevik revolution overthrew, as well.
In fact, while the Soviet Union is nothing to want to emulate, the savage capitalist system that is now at work in Russia, has certainly done little to benefit the working class there. It has created however, a new oligarchy and a criminal class par excel-lance.
Please remember that in the age of unregulated capitalism in the US the conditions were such for working people, that they nearly overthrew the entire capitalist system in favor of explicitly “communist” one.
There were good reasons for that and it’s why I describe those who advocate the programs and policies that you do as being “regresssives”. Contrary to Todd’s hyperbole, nobody is advocating that the US become either Cuba or the old Soviet Union. I believe there is an evolved model of Democratic Socialism, that will work best for the majority of Americans. What I’m positive of, is that a return to the days of unregulated capitalism will do next to nothing for working people. We have ample evidence of that as well!

LikeLike
Greg Goodknight

31 May 2011

Thornton writes, “I believe there is an evolved model of Democratic Socialism, that will work best for the majority of Americans.”
I really had no doubt you thought this way, but thank you for making it clear. However, this is a center-right country and the majority of Americans don’t agree with you.

LikeLike
Todd Juvinall

31 May 2011

Thornton says, “I think you’d be hard pressed to say that the lifestyle of the average Russian didn’t improve when compared to the Serf/Peasant culture that the Bolshevik revolution overthrew, as well.”
Wow, now we all know he gets his information strictly from books. I have a best friend who is married to a Russian woman from St. Petersburg. She is in her mid fifties and lived all her life under Thornton’s favorite political system. She has a totally opposite view then he. There are many of her friends who also agree. They came to this country for freedom and capitalism.

LikeLike
Mike Thornton

31 May 2011

Gee, I think I just said something to the effect that I wasn’t advocating for either communism or emulating what took place in the Soviet Union.
As usual Todd, just says things, regardless of their relevance and/or accuracy.
Do you want to jump in and defend him again, George?
This is usually the point where you do that….
You’re welcome, Greg!

LikeLike
Todd Juvinall

31 May 2011

Thornton uses the SOP of the leftwing by making a point then saying, “but, I am not advocating” blah blah blah. The environmental nuts do the same thing. So, I guess whenever the left says they believe something they are unbelievable. Typical.

LikeLike
Mikey McD

31 May 2011

Thornton, to cite Russia as free market capitalism is ridiculous. I assume you were trying to be funny. To cite capitalism at home as creating ghetto’s and disenfranchised Americans is folly. Many understand that Ghettos are the product of a failed welfare system which enslaves. In these Ghettos gov promises/provides security in exchange for ambition/freedom/individuality.

LikeLike
George Rebane

31 May 2011

MikeT, your citations of the improvement in the lives of Russians and Cubans under communism is touching, but completely misses the point. Given your “improvement” argument, compare their improvement to the improvement that other nations enjoyed while practicing various forms of fettered capitalism.
With regard to the disastrous effect that 70 years of totalitarianism had on Soviet citizens (and in eastern europe), this is not a good forum for such a debate for people unfamiliar with anything beyond leftwing slogans about the glories of communism.

LikeLike
Mikey McD

31 May 2011

“democratic socialism” : An elite group in charge of resources. The illusion of populace. Conformity of the citizenry. Forfeit of individuality, ambition, standard of life. Mob rule.
This might help:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uIcOfu6Udec

LikeLike
Mike Thornton

31 May 2011

Or anything beyond rightwing Slogans about the glories of capitalism.
BTW, George, The key term you used is “fettered” capitalism.
Which by definition exists on a continuum, where social interest/responsibility is part of the equation and not just simply the maximization of profit.
But that’s not what you guys are pushing for. You continue to advocate for “unfettered” capitalism and we’ve seem the effect that unfettered capitalism has had on hard working Americans.
Mikey How do you get from “An elite groups in charge of resources” to “Mob rule” and think what your saying actually makes any sense?

LikeLike
Mikey McD

31 May 2011

Capitalists believe in the rule of law (a republic) not anarchy. There is a big difference.
Is your version of “democratic socialism” leaderless? I expect any version of “democratic socialism” to have leadership (elite) which leverages the sheeple (mob rule).

LikeLike
George Rebane

31 May 2011

“You continue to advocate for “unfettered” capitalism …” This is why our debates lead nowhere. And nowhere in these pages do you see anyone arguing for a conservative/libertarian position that is totally free of government controls. We must start with contract law and then proceed to regulations that maintain competition, which implies regulations that inhibit gratuitous monopolies and even oligopolies (the latter being harder). And there is more. Only agenda driven hard leftist continue with their endless droning of ‘unfettered’, ‘robber baron’, ‘cowboy’, … capitalism.
In the end MikeT, neither of us have any hope of changing the other. Our writings in these pages are for the readers who belong to that undecided 40% in the land (Pew Research). Your contributions here are very valuable in that regard. And even in that regard, each of us is appealing to robustly disjoint groups of that 40% as far as their other capabilities are concerned.

LikeLike
Mike Thornton

31 May 2011

So you’re saying that a capitalistic republic is ruled by an elite of wealthy business leaders and (apparently) rightly so, but if you have a governmental/economic system that focuses on the needs of the body politic as a whole, that’s “anarchy”?
Actually, I would think that you would be in favor of anarchy, since wouldn’t “anarchy” be the ultimate expression of libertarianism?

LikeLike
Mike Thornton

31 May 2011

Do you ever read the stuff that’s posted on your blog, George?
On a (much) happier note, it looks like the American people may have had just about enough of the regressives and their political/economic program.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/05/31/980848/-All-six-recall-petitions-against-Wisconsin-GOP-approved-while-three-against-Dems-put-on-hold?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+dailykos%2Findex+%28Daily+Kos%29&utm_content=My+Yahoo

LikeLike
Todd Juvinall

31 May 2011

George, as a person who likes to read history, I find it amazing the leftwingnuts are trying to take the world’s people beck to the days of yore. The Lords (democrat socialist leaders) are in charge and the peasants (common folks) are their little slaves. I just can’t understand that when we have all the real world proof of the failure of those forms of government. America is the last great hope to have a world where the individual is not just a piece of cannon fodder.

LikeLike
Mikey McD

31 May 2011

No law, no liberty. Where there is too much law there is slavery/serfdom.
To borrow a line from Karate Kid: “Balance Daniel Son.”

LikeLike
George Rebane

31 May 2011

“So you’re saying …” MikeT, I am not saying any of that; but your ability to come up with such interpretations should be an education to those not familiar with such pirouettes.

LikeLike
Paul Emery

31 May 2011

One of the problems with capitalism as it is heralded by the self described conservatives is that it places no value on the work being done only on whether it turns a profit. To place a value on the importance of the work being done is an evolution that Ms. Eisler embraces. Doesn’t the work of raising intelligent, educated and responsible children have more value than the manufacturing of cigarettes for example. How is the true value of the work we do established? It’s a huge question that no one wants to talk about.

LikeLike
wmartin

31 May 2011

” Doesn’t the work of raising intelligent, educated and responsible children have more value than the manufacturing of cigarettes for example.”…
I depends on how much they’re worth on the open market.
If you view children as a capital investment and, if anything, the human race is entirely too good at producing them, raising good ones would have the same effect as any other infrastructure. There’s an upfront cost followed by a payoff over time, and cultures who are bad at it will be overtaken by those that aren’t, everything else being equal.
Going forward, I suspect that the value of your average person will drop over time. In a country made of up ‘consumers’ rather than ‘citizens’ (tip o’ the hat to James Howard Kunstler), perhaps the average person’s main job will be to behave themselves, watch the 3d telescreen, and eat their soy loaf with as little fuss as possible. In US society, it certainly looks like increased efficiencies in work combined with the increased size of a welfare state produces that result.
The basic problem of providing a minimum standard of living really is an interesting sort of conundrum. If one is supplied, how do you avoid sapping the energy from most of the people receiving it? There’ll always be a group who through disability or otherwise, simply can’t do their part of course.
The few times and places that have made an attempt seem to substitute the tyranny of having to make your own way with either religion (Mormons perhaps) or the peer pressure that goes along with homogeneity (Sweden). That being said, the US is a big place. There’s really little to stop someone from starting their own exercise in utopia (Thorntonville?), where the rubber hits the road is when that utopia is imposed on others.

LikeLike
Mikey McD

31 May 2011

Paul, I have brought up a similar issue countless times. I believe that our experiences help create our values (as individuals and as a nation). Our values drive our decisions/actions. Experiences (education) is paramount. Check this out: http://www.johnadamsacademy.com/
Your logic concerning “one of the problems with capitalism… it places no value on the work being done” doesn’t make sense.
By definition any product/service must provide value or it would be worthless. How could a biz be profitable without providing good/service of value? Or said another way, how could a biz be profitable via providing a worthless good/service?
(excluding tax payer funded entities)

LikeLike
Paul Emery

31 May 2011

Mikey, wmartin
What you say is true but it only has to do with Marketplace capitalism. True capitalism would place a value on work that is being done that currently has no compensation. As more and more jobs disappear because of automation and exportation of manufacturing we need to look at new and expansive definitions of the true value of work and labor and just compensation for that work.
This is just an example: an executive in a tobacco company makes a product that kills people and may have a salary of millions but a mother of two children, which is a full time job for at least 20 years receives no compensation for her work in raising the next generation of productive citizens.

LikeLike
Greg Goodknight

31 May 2011

“This is just an example: an executive in a tobacco company makes a product that kills people and may have a salary of millions but a mother of two children, which is a full time job for at least 20 years receives no compensation for her work in raising the next generation of productive citizens.”
Sorry, but when I was a widowed father of one son, I never thought I was raising a son ‘for no compensation’, nor have I ever desired to have my taxes be paid to someone else to raise their child.
If they’re raising their children to be productive and honorable citizens that should be compensation enough. If it isn’t, I’d suggest she should have found a different line of work.
While I might not like tobacco, pictures of tobacco farmers remain on several denominations of our currency, and it remains a legal product. Addicts might have a love/hate relationship with the leaf, but no one forced them to start the habit and if they need help to quit, there is help available. However, we shouldn’t be so quick… cigarette addicts tend to die young and have fewer lifetime medical bills and Social Security payouts. They’re doing us a service.

LikeLike
Mikey McD

31 May 2011

Blaming 2 kids on capitalism is a bit of a stretch.

LikeLike
George Rebane

31 May 2011

Dear People – I agree with Paul that Eisler’s Caring Capitalism is an important topic that many progressives may use to alter and illuminate our times. While overjoyed at the lengthy comment streams on RR providing a forum for discussion and debate, I receive emails complaining that their length sometimes gives rise to comment threads within the stream that divert significantly from the main topic of the post. For this reason I have now split out two such threads into their own posts wherein the discussion may continue in a more focused manner and draw readers with commensurate interests. The Eisler thread is continued here along with the relevant comments from above that will give a cohesive independent launch.
http://rebaneruminations.typepad.com/rebanes_ruminations/2011/05/true-value-of-work-and-caring-economics.html
I hope this process is helpful, as will be any thoughts you may have on the matter.

LikeLike