Let's Get Honest! Absolutely Uncommon Analysis of Family & Conciliation Courts' Operations, Practices, & History

Identify the Entities, Find the Funding, Talk Sense!

Archive for October 2012

Troubled by Trauma Today, while Debating FR Rhetoric… (Published Oct. 31, 2012)

with 2 comments

Post Title:  Troubled by Trauma Today, while Debating FR Rhetoric (Published Oct. 31, 2012) Post short-link ends “-1cQ”  Wordcount, including a few tables (each word in the table counts) is just under 9,000 words.

(Adding the post title to the body of post itself, with reference to its shortlink, and a date published to the title itself are 2020 Updates.  The topic of Fathers, Inc. came up on Twitter, and I wanted to reference the posts which had already looked at this and its relationship to “Fatherhood.gov” (via drill-downs)while the address was still in NY.  It has since (see for yourself under “Contact” at Fatherhood.gov) moved to Georgia).

I also quickly added margin limits (700px) and a border and switched it to smaller (condensed) font more typical of how I’ve been blogging since blog restructuring (Jan. 2018)….  ALSO, this post (not that common) has long comment (and my response to it) by a mother (“stillhere”) who had contacted me (telephone, email); we networked over, as I recall, at least a year or more, comparing notes as she was out of state (compared to where I was).  Access or add comments at the bottom of any post…//LGH 2020May31

The conversational model of this blog has (I believe) run its course, although the relevance of the subject matter has not.

The subject matter is the constant round-tables, collaborations and strategizing (and all the involved professionals, most of them on the public payroll) on matters immediately affecting the family courts — and the family courts are full of people attempting to resolve criminal issues, in a model which frames these as relational issues.

A look at some of the largest corporations on the planet shows that these are often pharmaceutical corporations.  No wonder mental health is increasingly the paradigm, and governments are more than willing to use this framework to warehouse and silence people who shouldn’t be warehoused and silenced, while failing to incarcerate people who common sense might say, should be.  In this climate, the concept of “justice” as a fair process with checks and balances, and the courts as where this happens, is becoming obsolete.

While the conferences, institutes, initiatives, clearinghouses, “resources,” webinars and web-based toolkits; media campaigns to raise awareness of fatherlessness as a social scourge or (alternately) domestic violence as a social scourge or (alternately) child abuse as a social scourge or (alternately) too much religious influence (or, alternately not enough religious influence) in government as being a threat to individual rights or, alternately …. (get the point? if it’s ALL of the above, then there is an underlying, and larger in scope issue not identified yet).

While all this is going on — and pretty much in every single state — often in the states speaking out loudest about these issues through organizational mouthpieces — and vying for the limelight as being the most loving, the most protective, the most benefical, the most philanthropic groups around — SOMEHOW . . . . .

Women are still getting murdered by their exes, namely, by men, orphaning children into the foster care system, shortly after (or, sometimes, BEFORE) these same women seek help in the form of getting  a protection from abuse, or domestic violence (it varies in names by state)  restraining order.  While they sometimes get them through the criminal system, other times it’s through the civil system, which has increasingly become a joke.

In ADDITION, increasingly (seems to me) women who are not involved with these men — at all — but simply happen to work alongside or patronize businesses where such women work, pending or after divorce. In other words, they got up, they went out, they entered a hair salon or spa alive, and they left it in body bags, with bullet holes. Or on a guerney, to die shortly afterwards. The man was after his wife, but took out a few more females en route, sometimes a male, too.

Meanwhile, somehow, the fatherhood/marriage promotion rhetoric goes on- faithbased or unfaithbased (because of private and federal funding) unabated and as if this were NOT happening and NOT public knowledge.

In such a group I blogged yesterday, “men of faith” were called out (in another media campaign, badly distorting the context of its own theme verse) to take charge of their families as responsible fathers. But their faith institutions (presumably composed of both genders), on the other hand (in this same campaign) were exhorted to treat men better, nurture them, help their depression, participate in healing their wounds, deterring them from committing suicide, and in short be a healing balm — or forget adequate church attendance.  There is nothing more dangerous than an un-nurtured or sad male whose authority in his home has been challenged, I guess, or who doesn’t have a supportive woman in that home.

The person who started this campaign runs an unregistered (or barely registered) nonprofit at NRFC, which is not reporting ANY of its income, that I can see, and yet broadcasts the site anyhow.

Such person apparently has been a responsible fatherhood program manager within NYState ODTA (that distributes welfare funding, I gather), and cites himself as on the board of “Fathers and Families coalition of America” (another organization whose nonprofit filing I can’t find), and an ICF consultant (ICF International being an HHS grantee) and — the sky’s the limit on names one can claim and grants that flow towards the public web presence, how often supported by tax filings??? Not often enough! !!!

From the NYState Charitable Registry Search (Note:  National Fatherhood Initiative is registered in Germantown, MD but operating or collecting in NYState and registered there, as it should) we can see that SOME FR groups do post data — but Fathers, Inc. — which claims to be the contractor for the public-funded NRFC (national responsible fatherhood clearinghouse, see yesterday’s post) — does not.  Moreover, the corporate name of this group in NYS is “FATHERS” and the web-name is “Fathers Incorporated” (no comma), so good luck keeping it straight!).  After one factors out for the religious (which means, also “exempt”) organizations (not 501(c)3s in other words), still the other organizations seem to be doing a little better at giving the public a LITTLE information about their own operations here!

Community Fathers, Inc. 42-17-84 270581930 NFP SCHENECTADY NY
Corpus Christi Church The Order of St. Paul, First hermit-The Pauline Fathers 41-27-86 160743974 NFP BUFFALO NY
Crosier Fathers and Brothers Province, Inc. 43-21-09 NO DATA AVAILABLE NFP PHOENIX AZ
Equal Rights For Fathers of New York State, Inc. 43-39-32 161177439 NFP ROCHESTER NY
Families, Fathers & Children, Inc. 41-08-37 680661653 NFP BROOKLYN NY

a few more, from NYS:

Read the rest of this entry »

Written by Let's Get Honest|She Looks It Up

October 31, 2012 at 6:42 pm

WHAT is a “Resource,” Corporately Speaking? National Responsible Fatherhood Clearinghouse (“NRFC”) // Fatherhood.gov [Publ. Oct. 30, 2012].

leave a comment »

WHAT is a “Resource,” Corporately Speaking? National Responsible Fatherhood Clearinghouse (“NRFC”) // Fatherhood.gov [Publ. Oct. 30, 2012]. (short-link ends “-1cH”), about 12,000 words.

Certain things catch my attention periodically, and if details don’t fit, then it may be my understanding (normally) or, it may also be there are some details that seriously don’t fit.

And there has been a longstanding internal alarm on the existence of a website called “fatherhood.gov” and the serious investment of public money into media campaigns based on welfare funding!

How many millions is it acceptable not to account for, when it comes to public money?  How many people are to be on the public payroll (whose labor and assets are producing the money which the US is operating with?).

A good chunk of last night’s post,  wasn’t re-saved, and I cannot reconstruct it all here.  But I can talk about what I found and show how others can find this same information.

Here are some dots which REALLY don’t connect, but seem to be connecting; these are statements and evidence on-line:

  • The website with URL “http://fatherhood.gov” exists and is labeled “National Responsible Fatherhood Clearinghouse “(“NRFC,”).  Click & see!
  • On the website, it says its funding is authorized by various versions of welfare, meaning public law and supporting Congressional appropriations.  These have to come from a certain fund held by the US Government which we should be able to find (see ColdHardFact$, or submit the source if YOU find it!)
  • NRFC obviously is — but has been described also elsewhere — your basic federally-funded (plus ___???) PR/media campaign, buying and selling (so to speak) grants, information (indoctrination) and in short, charity, to what it considers deserving grantees, or maybe contractors.  Or maybe individuals.  As such it is a shop and might as well be called Internet Based Warehouse Dispensary — or the advertising site for the same.  “Come and Get it!”
    • Clearly someone has a surplus and wants to offload dollars and help to the deserving.


The Problem/Question:

OUTSIDE sources declare this NRFC has an “Executive Director” — but it’s a *.gov site.   How can that be?  WHAT is NRFC corporation-wise? Is it a nonprofit, is it government, is it a government-funded nonprofit blend (there are plenty of those around).

What is the legal definition of this “Clearinghouse” which to me looks like probably (as any website could be) a way to expand an email or visitor database of who’s interested in the topic, and build some momentum for the project of RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD, which already (in my opinion) has a good head of steam…

  • WIFI (Women In Fatherhood Inc) is a nonprofit with a Board.  Ms. Frances Ballard (who is married to Charles Ballard, a fatherhood leader) is on its board.
  • In this description of the WIFI Board, it claims that Frances Ballard is the Executive Director of this major website and federally funded Clearinghouse, NRFC.   Because the word “Executive Director” has a corporate meaning — it means some organization is registered in the USA to do commerce and has either a for-profit or a not-for-profit designation!
  • BUT:
    • If it’s a nonprofit, and not exempt from filing, than I, Jane Doe, should be able to look at its income, expenses, deductions, Program Accomplishments, and see an official list of its Board members, Program Service Revenues, any real estate or assets owned, its major CONTRACTORS and how much money was spent on salaries — and all the things people can look at on any group which actually files a 990.
    • If it’s a nonprofit OR for-profit BUSINESS in this country, and doing business — that includes paying salary or board members — then it MUST be incorporated somewhere and have articles of incorporation.
    • It also has to have, somewhere, a registered agent so that IF it gets sued in court on any basis– someone can receive the paperwork. RIGHT?
    • So — where is all that information for the NRFC?

The words “executive director” I do not believe are commonly used in government agencies.  “Director” yes; Czar, yes, “Secretary,” yes, “Agency Head,” yes. — Executive Director — no.  The use of “executive director” for a *.gov website and a “clearinghouse” is misleading and confusing.

However, that there should even be a website on a government site (US Government) called “fatherhood.gov” — and there is none called “motherhood.gov” (do they not go together, are they not to be balanced?) — should disturb anyone.  A LOT, but apparently it’s now just part of the landscape, and acceptable.

They tell you upfront that it’s an information dispensary, and they also want DADS to call in.  Is any of that call-in help going to end up steering them to fathers’ rights attorneys in local states, to help them win custody cases INdirectly, as the federal government is simply not allowed to mess directly with the state’s custody courts?  Here’s the description of its Mission:

The goals of the National Responsible Fatherhood Clearinghouse (NRFC) are to provide, facilitate, and disseminate current research, proven and innovative strategies that will encourage and strengthen fathers and families, and providers of services via the following priorities:

  • Robust NRFC Website – www.Fatherhood.gov
  • Media Campaign that promotes the Responsible Fatherhood field and efforts of local programs
  • Social media engagement
  • Development and dissemination of written products that advance responsible fatherhood research and practice
  • Outreach and presentations at conferences and events
  • National Call Center for dads and practitioners (1-877-4DAD411)
  • Virtual Trainings

If you look carefully at that list, every single item comes under output of indoctrination or media materials according to a federal policy/belief about fatherlessness.  (The history of which has also been written up in part by critics of the conflicts of interest between National Fatherhood Initiative and a rotating door of work within government, if not near the top of HHS (i.e., Wade Horn, David Blankenhorn, Ron Haskins, etc.).  Blogged recently, search “Dissident Voice” or Bill Berkowitz..

(Why is the administration so uninterested in strengthening Mothers and Families?  Search that term on whitehouse.gov and see how many occurrences in re: fathers and families.)

FUNDING, from the same page, shows the US Dept of HHS/ACF/OFA firmly claims this resource and is funding it from welfare resources, apparently:


The National Responsible Fatherhood Clearinghouse (NRFC) is a resource of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Administration for Children and Families’ (ACF) Office of Family Assistance (OFA).

The Claims Resolution Act of 2010 (CRA) re-authorized funding for the National Responsible Fatherhood Clearinghouse (NRFC). The NRFC was initially funded through the Deficit Reduction Act (2005) for “the development, promotion, and distribution of a media campaign to encourage the appropriate involvement of parents in the life of any child and specifically the issue of responsible fatherhood, and the development of a national clearinghouse to assist States and communities in efforts to promote and support marriage and responsible fatherhood.

In other words, from approximately 1996 through 2010, most of American Public didn’t get smart about this entire movement and how it was affecting their “States and communities,” for which ignorance we can thank in part the Domestic Violence Movement who promoted their own agenda while failing to inform their clients the details (and even to provide any tools to look at details), not evening naming the grants stream! or the closeness of this grants stream to Child Support Enforcement (HHS/OCSE, etc.)*** resulting in individual women having to ferret it out and report it themselves, while the system strengthened its networks.


*** Clarifying re: “the closeness of this grants stream to Child Support Enforcement…”)
[***July 31, 2020, nomenclature: I am formatting this page & some copyediting with intention to re-post or reference it.  While the “NRFC clearinghouse” funding stream (it seems, main CFDA (Category of Federal Domestic Assistance) is #93086 (where “93” represents the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) on whose site, obviously, the NRFC is), the most father-friendly grants stream closer to local child support enforcement (with “OCSE” — Office of Child Support Enforcement — administering it) is CFDA #93597, Grants (directly) to states for access and visitation.
The larger stream, however, is #93086 ($150 million dollars a year), and has been going on for over a decade, can go to public or private organizations and serves to establish in particular “fatherhood” as such a specialty and practice, that university centers — in cooperation with each other — feature it (Examples:  FRPN.org at Temple University, Pennsylvania, part of the leadership involves two women, including Jessica Pearson, the founder of https://centerforpolicyresearch.org in Denver (1981ff) who also has deep and long-standing (historic) involvement with the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts and the known fathers’ rights group with political clout pre-dating US’s 1996 welfare reform (under which we got such wonderful grants streams and websites as this post deals with), the Children’s Rights Council (see David Levy, Esq. (d. 2014) major activist for this nonprofit), and the “Child and Family Research Partnership (“CFRP”) at The University of Texas at Austin (LBJ School of Public Policy).
For an indicator how, in policy-speak, “child and family” and Zero to Three (or, “First Five Years”), in general means more fathers than mothers (mothers are “assumed” under the word “family” while the word “fathers” is often featured and is a policy focus, overall), I’m inserting two images from the “About” (i.e., self-description) of CFRP-Texas.  On the right side of a very large photo, fully four of six headlines (viewed today) focus on “fathers” and the others “Prenatal to Three.”
What, and where, are women, mothers, in this picture —  as a background presence, in the form of wombs… conduits.. birth canals, through which policy makers can gain remote (and hands-on) access to little kids to develop and practice their favored-gender-based theories on?  Do we (mothers) not even have a few NOUNS to describe us in the headlines?
Some of the “WHY” of this center has to do with its Director and her Princeton University connections.  Her first two degrees were from a private college in California which only admitted women in the 1970s and is known for its conservative politics.  Work experience outside of directing others on national policy towards children (pre-born and very young) and their families, with a PARTICULAR interest in fathers (does she have a husband yet?) (ever been a Mom?) seems to have been a few years in a “low-income middle school in California,” per the description.  Sounds like she may not be a real team player (likes to run things) and perhaps didn’t cut the mustard at the street level, with actual “in-your-face” kids…  Who BETTER to judge other women (i.e., mothers) who do this daily, and are good at it?  //LGH 2020… Cont’d next section, more on the grants.
I recently added a section to the top of my “Front Page” which gives examples of both federal funding streams, and (generally) have been talking about it for years.  But “family court reformist” academics — and, generally, journalists who follow or quote them, along with the WHOLE domestic violence advocacy organization networks (state coalitions, special issue resource centers, etc.) fail to call attention to this on their public websites, or consider that it MIGHT just be a factor affecting the problems they discuss (i.e., custody of minor children being switched from non-abusive mothers to abusive — with a documented history of it — fathers, via family court and custody hearings — which the “access and visitation” grants target. … (I use Twitter hashtags #access_visitation and #accessvisitation. Username @LetUsGetHonest)
This information has gotten out somewhat more but is still vastly under-reported in the context of family court fiascoes, or of domestic violence and child abuse problems.  The family court professionals certainly know about it, as many nonprofits some of them run were set up specifically to receive this type of federal funding.. (See “AFCC” for an organization whose members are likely to be so engaged).
Both streams are related.  While the CFDA #93597 ($10 million/year grants) by definition must go to a single state agency (each year), i.e., no private organization, they are obviously intended for subgrants, and often are subgranted to private organizations.  The CFDA #93086 (Healthy Marriage/Responsible Fatherhood, or “HMRF” for short) ($150 million/year) grants can go to either public or private entities, even to for-profit ones.  You can select by CFDA in the HHS grants database, and learn a lot there, at TAGGS.HHS.gov although be forewarned — it’s not necessarily accurate data entry.  It seems to have no basic “style chart’ (consistency of entering things like state names, principal investigator names, grantee names, etc.  Multiple mis-spellings are found, and although it obviously sorts case-sensitive (with ALL CAPS in a different location from Initial Caps meaning, you could sort by any column and STILL not get an overview.  The situation was so bad that in about 2013 I started a whole blog to demonstrate it (Fall, 2013 as I recall), but before I could post the whole thing (intent was to simply show the grantees UNsorted, 500 records at a time, and expose this), the database was re-vamped, adding functionalities and removing a very important one — the ability to search by EIN# which would compensate for fake or erroneous data entry of such basics as a grantee name..]]

Spelling It Out Again, Basic Players, Basic Blueprints [yawn…][well, we’d better not, actually…] (Publ. Oct. 28, 2012)

leave a comment »

Spelling It Out Again, Basic Players, Basic Blueprints [yawn…][well, we’d better not, actually…]

(Published Oct. 28, 2012; about 12,700 words.  Case-sensitive, WordPress-generated short-link ends “-1cD”).  This information and minor (readability) format changes added June 22, 2019 on realizing the post needed a “Read-more” link, when it came up in a blog search of a specific term “Saddleback,” among about seven other posts.  //LGH


MDRC (1974ff), TANF (1996ff), Gov Leavitt (1998ff), Gov Keating + Wade Horn (2000ff)

Actually, don’t yawn — because this is an infinitely expanding program until the US goes bust, which it is probably just speeding up.  At which time program engineers (*including a few former US Governors, and such) plus funders (Federal Government + Major Foundations built by corporate wealth), and a variety of religious leaders who also are being enriched by this (including those that are already on the Forbes list, like David Green of “Hobby Lobby” was, as I pointed out recently, who gave (literally, a donation) over 150 acres to Saddleback Church/Rick Warren, who is already marketing HIS wares through the church and trademarks on it, too.  These are Purpose-Driven Programs, I’m just deducing some of the Purposes by observing their Practices.)…and of course the gatekeepers such as the lawyers, judges, mediators, custody evaluators and so forth . . . will be able to afford THEIR exit plans in their retirement years, potentially.  They are already internationally connected and doing business, in many cases (whether through travel, having corporations registered overseas, or simply the internet).

Heck, the US Government is investing internationally for sure, and I’ll bet that every single state’s public employee pension plan (CALPers, New York States’ Pension Plan, Pennsylvania’s — probably every single one – and you can find them on their CAFRs and look) — probably also  is investing in multiple currencies and countries, playing one against the other, plus in various corporations.

But I believe there is likely to be a continental lockdown, which may explain perhaps why so many are in privatized lockUPs..  

The number one feature I notice is treating the human population like a material resource, which (from that point of view) it is — if they are poor, because of prior policies set up (by the same crowd) — exploit it.  If they are divorcing — exploit that, too.

Then sell it to them (because any good businessperson is adept at getting other to fund its startups, and of course many things are also tax write-offs) and have their income taxes pay for it, and the income taxes of the middle classes’s taxes who hasn’t caught onto this yet because they’re working 9 to 5, detoxing from work part of their time off, and stressing out about the future while at work, etc.

MAKE SURE the Middle Class believes that the real problems are the shiftless poor, the fertile female African Americans or anyone else with dark skin, or heck any color female skin, and things like DIVORCE. ANYTHING but the bottom-line reality….  

Then go about to help the other side of the equation…. based on some profile.

Hopefully  people who read the last few posts (sorry, I don’t have any gold stars or discount coupons for the effort!) will start to understand that something less than above-board (at some levels) and “in-your-face” (at other levels) is going on involving:

  • Religious beliefs held in common by at least Mormons, Catholics & Evangelicals
  • Certain of the 50 United States well-knowon for their Mormon, or Evangelical roots (Utah, Oklahoma, specifically)
  • Certain individuals in responsible positions at the top-of-state level, whether Governor (Keating OK; Leavitt:  Utah; and a family divorce lawyer also serving as a Utah State Rep and on its Judiciary Committee, proposing legislation and getting it passed…)
  • Federal Grants to the States from HHS involving Welfare Funding.
  • Family Lawyers and Related Industries — Seeing as to get legally divorced, one often utilizes a lawyer — or at a minimum, walks into some sort of family courts to get that divorce — there is also a marketing element in the marriage promotion business by family lawyers, which capitalizes on the HHS grants and their influence in the legislature to mandate or promote purchasing of services, seminars, books, and classes by the same.I have (now) a sky-blue-background “rant” (about three inches of vertical space? or so) at the top of “Christianity and Its Sects in the Statehouse” in which I completely derailed into a NHMRC (National Healthy Marriage Resource Center) website and gave a short, but detailed reference to what money is supporting that operation — and the products, services, and goods that the FOUNDATIONS supporting MDRC (look it up) in promoting and dissemination, essentially “fatherhood” promotion, even though HHS is already granting corporations quite a bit to set up shop in this field.  MDRC was formed in 1974, I have posted on it, and a very old (why can’t such a wealthy firm update their own website with a better diagram for the public?) — pie chart, 2010, showing the main sources of its funding.
    • Another way to call that what is is, would simply be AFCC, NACC, CRC, and friends.

The sky-blue rant at the top of my Oct. 21 post “Christianity and Its Sects” shows how a visit to a federally-funded site which spins off business to the Oklahoma Marriage Initiative PR Firm (Public Strategies Inc.) and friends — then links to a nice MDRC program evaluation, which spins off money to its subcontractors, and you can follow who is supporting this from the acknowledgement in the front of the report.  Not to mention the number of the federal HHS contract used to do the study.  In short, the people getting the most employment profit from this do NOT appear to be the poor, but those studying them.

I think I have more than demonstrated that the public access database TAGGS.hhs.gov isn’t going to help us study where the bulk of the HHS money is going in any efficient or meaningful way.  I say that after three years of scrutiny, mostly showing screwups in the basic design, not just data entry and a whole lot of them seem like MORE than accidental.

I also find groups that don’t file taxes with their chief personnel (CEOs, who got over $100k salary from apparently the original HHS) then being further promoted to more responsibility — i.e., I”m talking about for example, Mrs. Charles Ballard, commonly known as Frances Ballard, sitting on the board of WIFI (Women in Fatherhood Inc.) AND being somehow involved in the administration of the “national responsible fatherhood clearinghouse” which it assures us, is funded by the US Government.  So how can a person be an “Executive Director” of what looks like a government-supported website unless he or she is a government employee?

I haven’t figured that one out yet.  Maybe you can: The first title given in her description is ED of the NRFC — which is a website!  She is doing this while also on the board of WIFI — so on HER tax return (assuming there is one) where’s the income coming from and reported as? I also note that while wifi is not a D.C. organization, most likely the clearinghouse (being a website), IS:

Frances Ballard is the Executive Director for the National Responsible Fatherhood Clearinghouse (NRFC). In her role she is responsible for the strategic direction and leadership for activities regarding the NRFC, including the coordination of the media campaign, clearinghouse and Web site, Training and Technical Assistance (T & TA) to responsible fatherhood demonstration sites, and building relationships and partnerships for NRFC

This site is, literally, steering and setting national federal policy.  Was Ms. Ballard somehow elected as a public official, or was this website voted into existence and then privately contracted out to her?  I notice that the WIFI link has a direct link at its bottom to “childtrends.org” which is an Annie E. Casey foundation “thang.” This is certainly ALL about the children, that’s why no one need to explain to the adults– their parents — where their inheritances (or household incomes) went, or is going in the future, except out the door and from there, who knows?

This website has a *.gov address.

So, what does it mean to have an “executive director” — is that person an employee or a contractor — it should be one or the other.  To be an “Executive Director” of a *.gov site is a very interesting job title.  Is that not an accurate job title?

[next section in different background color is a quote.  Not sure why I didn’t use the “quote” function originally…//LGH comment added June 22, 2019 during post format quasi-cleanup]

Who are we?
The National Responsible Fatherhood Clearinghouse is an Office of Family Assistance (OFA) funded national resource for fathers, practitioners, programs/Federal grantees, states, and the public at-large who are serving or interested in supporting strong fathers and families.

The National Responsible Fatherhood Clearinghouse (NRFC) is a resource of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Administration for Children and Families’ (ACF) Office of Family Assistance (OFA).

The Claims Resolution Act of 2010 (CRA) re-authorized funding for the National Responsible Fatherhood Clearinghouse (NRFC). The NRFC was initially funded through the Deficit Reduction Act (2005) for “the development, promotion, and distribution of a media campaign to encourage the appropriate involvement of parents in the life of any child and specifically the issue of responsible fatherhood, and the development of a national clearinghouse to assist States and communities in efforts to promote and support marriage and responsible fatherhood.”

Contact Us information:

Mailing address
National Responsible Fatherhood Clearinghouse
307A Consaul Road
Albany, New York 12205

Federal Contact
Lisa Washington-Thomas
Branch Chief, TANF Technical Assistance
Office of Family Assistance
(202) 401-5141
Read the rest of this entry »

Christian Sects 2: Progressive Mormon Feminist (??) on Mitt, Back in the Day….

leave a comment »

Just in case I wasn’t clear in that long-winded “Christianty and Its Sects in the Statehouse,” Let’s bring it a little more current. An atheist feminist friend who validated my right to get angry (few others actually did, or exhibited any anger) when my kids were stolen overnight, sent me the first article, which is from “Religion Dispatches.”

The article is self-explanatory enough. But remember to scan the 97 comments, which (surprisingly) are from plenty of men as well. One of them says there are “Judy” Mormons and “Jim” MOrmons, really there are all kind of Mormons. Well, draw your own conclusions — having run my mouth elsewhere today, I’m out of time on the topic!


Jim Reed • 2 months ago • parent 
Not exactly. I was saying if Romney is elected then the church will switch even more that way, and be 99% Romney Mormons. At that point it will become very difficult, or even impossible, for a Mormon to oppose him, especially a woman. Now is their chance to make a big difference, and help the post election shift go the other way toward a more balanced church.

ANYHOW here we are.

Mitt’s Best-known Mormon Critic Tells it All:  One Last Time:

Judith Dushku tells the whole story

Joanna BrooksJoanna Brooks, named one of “50 Politicos to Watch,” is the author of The Book of Mormon Girl: Stories from an American Faith and a senior correspondent for Religion Dispatches.
For years, now, the press has been beating down the door of Judy Dushku, a Mormon feminist, global women’s rights activist, and professor at Suffolk University. It was Dushku who during Romney’s Senate run in 1994 broke the now infamous story of Romney’s pressuring a woman in his congregation not to have an abortion even though her life was in danger. That’s a brave stance to take in a community that prizes conformity and group loyalty.But Judy Dushku is ready to stop serving as the media’s go-to on Romney’s issues with women. She’d like the whole story to be told. But she’d like the press crush to end. After all, she’s busy these days founding an initiative to foster economic self-sufficiency among women in Uganda.

. . . .

This contravenes another cultural norm, which is that Mormons should stick together. How did you come to be so independent?

I grew up as a “military brat”—living all over the country, but going to high school in Michigan. I went to BYU and tried very hard to fit in like the kids from Arizona, California, and Utah. I dyed my hair blonde. I joined the Young Republicans. I went to Cleon Skousen lectures. And I wanted to get married, go to Washington, and work in the State Department. At the very last moment, with no boyfriend to talk me out of graduation, my professors talked me into applying to the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts, and I got a scholarship. It shocked me, but I went to Boston and the Fletcher School. I was the very straight arrow Mormon girl; the one who drank from the separate punchbowl. Then the Vietnam War swept me up, and I began to question everything.

I was hired by Suffolk University and I fell in love with teaching. Suffolk was an iconic working-class university—in the 1960s that meant working-class first-generation-college white immigrant families. I had young men negotiating grades with me because if they didn’t get a C, they’d get drafted. I investigated how people avoided the draft and became very aware of class divisions in Boston and America at large. The war really turned me into a social critic, a thinker, introspective about who has power and who does not and the role of interest groups and elites. That’s when I met Boston’s Mormon feminist community and got involved in the women’s movement in politics. I’d gotten married and was facing workplace challenges—no maternity leave with my first child, and I had to pay my own substitute. My husband was a working-class immigrant from Albania, so I learned a great deal about immigrant life. In my life and in my teaching politics at the university, I became a strong critical thinker about power.

At the same time, I always wanted to stay a Mormon and fit in. I was able to do so in more diverse congregations, even after my husband and I divorced and I was a single woman with four little children in tow. I have had every intention of being an enthusiastic active Mormon mother.

(INTERVIEWER): And you’ve always been active. Now you hold the position of Stake Relief Society president, which is a position of authority over the women in several congregations—parallel to the position of “stake president” once held by Mitt Romney. And you’ve started your own humanitarian organization.

…Be sure, if you click on that link to also read Johanna Brooks 2012 article on some LDS clinical psychologists, one of who was later recommended to be a bishop (verify article, that’s by memory) who were teaching others interrogation techniques.  And how did Romney feel about this.

However, I looked up the account of the “have the abortion, even if it threatens your life” article, which is below.  On that link also is a link to a woman who, while she also had been raped and not gotten pregnant, had (apparently in other circumstances) been highly pressured to give up her daughter who — despite being in what looked like a good, stable, family (adopted by). . . later committed suicide.  This mother writes, she hasn’t gotten over giving up her daughter, 46 yrs later.

I know people are going to vote.  Just think, before you do, OK?  Think about some of these women.  I’m not an ex-Mormon, but,  . . . . just think, OK?  As they say, it’s something to be a woman “without a country”…. speaking, social networks. 


  • SUNDAY, OCTOBER 14, 2012

Romney’s convenient stand on abortion: Flip. Flop. Loop holes.

Hard-hearted Romney then, no friend to women in trouble

More troubling information about the man who would be president, Mitt Romney, and his relationship to women is emerging. We wrote earlier about his encouraging a single mother to relinquish her child for adoption–threatening her with excommunication if she did not–but another story has come to light. It happened in 1983, the same summer that Romney infamously drove to his house at his gated lakefront community on Lake Huron with his Irish setter, Seamus, in a dog carrier lashed to the roof of the car. This became political fodder–cartoons, gags on late-night comedy, even a satirical song–but another incident that summer has been largely ignored until now.

A pregnant woman and a practicing member of the Church of Jesus Christ of the Latter-Day Saints (LDS or Mormon) had a life-threatening blood clot lodged in her pelvic region. Carrel Hilton Sheldon was in her late thirties, had four teenage children, and had lost fifth in childbirth. This was her sixth pregnancy. To treat the clot, Sheldon was administered an overdose of the blood thinner Heparin in the eighth week of her pregnancy, {{@WHERE??}} which led to massive internal bleeding and extensive damage to her kidneys. She might even need a kidney transplant. Given the fatal repercussions to her, she and her husband faced the great likelihood that the fetus was also severely damaged.

 (=author, “Lorraine”)

The LDS stake president in Massachusetts was a Harvard-trained physician, Dr. Gordon Williams. He counseled Sheldon to follow her doctor’s advice and terminate the pregnancy to save her life. “Of course, you should have this abortion and then recover from the blood clot and take care of the healthy children you already have,” she recalls him saying. A stake president is a male volunteer in the church who is in charge of several Mormon congregations, called wards or branches; bishops in the church, also volunteers, are the spiritual leaders of the wards, and as such, are below the stake presidents in the hierarchy. At the time Romney was 36 and a rising star in the church, and Sheldon’s bishop.

{{Rock, Scissors, Paper, Stone.  Stake President trumps bishop}}

According to an account that Sheldon wrote anonymously for the LDS women’s journal, Exponent II, and an interview with a friend of Sheldon’s, Romney paid her an uninvited visit late that summer (after returning from Canada) in her hospital room and urged her to have the child, all medical advice to the contrary. He talked about his sister who has a a retarded child, and what a blessing the child was. “He told me that ‘as your bishop, my concern is with the child.'” Not only was there no empathy forthcoming from Romney, he said he doubted the stake president’s approval, and said he would call him. “At a time when I would have appreciated nurturing and support from spiritual leader and friends,” Sheldon wrote, “I got judgment, criticism, prejudicial advice and rejection.”

wives of Brigham Young
Brigham Young’s wives in the late 1800s. Charming.

According to R.B. Scott, author of Mitt Romney: an Inside Look at the Man and His Politics, Romney’s only concern was for the unborn fetus, not the health of the woman, not her other children.

Author Scott, also a Mormon, interviewed Sheldon’s 90-year-old father, Phil Hilton, about the incident: “I have never been so upset in my life,” he told Scott. “[Romney] is an authoritative type fellow who thinks he is in charge of the world.” Hilton was so offended by Romney’s lack of sensitivity to her daughter’s life that he ordered him out of his home. He told Scott he was fully prepared to throw Romney off his porch if he did not leave immediately. Romney left.

When confronted about the incident by reporters from the Boston Globe in 1994—little more than a decade afterward—Romney claimed no memory of the incident. You can bet that Sheldon has not forgotten.

Now living on the West Coast, she is no longer a member of LDS. “Here I—a baptized, endowed, dedicated worker, and tithe-payer in the church—lay helpless, hurt, and frightened, trying to maintain my psychological equilibrium,” she wrote, “and his concern was for the eight-week possibility in my uterus—not for me!

Romney’s flip-flopping on just about all issues has been covered extensively, but his stand on women’s rights and abortion, and even contraception, is what concerns us here. According to a former friend of his and a LDS member today, Judy Dushku, his position on abortion has changed with the expediencies of politics. Dushku is no light-weight throwing pot shots. She has been a professor of government for 40 years and she now teaches at Suffolk University in Massachusetts where she is the Fulbright Senior Specialist. Dushku was an editor of Exponent II, and knew Sheldon well, when she asked her to write a piece describing what had happened to her. The magazine agreed to publish the story anonymously.



  • THURSDAY, JANUARY 12, 2012

Romney urges single woman to give up her baby–or be outcast from LDS

Mitt Romney, as a leader in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, pressured an unmarried woman to give up her unborn child to be adopted. That revelation comes from The Real Romney, a new book excerpted in the February issue of Vanity Fair.  In the book, co-authors Michael Kranish and Scott Helman tell the story of one Peggie Hayes, who had a long-time connection with the Romney family.

Hayes had joined the church with her mother , and knew the Romneys so well that as a teenager, Hayes baby-sat for the Romney boys in Boston. In her last year of high school, however, her mother abruptly moved with her daughter to Salt Lake City.

{{That must have been a little traumatic…}}

Peggie married, moved to Los Angeles, had a daughter, divorced, and eventually moved back to the Boston area, where she made contact again with the Romneys. She stayed a member of the Mormon church.

{{I wonder if the marriage had anything to do with Mormons pushing marriage, or to get out of the neighborhood.  Sounds like she did this while just out of high school — see ff.}}

In 1983, Hayes was 23, a nurses’ aid struggling with her finances, and Romney was not only her church leader as her bishop, but she also thought of him as a friend. He helped find her odd jobs with other members of the church. Then Hayes became pregnant, and though marriage was not part of the equation, she looked forward to having another child. “I kind of felt like I could do it,” she is quoted as saying in the book. “And I wanted to.”

{{comment:  jobs with other church members; keeping it in-house.}}

But Romney, hoeing to Mormon policy of discouraging out-of-wedlock mothers, sat down with her and “said something about the church’s adoption agency.” From the excerpt in Vanity Fair:

Hayes initially thought she must have misunderstood. But Romney’s intent became apparent: he was urging her to give up her soon-to-be-born son for adoption, saying that was what the church wanted. Indeed, the church encourages adoption in cases where a successful marriage is unlikely.

Hayes was deeply insulted. She told him she would never surrender her child. Sure, her life wasn’t exactly the picture of Rockwellian harmony, but she felt she was on a path to stability. In that moment, she also felt intimidated. Here was Romney, who held great power as her church leader and was the head of a wealthy, prominent Belmont family, sitting in her gritty apartment making grave demands. “And then he says, ‘Well, this is what the church wants you to do, and if you don’t, then you could be excommunicated for failing to follow the leadership of the church,’ ” Hayes recalled. It was a serious threat. At that point Hayes still valued her place within the Mormon Church. “This is not playing around,” she said. “This is not like ‘You don’t get to take Communion.’ This is like ‘You will not be saved. You will never see the face of God.’ ” Romney would later deny that he had threatened Hayes with excommunication, but Hayes said his message was crystal clear: “Give up your son or give up your God.”

Hayes gave birth to a son she named Dane. Before he was a year old, he needed risky surgery because the  bones in his head were fused together, restricting the growth of his brain. They would have to be separated. Hayes looked to her church for emotional and spiritual support, and, setting aside their uncomfortable conversation before the baby’s birth, called Romney and asked him to come to the hospital to give her baby a blessing. Hayes was expecting him, but two people she didn’t know showed up instead. From VF:

She was crushed. “I needed him,” she said. “It was very significant that he didn’t come.” Sitting there in the hospital, Hayes decided she was finished with the Mormon Church. The decision was easy, yet she made it with a heavy heart. To this day, she remains grateful to Romney and others in the church for all they did for her family. But she shudders at what they were asking her to do in return, especially when she pulls out pictures of Dane, now a 27-year-old electrician in Salt Lake City. “There’s my baby,” she said.

One has to be a strong and brave woman to stand up against the pressures of the LDS strictures. LDS is not like Catholicism, where in America there are “cafeteria Catholics” who go to Mass on Sunday but use birth control on Saturday. To be a Mormon in good standing, the rules are strict, no exceptions. How many more mothers and children must be sacrificed in order to hoe to church dogma until the elders have a divine revelation and LDS policy changes?

In this day and age, after all that we have learned about the psychological harm to both mother and child in unnecessary adoptions, urging any mother who wants to keep her baby to give him up to strangers is cruel and unusual punishment.–lorraine

{{So do too many people with their talons in welfare diversionary, and/or faith-based funding.  They encourage women to marry their way out of poverty, or give it up, and are open about this.  This is why, regardless of the next President, voters should address this issue in the reauthorization of welfare in 2013.  MOREOVER, my lookups are showing there a huge development in federal funding to encourage adoption (Promoting Safe & Stable Families, etc.) — millions of $$.   Also the development of child welfare as a field of law, $600K to the “National Association of Counsel for Children,” (NACC) which overlaps with the AFCC I keep yakkin’ about, was labeled “ADOPTION ASSISTANCE.”  MEANWHILE, at the law school level, and again coordinated by AFCC members, centers (with private funding help) are being set up called “CFCC”s (Center for Families & Children in the Courts) where experts can convene and decide policy without a lot of single mothers, or uninfluential single fathers around.

THEIR thing has been to promote Unified Family Courts as a model.  While this may sound efficient, the real purpose is to gain SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION over both custody (which may not involve abuse, at least by both parents) and dependency courts, and to order more therapeutically jurisprudent services (to cronies).   I am networked with mothers and have been reporting this — you can smell the patronizing tone when you walk in a courtroom.  This is where it comes from.  Not reported at the centers — repercussions.  For example, the “Unified Family Court” set up in Lackawanna County, PA (which definitely got help from the Baltimore-based CFCC on the pilot unified court) has already been raided by the FBI on allegations — which seem pretty likely in my opinion — of financial misdeeds, overbilling, double-billing, etc. — by an NACC member.. etc.

To Summarize:  Mormons are not the only ones with this attitude.  However, (see Christianity and its Sects article) it does appear that having adopted children when they can’t have real children might help a couple in the afterlife…  It appears to be taken further in these circles, perhaps.

In THAT regard, I notice that one of the significant marriage grants from HHS was aimed at stepparents, and was moved from one state, grantee, and category AND to Utah…And again, as I a few posts ago blogged, UTAH was apparently (per “smartmarriages.com link on “Legislation”) one of the first states to have a Governor-level State-wide Marriage Initiative or declaration. Here’s that information, available from “Smartmarriages(r) site, left bar, under “Legislation”…. (actually that site’s pretty messy too, considering how much money the conferences, etc. must pull in..))


In 1998 and 1999, for the first time, governors in three states, Utah,
Oklahoma, and Arkansas publicly made reducing the divorce rate a goal
of their administration.

– Utah Governor’s Commission on Marriage – In 1998, Governor Michael Leavitt
organized the nation’s first Governor’s Commission on Marriage and charged the Commission
with the task of identifying programs and tools to strengthen
marriage in the state. He and First Lady Jacalyn Leavitt gave the opening
address at the 1999 Smart Marriages conference laying out the blueprints
for Utah’s statewide conferences that teach marriage skills to couples.

  • Oklahoma: Using Welfare Money to Promote Marriage –Wade Horn, April 4, 2000
  • West Virginia $100 monthly welfare bonus to married couples – 8/01

– States with TANF set-asides as of 12/07

TANF – The 1% Solution – step-by-step how to recording by Chris Gersten of FAMLI

  • Texas Passes 1% Solution TANF set-aside legislation! – 6/07 

Marriage Handbooks – developed by STATES as part of their marriage legislation, governor’s initiatives, etc. Click to read.


An LDS birth mother talks about her church, search and reunion, and the LDS position on such matters.


“I guess my unique perspective is that the sealing ceremony [of the LDS] should give adoptive parents all the comfort and courage in the world. If they truly believe the sealing ceremony joins the adoptee to their family for time AND all eternity, then what does it hurt to let an adoptee find his or her natural parents? I suspect the resistance to the opening of sealed records has to do with the secrecy and shame surrounding single motherhood, especially during the era of mass surrenders.

In the early ’90s when I relinquished, I was told to NEVER tell anyone what had happened, that it would affect my chances at marriage and future callings or leadership positions. I was even told that I should not tell my future husband, who ever he might be. It was to be a secret and should remain that way until I died. If I was being told those kinds of things in the ’90s, I can only imagine what the mothers of early times had been told.

(some of the contents on this page reference similar deals with the Catholic church and were suggesting that telling others might lead to discovering paternity, some of which might lead back to supposedly celibate priests…)

One of the issues we struggle with as members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints is pride and in trying maintain the appearance of perfection. As you are well aware, many first mothers go on to over-compensate for their loss by becoming uber-successful in other areas of their lives. In the LDS culture, success is defined as having a perfect home life with perfect children and a perfect husband – anything less than that is considered substandard.So if a woman had been admonished to NEVER tell a soul about what happened or it will destroy her and her family, then spends the rest of her life in a very closed culture which reinforces prideful behavior towards “perfection” in the home, it is no wonder that she is terrified of what will happen if anyone were to find out. However, it doesn’t make it right. In fact, it is a great tragedy for all involved. . . . .

That’s a shame, because Christianity — or, should I say, “the gospel,” as represented in the New Testament, shows a pattern of forgiveness.  God forgave Paul, and he was one bad guy….There’s also an account in John 8 of forgiving a women caught in adultery, the theme is of forgiveness and atonement.  From what I’m hearing of Mormonism, it’s pretty much the opposite.  I’m hard put to figure out where a Jesus Christ figure, and the entire message around the crucifixion, Lamb of God (etc.) comes into the mix, coming out of the temple practices, animal sacrifices, and such. This religion sounds terribly legalistic, and no mercy even after death, either, for the unmarried….

ANYHOW, regarding Legislation (Probably a done deal by now) might as well look at this:


Attorneys & Legislators in touch with SMARTMARRIAGES’ “Diane Sollee,” and one of them reporting a recent triumph. I wonder if the person is or was also an AFCC member as an attorney… These are things to pay attention to– BEFORE the bills are passed! This datesto 2007; note another round of marriage funding was reauthorized in 2006, I believe (and basically Welfare was re-appropriated, nationally, in 2005 as DRA (Deficit Recovery Act). Time to stay on top of these matters as citizens!

March, 2007

Dear Diane:
I am an attorney and Utah state legislator, and attended your conference last year in Atlanta. I just passed the nation’s first divorce orientation legislation, HB 128 and it has been funded! This bill is in addition to the already required 2 hour divorce education class for parents. The divorce orientation class is to help them understand the impacts of divorce, provide resources for strengthening their marriage, and resources to go through the divorce and deal with post-divorce issues with less pain, if they proceed.

I don’t know specifically which classes she’s referring to (a 2-hour class isn’t that long, but do the math, and who is the contractor, who wrote up the class?  The AFCC crowd is pushing classes about Conflict, and the KidsTurn (etc.) stuff, but they want I believe 8 weeks of someone’s time, and a good bit of money.  In Lackawanna County, Pennsylvania, last I heard, the KidsFirst class (also being marketed right from the Kentucky State courts site under about 11 or so “Divorce Education” options) was costing $60 and was administratively mandated by a certain AFCC Judge (Chet Harhut) writing it into action via a Rule of Court.  He simply said it was so, and it was so — kinda like “God.”  A crony got the business..See herein (look up “Libassi”).

California tried to pass a law overtly stipulating KidsTurn be studied, then backtracked not mentioning their pet project by name (too obvious), but the Governor (then Gray Davis) veto’ed it on the basis that the legislature was probably not qualified to measure mental health qualities of divorcing parents in this manner, etc. (SB-577 or similar name, see “Kehoe” and I blogged that, too).  They never give up…

It also allows couples to file for a temporary separation, WITHOUT filing for divorce, for up to one year. During the separation, they must take the course.

Cannot couples already do this by other means without taking a course?  One means is when the marriage has already been marked by DV — and that will precipitate a custody arrangement.  Another way is to amicably (without the courts) figure out how to separate, in a nonabusive marriage; I do not know if there is another way in this state to file for custody matters other than starting a divorce or DV action (the DV action will often precipitate a divorce action). Another one — not advised for women, given the current climate — my opinion — is to file for child support, if it’s needed, for a couple that is already separated.   Point being — why do couples need to allow these folks to get their sales marketing in also, during those difficult transition times?

If they proceed with the divorce, the relatively small filing fee for the temporary separation is applied to the divorce filing fee. It passed the HOUSE unanimously and the Senate with only one dissenting vote. The court administrator’s office is ready to begin implementation through the office that now administers the divorce education class for parents.

I would like people to know about this legislation so that they can introduce something similar in their state. I appreciate all that you do for marriage and families in this country.

Copy and paste this URL into your browser and you will have several options
to retrieve the text or even listen to committee and floor debates.


Lorie D. Fowlke
District 59
Orem, Utah

I think you should look at the minutes in the amended (substitute) bill, which say if after shelter hearing the child doesn’t go with a parent or relative, it has to go to a married couple, in the context of also another amendment about expunging criminal records.  Interesting.. The legislator who wrote this was Vice Chair of the Judiciary Committee, which i’m sure helped.

After finding her website (below) it turns out she’s also selling (no doubt) what looks like possibly this seminar — and I’m sure, along with it, her book by the same name, ‘Thinking About Divorce”? (more below)….


What do you know about how a divorce will affect your life? What can you realistic anticipate from the divorce process? Can your marriage be salvaged? Lorie Fowlke is a divorce attorney and wants to help you make an informed decision. Scheduling the ”Thinking Divorce? Think Again!” seminar for your group or organization may salvage a marriage or help reduce the damage of divorce litigation.

Beware Greeks Bearing Gifts and Unsolicited marriage helpers…. in any state!!  You can do church — in which case the woman loses, most religions — or you can do secular — which may be a tossup, but once it gets to child support, it’s tweaked in the fathers’ favor, although on closer inspections, it’s kind of like staging dogfights (cat fights?) — someone is always paying for the venue, placing bets, and the house always wins…. that’s the attorneys, etc.

Looking up Rep Lori D. Fowlke, she sponsored and got passed a bill naming a week in February “Celebration of Marriage Week” in 2005.  These people are smart — one step at a time, right?  Here it is!




Chief Sponsor: Lorie D. Fowlke

Senate Sponsor: Curtis S. Bramble

This joint resolution of the Legislature designates February 7-14, 2005 as Marriage Week in the state of Utah

This resolution: < designates February 7-14, 2005 as Marriage Week in the state of Utah; and < encourages all Utahns to reflect on the importance of strengthening the institution of marriage.

Be it resolved by the Legislature of the state of Utah:

WHEREAS, the legal marriage between a man and a woman is the cornerstone of healthy family life;

WHEREAS, this cornerstone brings security, commitment, meaning, joy, and spiritual maturity to the man and the woman who enter this lifelong covenant with unselfish commitment;

WHEREAS, this cornerstone provides children with a safe haven in which to grow, learn, and experience life from the hands of caring parents;

WHEREAS, this cornerstone buoys and unburdens society from the costly impacts of dysfunction and helps to mitigate continued cycles of dysfunction;

WHEREAS, this cornerstone creates interconnected communities of family, generations, neighborhoods, faiths, and the nation;

WHEREAS, this cornerstone engenders family autonomy and pluralism that are the frontline defenses in preserving the nation’s political freedoms;

WHEREAS, this cornerstone advances economic prosperity and hedges families against difficult economic times; and

WHEREAS, this cornerstone, marriage, is ordained of God to perpetuate the human race and to prosper both men and women:

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Legislature of the state of Utah, in recognition of this vital and essential institution, designates the week of February 7-14, 2005 as Marriage Week in the state of Utah and encourages all Utahns to reflect on the importance of marriage generally, and their own marriages specifically, for the purpose of strengthening its influence, appeal, and affect.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that a copy of this resolution be sent to the Governor’s Commission on Marriage.

More lookups:

This link from the “Roman Catholic Diocese of Altoona & Johnstown, Pennsylvania” is advertising a book by Lori D. Fowlke (who is probably a Mormon, not a Catholic) who apparently is BOTH divorce attorney AND a legislator (I found out, below) (the logo is the link):  The link has references to pornography, Natural Family Planning, etc. but nothing on domestic violence or child abuse (naturally)…

diocese banner

If you are tempted to divorce, read:
Thinking of Divorce? Think Again: Seven realities you need to know
by Lorie D. Fowlke, JD. Written by a divorce attorney who describes the monetary, legal, and emotional nightmare of a divorce. “A must-read book for anyone who is seriously considering divorce.” – Stephen R. Covey

This attorney was actually born in China Lake, CA — some indicators of AFCC affiliation — and she attended law school in UTAH after having her family.    She’s listed under adoption attorneys, and is a court-certified mediator.  I.e., she’s “drunk the Kool-Aid:” and is selling her book on the website, too..

Practice Areas

Family Law; Civil Litigation; Mediation

1994, Utah and U.S. District Court, District of Utah

Unlisted school, J.D.

Member: Central Utah Bar Association; Utah State Bar; Utah Council Conflict Resolution (Founding Member); Collaborative Lawyers of Utah.  {{underlined = an AFCC “tell”}}

Biography: Member, Moot Court.

Representative, Utah State Legislature.

Born: China Lake, California, March 30, 1952

 Current Practice: Lorie joined the firm in 1999. Lorie has an extensive practice in all areas of domestic relations law, including divorce, paternity, modifications, adoptions, and juvenile court work.

She also practices in the area of construction law, small business, real property, probate and contracts.

In addition to her court practice, Lorie is on the list of court-certified mediators and mediates cases cheaper than she litigates them because she believes so much in that process.  {{Mediation is also a federally-supported endeavor; see access/visitation grants..}}

The US Postal Services also contracts with Lorie to mediate their EEO employment discrimination complaints, which she has done for over eight years. She does conflict work for the office of the Guardian Ad Litem, representing abused and neglected children.  {{define “Conflict work…”}}

Education: Lorie graduated from BYU with a bachelor’s degree in Law Enforcement and worked as the first female police officer on patrol in Santa Barbara, California. After returning to Utah and having her family, Lorie went to law school at the J. Reuben Clark Law School, where she was a member of the moot court and trial advocacy teams and graduated cum laude.

that “J Reuben Clark” Wikipedia has been flagged for verification, but does tell us who J. Reuben Clark was, including First president of LDS and Dept of State under Coolidge, Ambassador to Mexico in 1930…. In 1933, at age sixty-two, Mr. Clark’s lifelong devotion to the Church culminated in a new calling—counselor to President Heber J. Grant of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. As a member of the First Presidency, President Clark was a leading supporter of the Church welfare plan. He also helped put the finances of the Church on a budget plan. He was an inspirational leader and spoke forcefully on topics including freedom, his court, the inspired Constitutions, work, integrity, and chastity. An avid student of the life and teachings of the Lord Jesus Christ, he authored many scholarly books on gospel topics.

In Rep. Fowlkes,

I’m showing the profile of someone serving as attorney and state legislator at the same time, also the mother of six children. She has also a bachelors in law enforcement from BYU — likes to run & exercise authority over others, I guess (does this help compensate for the mother of six situation? Is this a Mormon marriage?). Look at the pose (this is her commercial website, a little moonlight maybe will help the kids’ college educations??)

http://thinkingdivorce.com/bio.htm  Look at the pose & demeanor, on a site reading, “Thinking Divorce?

Lorie Fowlke, J.D.
Lorie Fowlke is a practicing attorney specializing in family law and domestic issues. She also serves as a state legislator, court appointed mediator and mediates EEO complaints for the U.S. Postal Service. She frequently represents children in divorce and abuse/neglect cases as a Guardian ad Litem. Lorie served as a past president of her local Bar Association and is active in family law and alternative dispute resolution issues.

Lorie obtained a Bachelor’s degree in law enforcement at Brigham Young University and worked as the first female police officer on patrol in Santa Barbara, California. She is a former businesswoman and newspaper columnist.

The mother of six children, Lorie enjoys horses, skiing, and camping. She lives with her family, three horses (attorney’s salary & state rep salary probably helps with that!), and her yellow lab, Gizmo:

 The Book & DVD                  
 Mediation Services                
 Divorce Quiz                        
 Divorce Resources                 
 Divorce Statistics                   
 Alternatives to Divorce Litigation
 Lorie Fowlke Bio                   
 Children’s Bill of Rights        
(Note, above, showing a forlorn, isolated looking woman (not man) with no kids around…..)

Resources — I’m going to post these.  The only referral for DV is the hotline; but there are several recommending self-improvement, visit your church, visit a therapist and ask for a referral — and mental health resources.  Apparentl someone wanting a divorce needs (her) head examined, too.  Last, but not least, see “smartmarriage.com” — which is FYI a business (for-profit) in washington, D.C. so this is free advertising.

I just looked at the Divorce Resources page, and now am a little incensed — flat-out marketing, recommending mental health, therapy and a passing reference to “physical abuse” that if it’s present, call the national DV Hotline (the words “Domestic Violence” do not show in the  blurb), which many women, including me, have done, and know approximately how that turns out (it’s also federally funded, and expensive, too).  After recommending some books written in the 1970s (for God’s sake!) — Gail Sheehy “Passages” – and pushing some more marketing efforts (I’ll show) it concludes with the smartmarriages conference, #10.  One good turn deserves another, right?
So yes, think again — if you’re about to divorce, especially in Utah — you will have to run the gauntlet, and one of your potential family lawyers is also a state legislator recommending anti-divorce, and (quite honestly) anti-feminist legislation, for profit, and as par for the course in what I’m going to guess is her religion.  Like I said, Catholicism and Mormonism are significantly different, but they come together on this one!  Make lots of babies and stay married, plus there are lot of spiritual beings floating around up in the sky who have died already, and may be influencing your options on earth.  If they aren’t, those who believe they are are still going to influence (restrict) options on earth anyhow . . . .possibly from the statehouse.
If you analyze the offerings below, it’d be a real eyeopener.  Again, restricting the reauthorization of WELFARE DIVERSIONS TO PROMOTE MARRIAGE AND FATHERHOOD would clip some of the flight feathers on certain of these businesses and nonprofits.  That’s March, 2013…
Whether you choose to seek a divorce or to try again on your marriage, it pays to be as informed as possible. There are numerous resources available to help you move forward in a constructive manner. Use them.
In local bookstores, look in the self-help, self-improvement, and relationship sections. For those of you who are readers, there are dozens of books about how to improve communication skills, how to improve your relationships, and how to maintain your marriage. Knowledge is power and you can learn how to change the status quo in your home.

{{I believe it’s fair to say this is directed at the women, whose sphere is the home, right?}}


Visit local churches, classes, workshops and seminars. Learning from books provides a great deal of information, but you need practice, too. Many mental health organizations, civic organizations, local colleges, and churches offer courses to improve your home life, sometimes at minimal cost. Take advantage of the opportunities there.
Visit the National Domestic Violence Hot Line at www.ndvh.org or 1-800-799-SAFE (7233). Physical abuse can be a problem that requires serious a commitment in order to be overcome. Both spouses must be committed to addressing this situation or be prepared to accept the consequences, which can be grave. This site has resources for both the victim and the perpetrator of abuse.

{{The Victim needs the abuse to stop — NOW.  If it’s not going to stop — NOW, then the resource needed is called DISTANCE.  Getting that distance means probably going through family court and wading through famiy law attorneys that believe targets of crime should “work it out” with the perpetartors. Notice the word “perpetrator” is actually used..

HERE — and not leaving it up to the “NDVH” hotline — is where mention should be made that  DV unchecked can lead to death, and/or orphaned children.  I guess that’s not an issue (She also works in adoptions, right?)}}


Another site to visit is the National Vital Statistics System at www.cdc.gov. The United States Center for Disease Control actually maintains statistics for all types of information, including marriage, divorce, children per family, unwed pregnancies, and other important data. {{NOTICE the fOCUSE!!}} The organization also releases articles that will help interpret the information and make it meaningful to you.

{{notice no mention is made of homicides or femicides due to item#3.  This item#4 is to counter item#3. From here, we are going to go into two reference books written in the 1970s (during the tmie no-fault divorces in some states were instituted, a time of feminism, AND I believe before even some DV laws were written.  As our friend/state legislator above here surely knows (having graduated at the top of her class from law school in 1999, even a Mormon one) laws against DV were increased and the shelter movement (battered women’s shelters, in otherwords) were jsut getting under way seriously in the 1980s…).  The VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN ACT (OF THE U.S. CONGRESS) WAS PASSED IN 1994 (the first time) and has continued to be reauthorized AND funded — but doesn’t rate even a passing mention above.  Instead, we are going to find the following two books written 20 years earlier.

That’s a clear statement of what people in Utah might face when they choose to divorce.  I’d relocate first!}}


Read Sheehy, Gail, Passages: Predictable Crises of Adult Life, NY E.P. Dutton, 1974. This book will help you understand that the crises in your life may not be as unique as you think. May of us go through stages in adulthood similar to the stages of childhood, and our behavior is not necessarily unexpected, at least by those who are informed. Check out this book to see if your actions or those of your partner are part of the natural evolution of growth, rather than something that is extraordinary or unacceptable.
Read Stanton, Glenn, Why Marriage Matters: Reasons to Believe in Marriage in Post-Modern Society, September 1977, Pinon Press. This is an example of many books available that propose marriage is still a viable and vital institution in our society. If you do not believe in marriage in general, it may be hard to believe in your marriage personally.  (See below)***

ALSO under “Why I Look things up” — LinkedIn shows he was a Bush Administration person pushing for more fatherhood involvement at the HeadStart level …He has five children (one boy, looks like they kept trying til they got one) and lives in Colorado.  SITE

He debates and lectures extensively on the issues of gender, sexuality, marriage and parenting at universities and churches around the country. He served the George W. Bush administration for many years as a consultant on increasing fatherhood involvement in the Head Start program. Glenn is a regular contributor to Focus on the Family’sBoundless blog,  National Review Online’s The Corner and The Home Front, as well as the Gospel Coalition

He also went StRAIGHt from graduation in Florida to working for Focus on the Family (from same site, bio & cv):

  • 6/93-11/97:  Social Research Analyst for Marriage and Family Studies, Focus on the Family, Colorado Springs, CO.
  • Education
  • B.A. Humanities Interdisciplinary,  emphasis in Philosophy, Communication Arts and Religion from the University of West Florida, 1991.
  • M.A. Humanities Interdisciplinary w/ Honors, emphasis in Philosophy, History and Religion, University of West Florida, 1992.
  • Master’s Thesis:  “The Intellectual Impetus of the Religious Right: An Expository Analysis.”


Contact state bar associations. Every state has an association, usually in the capital city, which keeps track of the licensed attorneys in that state. Some states require attorneys to join the bar association while other states make it optional. A bar organization generally disciplines its lawyers and maintains records of complaints by the public. Certain types of discipline are private and others are public, meaning you can find out whether an attorney you are considering has had public discipline. It is like calling the Better Business Bureau for lawyers.
Contact your state and local mental health facilities. Every community has local mental health facilities and, often, state facilities. Some of these facilities are priced on a sliding scale, depending upon a client’s income. Many individuals may require some additional assistance to learn how to communicate effectively. Some people have mental health issues precluding their ability to reason and communicate. Sometimes, these issues need to be addressed before a couple can work together constructively.
Visit www.aamft.org (American Association of Marriage and Family Therapy). This organization can assist in referrals for the type of therapist you may need. Remember that therapists are just people, and sometimes your personality may respond better to one therapist than another. You should try another therapist if you do not become comfortable with your first choice within a reasonable time. Sometimes people do not necessarily need therapy but instead need some life coaching skills. Coaching or mentoring is a new field and you should be cautious but open to new approaches in dealing with old problems. Finding the right coach for your marriage could make all the difference.
Visit www.acresolution.org. The Association for Conflict Resolution is a professional organization dedicated to enhancing the practice and public understanding of conflict resolution. This web site explains the mediation process in a family dispute setting and describes the attributes of a qualified mediator. It also has referrals for mediators registered with its organization.
Visit www.divorcemagazine.com. This site provides all sorts of useful information about divorce and about maintaining relationships. It has everything from Dr. Patricia Love‘s remarks, to call-in polls showing how many divorced people wish they had stayed married if they had known then what they know now. (A whopping 40%, by
the way, though other polls have rated the figure as high as 70%!)
Visit www.marriagebuilders.com. If you are willing to work on your marriage, this site will provide you with articles, workshops, information, and referrals to help you in that direction. There are a number of similar sites available, some of which are affiliated with universities.

Visit www.mediate.com. This site provides many interesting articles about mediation and the effects of divorce. It also has information regarding mediation training and a network of mediation and conflict resolution organizations throughout the country. A mediation referral service is available here as well.
Visit www.nami.org (National Alliance For The Mentally Ill). If you or your loved one is dealing with a mental health issue, you should be in contact with this organization. It may have resources available that will help you in ways you had not yet contemplated. A correct diagnosis is critical and, if not obtained, could explain why you feel like you are hitting your head against the wall.
Visit www.smartmarriages.com. This is another site that will provide a wealth of information and resources to help you save your marriage. This organization also has an annual seminar and provides training for individuals and therapists interested in assisting the rest of us work on our marriage. Remember, marriages, like any relationship, are rarely stagnant. They either get better or get worse; it is up to you. They do take effort but most people believe it is worth it.
(read all about Dr. Harley in MarriageSavers(r):
Dr. Harley earned a Ph.D. degree in psychology from the University of California at Santa Barbara in 1967 and has been a Licensed Psychologist in Minnesota since 1975. For the first ten years after earning his degree, he taught psychology at both the graduate and undergraduate levels. During those years, he was also a frustrated part-time marriage counselor with little success in helping couples.   In 1973 he discovered that he was not alone in his failure to save marriages — almost everyone in the marital therapy profession were also failing . . .

…(He writes):  for a number of years I had to explain that Marriage Builders, Inc. was a for-profit corporation, and as such, was not eligible for tax-free contributions.

However, it did get me thinking about what we could accomplish if we had more money. So I formed a new 501c3 corporation, The Association of Marriage Builders, Inc., whose stated purpose is to save marriages through education and research.

Beginning next year (2011) the Association of Marriage Builders, Inc. will have it’s own website (AOMB.org) with information regarding past, present, and future projects as well as on-line training programs. When the site is up, it will be acknowledged on this page.

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ PLEASE BOYCOTT THEM….._ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

Fact Checker: Do Faithful Christians Take the Bible Literally?

Note: FactChecker is a monthly series in which Glenn T. Stanton examines claims, myths, and misunderstandings frequently heard in evangelical circles.

One of the things I enjoy most in my work at Focus on the Family is the opportunity to speak at secular university campuses and to organizations that are indifferent or opposed to orthodox Christianity. Most of my colleagues are sane enough to avoid such invitations, but I relish them because they allow me to mix with folks who see the world very differently and it’s intellectually and rhetorically stimulating to interact with them in a meaningful way. I also get the opportunity to correct lots of misunderstandings about what Christians actually believe.

Glenn T. Stanton is the director of family formation studies at Focus on the Family and the author of five books on various aspects of the family, including his two most recent, Secure Daughters Confident Sons, How Parents Guide Their Children into Authentic Masculinity and Femininity (Waterbrook, 2011), and The Ring Makes All the Difference: The Hidden Consequences of Cohabitation and the Strong Benefits of Marriage (Moody, 2011).
Also per linkedin has a Colorado Connection:

Glenn Stanton

Colorado Springs, Colorado Area Research
Research Fellow at Institute of Marriage and Family Canada, Author at InterVarsity Press, Author at NavPress, Director, Family Formation Studies …
University of West Florida
He attended college for three years (did he get a degree in anything?) and then began what — writing? The canada connection is interesting….
  • Research Fellow
  • Institute of Marriage and Family Canada
  • June 2006 – Present (6 years 5 months)
  • Author
  • InterVarsity Press
  • September 2004 – Present (8 years 2 months)
  • Author
  • NavPress
  • August 1997 – Present (15 years 3 months)
  • Director, Family Formation Studies
  • Focus on the Family
  • June 1993 – Present (19 years 5 months)
  • Glenn Stanton’s Education
  • University of West Florida
  • 1989 – 1992
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

The University of West Florida (UWF) offers over 400 fully online course sections each semester that lead to undergraduate and graduate degrees as well as credit-earning certificates. Admittance to one of our 29 degree or certificate programs provides the opportunity to apply for an out-of-state tuition waiver that substantially reduces tuition for non-Florida residents. Waivers must be requested every semester.

It’s a large school in the state system of Florida with several campuses also.  i don’t see any (at all) of the studies listed above mentioned, but perhaps he wrote his own, or I didn’t see it yet.

UWF is a member of the State University System of Florida. The Florida legislature established the university in 1963, ground was broken in 1965 and classes began in the fall of 1967. UWF has three colleges, Arts and SciencesBusiness andProfessional Studies, and is accredited by the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools. UWF serves a student population of approximately 11,200.

(Obviously would not be in favor of gay marriage, etc.)
(I think we get the general idea, and I have other things to do….)

Written by Let's Get Honest|She Looks It Up

October 27, 2012 at 9:04 pm

Countering Global Wealth Consolidation 1. Isn’t Optional 2. Means Change Your Mindset.

leave a comment »

I hear the sound of a large “whoosh!” as things that sustain life are sucked out of the ethical unwealthy and siphoned into the shareholders by smart, and opportunistic private equity investors.

The poor used to be warehoused in HUD tenements (projects, right?), Ms. Fitts relates, but once the equity is sucked out of them, taxpayers can’t fork it over any more, and so here comes Privatized Prisons (CCA, etc.).  You KNOW at some level, right, this is the truth?  When I started seeing this?  I simply looked up the wealthiest Congresspeople in 2008 and where that wealth came from.  I saw Corrections Corporation of America (out of Nashville).   The Obama’s wealth was also listed and if you look closely, this involves real estate, including some projects, in Chicago.  HOW do we really think people get into politics and office?


We need to understand just how, and why, the “Rule of Law” is a Myth, and the Real Rules in Operation are simply How to Do a Financial Coup d’etat.

Now I see the signs of financial holocaust through the eyes of people who are being destroyed. Their currency is debased. Their children are targets of both “legal” and “illegal” drug trafficking and are condemned to learn in dumbed- down schools. Their small business equity is being extracted from under them. It is they who are carrying the burden of taxes without the benefits that government investment is supposed to provide. The cruel twist is that citizens are funding the financial ruin that is killing them and their children.

Now I understand the process by which the rich get rich and the poor get exhausted

My three years on this blog plus just observation of life pretty much led me to the same conclusion.  Not knowing this resource (yet), I posted (herein) that the for profit/nonprofit system was PER SE creating a caste system.  That was simply the truth.  I also had ample experience with nonprofits, i.e., seeking assistance from several of them.  Now I have better language to describe it, and some more “case histories” to demonstrate the matter.

FYI I still have not solved this problem.  I still have major economic struggles, no assets, a destroyed job history and a destroyed social support system (particularly since I quit using on-line groups for an emotional crutch, and/or trying to argue some sense into them.

How money works is not only essential to know — it’s interesting.  And it’s the current landscape – it’s here.  You might as well learn about it.  FAST!

Please take time to work through at least some of this material by Ms. Fitts and then keep your eyes opened.  The quote above is from “The Myth of the Rule of Law” — an elegant, and well-formatted 27page read.  Here’s the intro:

Note from CAF: This post was originally published here in February of 2009. In light of recent events,  I am republishing.]

By Catherine Austin Fitts

In the fall of 2001 I attended a private investment conference in London to give a paper, The Myth of the Rule of Law or How the Money Works: The Destruction of Hamilton Securities Group.

The presentation documented my experience with a Washington-Wall Street partnership that had:

  • Engineered a fraudulent housing and debt bubble;
  • Illegally shifted vast amounts of capital out of the U.S.;
  • Used “privitization” as a form of piracy – a pretext to move government assets to private investors at below-market prices and then shift private liabilities back to government at no cost to the private liability holder.

Other presenters at the conference included distinguished reporters covering privatization in Eastern Europe and Russia. As the portraits of British ancestors stared down upon us, we listened to story after story of global privatization throughout the 1990s in the Americas, Europe, and Asia.

Slowly, as the pieces fit together, we shared a horrifying epiphany: the banks, corporations and investors acting in each global region were the exact same players. They were a relatively small group that reappeared again and again in Russia, Eastern Europe, and Asia accompanied by the same well-known accounting firms and law firms.

Clearly, there was a global financial coup d’etat underway. The magnitude of what was happening was overwhelming. In the 1990′s,

    millions of people in Russia had woken up to find their bank accounts and pension funds simply gone – eradicated by a falling currency or stolen by mobsters who laundered money back into big New York Fed member banks for reinvestment to fuel the debt bubble.

Reports of politicians, government officials, academics, and intelligence agencies facilitating the racketeering and theft were compelling.

Ms. Fitts’ firm Hamilton Securities was targeted — she was targeted and almost destroyed.  A simple software program (I don’t know HOW simple) that connected the dots of HUD Frauds (or defaults) to PLACE — which then also revealed where the crime was happening — was called Community Wizard.  Her ideas for turning around drug-riddled neighborhood and keeping capital LOCAL seems to me were good ones.  They were also rejected.

On page 18 of the (above-linked “myth” document) — I got my validation from a top financial expert — and again, pretty close to the first time I had CAFRs explained to me (meaning, I read a blog or two and looked at some samples), it made sense.  I also realized that these were maps // diagrams — better than my narratives.  I then began reporting & publicizing it and next thing you know, I’m put off a forum of a city in Lackawanna County PA (where the FBI had raided the courthouse, and which city was going bankrupt), and told by the moderator to keep my nose out of the NON-family court thread, but not before I’d started a topic on CAFRs and literally dug up Scranton’s (which had been named kind of strangely on their business admin site).  Eventually I was bounced off the forum, which was fine by me — more free time for people who give a damn.

I POINTED OUT THE DANGED CAFRss.  Look at this, from p. 18:

That was one of the reasons I turned down the opportunity to serve at the Federal Reserve and instead started Hamilton upon leaving the Bush Administration. It was the reason why we at Hamilton built Community Wizard. The Community Wizard made it possible for anyone to put together a sources and uses statement for government activities (taxes, time use, spend- ing, credit, regulation, operations, and more) in their community. An easy step was just linking to the Consolidated Financial Reports (CAFRS). The shock of finding so much in the way of hidden assets and where the money was really going was always a pleasure to watch. Why should the finance committee chairmen of the political campaigns be the only ones to see the information on how the money works by place?

Luis Mendez, one of my partners at Dillon Read, visited me in Washington in 1996. He said that Wizard was a stupid idea, that would not work. Things were hopeless, he said. I showed Luis a printout of the CAFR for his community of Bronxville, New York. When he saw the figures, he exploded in rage. The first item was $4 million of flood insurance. This was the worst form of corruption, Luis said. Apparently, Bronxville was on a hill. The next day Luis spent two hours on the phone with the Deputy Mayor of Bronxville going through each item and informing him this was all going to stop. Apparently, things were far from hopeless, once one had the information. It just took one good map to see how to fix thousands of little things, one at a time

What Human Behavior can the UnWealthy Change to Quit enabling this Consolidation

Our Human Behavior — How Can We Change it to Counter this Consolidation of Wealth?

Instead of complaining about how corporations think and act, how about thinking and acting more, as individuals, about the “corpus” of our money?

When we give it up to others (including through wages) to pool, invest, and sell– is it out of sight, out of mind?  Where, really and to what purposes, are we putting it?

We essentially are saying, too many of us– I am not smart enough to invest and manage my own income.  In exchange for HOPE, including HOPE of some job security now, I will let you manage it, for which privilege, you will get from me the primary hours and energy of my days, and the prime years of my life, to help make widgets, or highly technical improvements to make society whirr and hum better (depending on what type of job we work), and I myself will gain a resume and some job skills.

Read the rest of this entry »

Written by Let's Get Honest|She Looks It Up

October 25, 2012 at 11:31 pm

What It’s Still About….(… in Summer 2013)

with one comment

(Post title changed to remove “Election Year Update 2012.” The message is still appropriate now….Also in reviewing this post (and adding some quotes) I’m temporarily moving the “more” link further down the page, (in other words, the “abstract” is almost post-length) to call attention to the material.)

[This post is “sticky” and stays on top.  New posts are beneath . ..Some additions, March 2013…(As I learn more, it shows up on the blog). ~ Or see “The Last Seven Let’s Get Honest Posts” links, on sidebar ~ better yet, See also my other blog Cold,Hard.Fact$]; 

This blog has VALUABLE INSIGHT on the family courts money trail (a trail of tears), and about many crisis intervention groups who are in on it (and hence, won’t blog it), and from some of whom I sought help, solace, or actionable information — and got NONE.  

Question: WHY would any group which truly wants to save lives withhold relevant information, tools to find that information, and prior ground-breaking conversations about that information — in the amounts of billions of dollars of federal incentives to the statesaffecting — custody outcomes (as to the child support system, HHS/OCSE) while feeding less helpful information to their clients?Another Question: You should also ask why — where is that money coming from, and why does our government always want to raise taxes when they can’t keep track of what they already collected (MUCH more than is commonly realized) and when a lot of that is simply fed to fraudulent or evanescent corporations that don’t stay registered at the state level?

When it’s a matter of eminent domain and someone gets sued over bribery, then it makes headlines and people get indignant. Daily News 2001, Los Angeles Area.

COURT MAY RECEIVE CLOSE AUDIT. 2001. Similarly, and around the same years, other people were asking questions about “court-connected” funds of a different sort. 2002, this one, there was a series of articles:‘SLUSH FUND’ PROBE POSSIBLE KUEHL MAY ASK FOR INQUIRY INTO JUDGES’ PROCEEDS.[one has to actually read these – I’m not outlining them for those who won’t….]
This one in PARTICULAR shows that in 1999ff Marv Bryer and others were doing what I do now — reading tax returns, looking at the fronts of checks, looking at the BACKS of checks, and noticing that what’s written out to ONE fund sometimes gets deposited into another, which fund happens to be a private judges’ association.

Here’s a yet more detailed one (best: read the series; see “related articles”):


(Now that you’ve read it, naturally, with attention…..)

Read the rest of this entry »

The Profits Are in the Investments (ROI), Mergers/Acquistions, Sales, Dividends etc. — not the Wages!

leave a comment »

 ALEC’s Private Enterprise Board Chairperson & “Centerpoint360”


In a recent post, I put up some of the board members (Private Enterprise Board, and others) of “ALEC” the American Legislative Exchange Council. {pls. hover cursor for their “about us” History, which is significant} This is where corporations solicit — openly — American legislators (who sometimes get “scholarships” to attend!) and convene around initiatives, draft legislations, and then they get to go back home and pass the legislation, hopefully….

ALEC – American Legislative Exchange Council

It has a variety of Boards, Task Forces, etc.

About ALEC

I didn’t get to “profile” the corporation of the “private enterprise board’s” listed company, which was unfamiliar to me.  It’s called “Centerpoint360”  SourceWatch points out:

Centerpoint360 is a lobbying firm based in Greenwich, CT. According to its website, “Centerpoint360 serves as a complementary angle to the traditional government relations operations. We serve at the intersection of business and government in order to enhance a client’s ability to shape the debate as well as manage the legislative and regulatory processes.”[1]

The firm’s clients “include Fortune 100 companies with annual revenues in excess of $200 billion as well as not-for-profit and privately held enterprises, with clients in the consumer packaged goods, transportation, technology, supply chain & distribution, healthcare and sports marketing industries.”[2]

Support for the American Legislative Exchange Council

Centerpoint 360 President and CEO W. Preston Baldwin is the Chairman of the corporate (“Private Enterprise“) board for the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) as of 2011.[3][4]

A list of ALEC Corporations can be found here.

About ALEC
ALEC is a corporate bill mill. It is not just a lobby or a front group; it is much more powerful than that. Through ALEC, corporations hand state legislators their wishlists to benefit their bottom line. Corporations fund almost all of ALEC’s operations. They pay for a seat on ALEC task forces where corporate lobbyists and special interest reps vote with elected officials to approve “model” bills. Learn more at the Center for Media and Democracy’s ALECexposed.org, and check out breaking news on our PRWatch.org site.

More about Baldwin’s background, and Centerpoint360, from SourceWatch shows he formerly worked for “UST” (smokeless tobacco) which was just bought up by “Altria” formerly Phillip Morris.  which brings up another point — when companies get that much negative publicity, how hard is it to simply change the name, and continue in the same or similar line of work?  Seems to me it should be easy.

I learned on about October 23, 2012 that Phillip Morris ended up buying the largest US Food Company around, “General Foods” and merged it under the name Kraft.     I did this as a direct result of following up on one of the largest nonprofits in the District of Columbia, whose business is promoting vaccination in some of the world’s poorest countries, and whose present CEO used to work for a vaccination technology company.  Looking up THAT company, I found the co-founder of it got his background in Biscuits and Confectionary (i.e., sweets).  Looking up THAT company, I found out how Kraft  bought it out in 2010, and immediately closed a factory moving the operations to Poland.

Looking up the background of KRAFT, I found out it had just split off its food from its snacks business, distributing dividends (or however this is done) as recently as this past month! (October 2nd).  I am very interested in the history of market-dominating foods, which General Foods (began as “Postum” in 1893, Battle Creek Michigan) was.   It developed one product — a ready-to-eat cold cereal (you may have heard of Grape-Nuts) and focused early on and from the start on advertising and education.  From there on (raising cash) it started buying up other companies.  The rest is history.  and Philip Morris is part of it.

By consistently looking things up, we can get a better picture of how some of the major players in THIS economy (and on the globe) got themselves going.  I learned yesterday just how significant Oxford University (England, obviously) was in this mix.  You can too — it’s on the ColdHardFacts blog.

I didn’t know when publishing THIS blog (and the Philip Morris stuff) re: Centerpoint360 (a lobbying firm from CT with connections to ALEC, which has connections to the US Congress)  that the same company was so much into the US food supply.

Then, the next day (Oct. 24, 2012) I then noticed another page on a Catherine Austin Fitts site I’ve been working through (it’s a lot of material), and how the EU had made the connection between the cigarette industry and money laundering, plus the drug (or if you will, criminal profits from illegal drugs) industry.  A lawsuit was actually filed by several sovereign nations in the EU against a United States Defendant, RJR (RJ Reynolds, i.e., a tobacco firm).

This parallels with the situation of judges buying some real estate cheap, then it’s suddenly appraised high, and they are able to miraculously pay off one lien after another (were they real mortgages?) (whose money paid them off) totaling FAR more than a judge’s salary.  I heard of this, but to see it in a series of real estate deeds, compared to mortgages on the same, is a whole other matter.

It sounds to me similar deal here.  THis will not make sense (obviously) until a person has looked at some of the company’s histories and starts thinking in these terms.  That’s what I’m asking us plain old worker bees, life-long job-holders, to start doing — understand more than before about how corporations operate!   That’s WHY I’m laying this stuff out.

It’s not enough just to be a good guy, an ethical person.  Collectively, we need to acknowledge (see, when it’s happening under our noses) and respond to how the bad guys are operating!  Unless it’s OK to turn the world into a single criminal enterprise and just be extorted into oblivion or worked into lesser and lesser subsistence lifestyles, you can’t support your kids — you can’t fight to keep your kids — you can’t find justice, and eventually after enough years of this, you simply die.   Is THAT OK???

That’s why I “converse,” this information onto a blog, month after month….It’s not OK to keep playing ‘pretend’ this isn’t happening.      Behaviors need to change!   Self-education needs to become the norm; does the information make sense, is it verified — or does it make NO sense, and it’s not verified?


Note:  This requires attention and mental exertion called reading, and mentally sorting and filing what is read:  front-burner, back-burner, trash heap.  The reward of understanding comes later, not up front!

FYI, some of my most valuable finds came from noticing details that may not have seemed important on their own.  I don’t know why I focused on Philip Morris a few days ago, but here we are.  They were accused of RICO over here, and another cigarette company, and some brands it was associated with, has been accused of RICO by the European Union.

I suggest that when the European Union files a lawsuit, it may have some basis for doing so . . . . . And it went after a huge cigarette company.

RJR Nabisco

Nabisco Logo


  • RJR Takeover Wars – The Next Episode by Catherine Austin Fitts (Scoop Media, November 2002) The European Union Sues RJR Tobacco for Two Decades of Global Money Laundering for Colombian Drug Lords, Russian Mafia, Italian Mafia, Saddam Hussein’s Family & New York Real Estate Investors * * *

Read the rest of this entry »

Written by Let's Get Honest|She Looks It Up

October 24, 2012 at 6:46 pm

HHS Grantees…How many Evangelizing, How many Hypnotizing, How many Simply Disappeared?

leave a comment »



THIS POST MAY BE A SLIGHT DUPLICATE OF AN EARLIER ONE.  IT CONTAINS MISCELLANEOUS SORTS ON GRANTEES, BUT BELOW THAT, SOME DETAILS ON A FEW OF THEM MAY INTEREST YOU — IN PARTICULAR RE:  “PAIRS” “IDEALS” “ASSOCIATION FOR COUPLES AND MARRIAGE ENHANCEMENT” & NIRE(r)”GOODSHEPINC.” (a grantee which turns out to be a couple marketing quite a few items, including a specialized product code-named by one guy, “TheoPhoskos” or something like it.

Individuals mentioned:

  • David & Vera Mace (apparently one of the earlier ones  bringing in the “marriage education” field, along with a Catholic Father from Spain…
  • Bernard and Louise Guerney
  • Mary Ortwein
  • etc.


I have just finished some intense days reading about the history of a Christian group (sect) from the 1200s who suffered severe persecution (and massacres) for their lay-preaching, for CENTURIES and eventually, having probably helped influence the reformation, blended in with it — and helped with early Bible translations.  Their primary sin was lay preaching — AND allowing women to preach also.  This challenged the entire ecclesiastic privilege at a time when Popes were warring with each other (and various emperors) for dominance.

At the bottom of the “Where’s Waldo” post (re: the Waldensians) — I randomly pulled up some mainline church doctrine, showed its format (sloppy), and at the bottom, the megachurch Saddleback/Rick Warren.

Marketers use Churches for their distribution network, obviously, so I went to USPTO.gov and looked up things trademarked to Pastor Rick (Warren) – -and even I was surprised.

There also was a single article on a woman who –attempted — at least — to report domestic violence against her by a church member; she’d been paired with him originally by his mother, in a Saddleback choir.  It turns out the man was a serial abuser (his first wife had suffered even more severe abuse, facially disfiguring).  Saddleback, instead, gradually excommunicated the woman reporting (after squelching her reporting of it) and after the man was (properly) dismissed from leadership at his prior church, because of DV, he was instated gladly at Saddleback.


We should be #1 aware that what’s often called “Church” is simply using people for business, and that #2, too many of them simply hate women — which any God, assuming such a God is real and worth worshipping — simply would not do.


There are many lessons to be learned by reading up on these matters.  However this post is less weighty than some others — but I do wish to point out that some of the main players (PREP, IDEALS, etc.) are to be found all over the neighborhood — and HOW they spread their wares. . . . .


Also know that both Romney and Obama have supported the federal funding of these programs on the basis it helps people.  It does — it helps enrich those selling the product, and helps strengthen churches which discriminate against women, specifically, and which, moreover, apparently can’t and don’t read their own scriptures straight, or enough to actually be convinced by the contents.  As such, I say, strip the nonprofit tax status which is a church/state partnership that should not exist, and weakens the function of both church and state.

Read the rest of this entry »

Written by Let's Get Honest|She Looks It Up

October 24, 2012 at 8:45 am

Where’s OUR “Waldensian Dissent”? They let women preach in 1200 AD. Today, We PAY (private and public) Religious Groups who still won’t!

with one comment

What they did, and endured, should not be forgotten — or dismissed.

As it turns out, the Inquisition was essentially developed, in part, to attack this one group, who began with (it seems) one wealthy merchant in Lyons — having heard some of the Bible addressed to a rich man (which he was) — decided to actually do it.  At this time, perhaps only 10% of the population was literate, and the language of science and religion was Latin.  The man, how undoubtedly read his own language (being a merchant) got some translators — and the rest is history.

This group was Ahead of their Times as we are over 800 yrs later, Behind Theirs.

From 1179 AD, Who practiced what they preached – men AND women

From what I can tell, neither armies (whether of Kings or of Popes) exterminated them in their scattered and clandestine state — but apparently an ecumenical appeal to join the Reformation — quit wandering around preaching and stay put, build your own churches (which took place in 1532, by which time this group must have been exhausted, terrorized, and barely holding on, though holding on they certainly were) — and shortly AFTER that some of the worst massacres took place.

This just goes to show what can happen when a group of people makes a determine to practice what is preached, and gets its own access to the information (in this case, it happened to be primarily the Bible), and starts thinking independently about propaganda.  And, in this case, from the start it appears that women were allowed to speak, and even preach.   I am sure the literacy level improved in the process — but they took on the litterati of the era.

So what are we, in the USA doing now?  We are contributing to the church that is called the Federal Government (at least of late) and asking it for protection, social services, and our money’s worth.  We are not organizing to get the Executive Order rescinded of 2001 which helps deactivate just over HALF the population of the land (the female half) within religious orders, but allowing certain chosen figureheads (male and female) to rise to the top, in an effort to make sure more don’t have a true voice in raising their own kids, or an equal shot at survival economically — should they have children and not get or stay married.

I excerpted this from the post about “Christian Sects in the Statehouse.” I really believe as a whole, we do not accept how much of religious dogma — the negative and the positive — has saturated our culture, particularly the justice and legal systems.

Read the rest of this entry »

Written by Let's Get Honest|She Looks It Up

October 23, 2012 at 8:54 pm

Christianity and Its Sects in the Statehouse…(Gov’nr Marriage Initiatives, etc.)

leave a comment »

Reader warning: Not including this opening (rant?) this is an obnoxiously long (>=27,000 words) post,much of it quotes

Show and tell about some of the less publicized, or underappreciated, truths of mainstream powerful (that means financed and politically savvy, politically connected) beliefs of the truly religious who truly intend to run this place, the USA.  That is, more than they already are.

Yes, I tell this from my point of view, and on some of this I’m a former insider turned conscientiously objecting outsider, as to the religious organizations I once felt free to circulate among believing they were a little more tolerant than too many are….

(I’M A LITTLE TOUCHY ON THE FORMATTING IN THIS POST — SKIP BELOW OPENING SKYBLUE, two or three vertical inches of my yakking , IF YOU WISH TO IGNORE.  OR SCAN FOR YET ANOTHER TEACHING MOMENT..I’m full of information on this topic.  See Election Day Upcoming….)

In defense of the outrageous formatting — I tried to keep some quotes separated by background color,painstakingly manually entering the HTML to do so for every single occurrence, choosing some individually, or a few basic html color-codes memorized.  This includes line-height, font-changes, etc.  My habit of explaining quotes in the middle of an existing one didn’t improve the situation.

Moreover, wordpress doesn’t save right all the time, so it would lose formatting.  As the saying goes, simple designs are best.

Quite honestly, if you want a fantastic looking website  — go look at fatherhood.gov, or go look at the healthy marriage resource center which has a color theme AND a logo.  Then consider who paid for this nice stuff — because, most likely, given the backing — YOU did.

National Healthy Marriage Resource Center National Responsible Fatherhood Clearinghouse

Don’t forget to read from HMRC a recent report on the results of pushing marriage to low-income couples, published under “OPRE” of the HHS (that’s USGOV, HHS/ACF/OPRE) + MDRC (a major corp. which was formed in 1974 as a Ford Foundation/Federal Agencies combo, which is where most of its funding comes from.  I’ve blogged it..).   This 2010 study (a six-pager press release, is what it looks like written by six individuals, whose careers it will help no doubt, is called:

Early Lessons from the Implementation of a Relationship and Marriage Skills Program for Low-Income Married Couples

and “only” took funding from THESE:

MDRC and its subcontractors, Abt Associates, Child Trends, Optimal Solutions Group, and Public Strategies, Inc., are conducting the Supporting Healthy Marriage evaluation under a contract with the Administration for Children and Families (ACF) in the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), funded by HHS under a competitive award, Contract No. HHS-223-03-0034. {{that =the HHS link to the report}} The findings and conclusions presented herein do not necessarily represent the official position or policies of HHS.

Child Trends is an Annie E. Casey org; Abt Associates has done several of these evaluations (the name comes up); Optimal Solutions Group, I DNR for sure, but believe it’s related to Public Strategies, and Public Strategies, of course is a SMALL PR firm which is now a much more PROMINENT PR firm as it helped kickstart and manage the first welfare-grab action in Oklahoma, ca. 1999/2000.  Which initiative (OMI) “only” took $10 million at that time from direct aid to needy families to, instead, run programs like this.

However these studies most not be cost-efficient because look who else had to then still pay more for them.  Is anyone over-billing, I wonder….

Dissemination of MDRC publications is supported by the following funders that help finance MDRC’s public policy outreach and expanding efforts to communicate the results and implications of our work to policymakers, practitioners, and others: The Ambrose Monell Foundation(see last page here, + below/International Nickel), The Annie E. Casey Foundation, Carnegie Corporation of New York, The Kresge Foundation (think, K-Mart, older company), Sandler Foundation (Savings & Loan, sold to Wachovia for $25billion, netting $1.4 billion for a foundation, this one….making it one of the 30 largest in the country.  That’s actually a fantastic write-up of the Sandlers, who also funded ProPublica ($30 million).They are progressive.  Progressives are into this cause, too FYI…) , and The Starr Foundation. {{INSURANCE, it turns out}}.  (More Kresge background)

Cornelius Vander Starr

The Starr Foundation was established in 1955 by Cornelius Vander Starr, an insurance entrepreneur who founded C.V. Starr & Co. and other companies later combined by his successor, Maurice R. Greenberg into what became the American International Group, Inc. [[AIG]] Mr. Starr, a pioneer of globalization, set up his first insurance venture in Shanghai in 1919. He died in 1968 at the age of 76, leaving his estate to the Foundation.

Not that Starr was alive at the time, but didn’t we just bail out AIG to the tune of $182 million in 2008? (hover cursor)

The Foundation currently has assets of approximately $1.25 billion, making it one of the largest private foundations in the United States. It makes grants in a number of areas, including education, medicine and healthcare, human needs, public policy,

respectively (the ones I know offhand), UPS (AEC), steel (Carnegie, right?) retail stores, and ????  Back to the Marriage Study:

In addition, earnings from the MDRC Endowment help sustain our dissemination efforts. Contributors to the MDRC Endowment include Alcoa Foundation, The Ambrose Monell Foundation, Anheuser-Busch Foundation, Bristol-Myers Squibb Foundation, Charles Stewart Mott Foundation, Ford Foundation, The George Gund Foundation, The Grable Foundation, The Lizabeth and Frank Newman Charitable Foundation, The New York Times Company Foundation, Jan Nicholson, Paul H. O’Neill Charitable Foundation, John S. Reed, Sandler Foundation, and The Stupski Family Fund, as well as other individual contributors.

(The Stupski Foundation (not family fund) show him as coming from Schwab (+Princeton, Yale…) and her in Special Ed particularly; He has been on the board of MDRC….and is on the board of the Glide Foundation)

So supporting the MDRC Endowment which supports, studies on these matters in order to form a more perfect union between corporations and social scientists when it comes to government policies, we have contributing foundations who made their money in:

“On Sept. 21, 2004 at the post-concert New York Philharmonic Opening Night gala dinner, Gala Chairmen Hiroko and Hiroshi Tada (far left and far right) and Lizabeth Newman (third from left) with Maestro Lorin Maazel and his wife Dietlinde and Philharmonic Board Chairman Paul B. Guenther”   {{to the right — NYT link above/unrelated:  Herb and Marion Sandler.}}

The Newmans are married.  Perhaps if every one stayed married we, too, could attend some NYPhilharmonic Opening Nights?  Therefore, why not support studies of low-income couples and testing marriage promotion on them, funded federally…disseminated with help from the MDRC endowments these helped fund…)

The report (which I’m looking at) thanks:

Our appreciation goes to Andrew Cherlin, Kathy Edin,**(see “OMI”)  Richard Heyman, Ronald Mincy, (search my blog — he runs a fatherhood research institute at Columbia) and Robert Wood for their thoughtful review of the report).  On page 5 of the report, they show which curricula they used — four, in total.  Two were based on PREP (federally-funded), and one on PAIRS (also federal grantee, or its originator).  The fourth was based on a corporation called “loving couples, loving families, inc.” in Seattle and focuses on military families:


One example of the US military’s response is the Naval Special Warfare (NSW) Resiliency Program, which recently issued a contract worth up to $44.4 million to Loving Couples Loving Children, Inc. in Seattle, WA. This LCLC program was originally developed by John and Julie Gottman for low-income couples expecting a child

The Gottmans are highly involved in this field also….It’s big business, maybe instead of promoting marriage to low-income couples, someone should promote the “promoting marriage BUSINESS” to them (ALL of them!) which has a guaranteed federal grants stream behind it and infinite expansion possibilities.  Who needs child care or housing subsidy after that? People could get off welfare in a flash — all they have to do is go forth and recruit.  Make sure that a sizeable target population of low-income remains (supply & demand).  I suggest perhaps captive audiences — like prisoners?  Or adolescents enrolled in high school? (There’s competition, but not a monopoly already involved in those market niches).   Go grab a mother with small children off a soupline and promise them better, chunkier soup — if they enroll….

OK, that’s enough — and this is the REAL post…..That was just the reader alert that this was a long, and messy, post….on volatile topics that are going to offend some people more than the appearance here….

At the bottom of this post is 2001 testimony in front of a U.S. Senate Subcommittee, on the subject of  Welfare and Marriage.  If you read nothing else, please read this, and the section introduced by Rep. Mark Anderson (a Unification church members)….

Romney is sure to promote and approve of this continued funding of marriage promotion, yet Obama has, every bit as much as George W. Bush did, all of this having been specifically enabled to start with by 1996 welfare reform, which tied federal aid to the states NOT to families receiving the aid — but as block grants, tempting certain individual with specific, evangelistic and religious agenda, to grab it for specialized programming.

My Background, not Uncommon, belies common Welfare and Religionspeak.

I was not raised religious, but became interested as a young woman in college, and continued this interest to this day.  While never a traditional church attender (at least for religious reasons), I’ve had exposure to many traditions over time, after which an abusive marriage with religion at the forefront of said excusitis.  I then got out of that and realized just how religious our overall culture had become in the meantime (the 1990s, 2000s in particular) — and how much of that resurgence of religion was in direct response to the challenge of feminism, and the challenge presented by women like me getting out of marriages like that.  When I say “women like me” — many women in abusive marriages are targeted because of their education or professional ability — and not because of (as welfare funding presumes, patronizingly) because of a LACK of it.  The abuse happens across the spectrum.

Women in my situation, while we are willing to speak out about, and if necessary boycott, religious groups on the basis of their overt abuse and treatment of women and children,  are not usually ready to become so-called radical feminists and embrace the whole spectrum of, for example, N.O.W. or issues which would require us to utterly reject the foundations of a personal spirituality or understanding of life having spiritual components, however they are expressed in language and culture.

It has not helped induce even the moderately religious to speak out against misogyny, or minimizing/coverup up crimes committed against women (mothers, specifically) and constantly demeaning/minizing  women, to have practically the only others who are doing this, insisted on the full spectrum of polarizing matters which some are divided on, for example, abortion “whenever,” or endorsing and promoting LGBT no matter what.

Moreover, most of recent history and a good deal of the records of human history (and civilization) have a religious underpinning — and superstructures — so to fail to LOOK at this from inside and outside, to me, makes no sense.

If I’d relied only on help from nice(?), religious people to survive and/or leave, and/or thrive after that marriage — I truly believe one nuclear family — or the majority of it — would be dead right now.  When I then do the life-promoting thing, which is to separate, I truly do not appreciate living in a country run by forces which endorse the death-promoting thing, which is worshipping marriage as an idol, and sacrificing human life to it.   Or being silent while others do this.

However, it is not going to take me much more to become a very radical feminist if we have much more of this stuff shoved down the collective, national throat as “good” for someone, when it’s basically good for those who have an extremely odd and convoluted view of the universe.   Some of which I look at in this post.  Specifically three Christian groups:  Protestant Evangelical, Mormon & a bit of Catholic.  I also gave a brief review (but have blogged elsewhere) of Unification church.

ALL of these have promoted the “teach marriage using welfare funds” theory and exploited the situation.

Then, of course we had the election of 2000 and an Executive Order on faith-based programming.  A friend of mine sent me an “About.com” summarizing the situation — even as far back as 2005.  Here is the link, plus some:

Federal Funding of Faith-Based Services

Why Not Give Federal Funds to Churches?

By ,

“The government gave more than $1 billion in 2003 to organizations it considers ‘faith-based,’ with some going to programs where prayer and spiritual guidance are central…” recently reported Laura Meckler, AP writer. . . .

In January 2001, President Bush created, via Executive Order, the White House Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives. Since then, Centers for Faith-Based and Community Initiatives were established at five federal agencies, assistance and guidebooks were provided to religious groups to help them to apply for federal funds, and websites were created for speedy access to applications.

And in February 2004, the President issued an Executive Order earmarking an astonishing $3.7 billion to be doled out to faith-based and other organizations.

Apparently, Bush’s faith-based initiative was never intended to give religious-related groups equal footing in the federal grants process. Bush’s faith-based initiative was conceived to be the centerpiece of his administration’s domestic agenda, spearheading the final attack on the New Deal and the War on Poverty by replacing, not augmenting, federal social services.

Federal regulations now allow federal agencies to directly fund churches and other religious groups. Bush acted alone to rewrite these regulations after failing to persuade Congress to change the law.

That’s not enough, said Jim Towey, director of the White House Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives. An additional $40 billion in federal money is given out by state governments, he said, and many states do not realize that federal rules now allow them to fund these organizations. ”

With neither Congressional approval nor oversight, and without Judicial review, President Bush has successfully implemented his vision of doling out multi-billions of federal taxpayer funds annually to faith-based groups to supplement or support their social services programs.

. . .(In H.R. 1261) . . . George Bush has effectively inoculated faith-based social service providers from complying with federal employment requirements as a backdoor method of implementing a new American social order that permits discrimination on any basis in the workplace.

And that was in 2005.  We are now in 2012.  I recently was reviewing a list of “megachurches” in a certain state, most of which got to be “mega” by their innate desire for evangelism, skillful use of the internet, and at least one was running PREP, Inc. and had just begun more associated nonprofits (social service) which were already delinquent in filing.   Here’s a by-state searchable database from 2011 from

Hartford Institute for Religious Research (thanks to them for this research!)

Megachurches by State (separate smaller files)

So, I look at some distant AND recent history of some of these Christian groups, in addition to their self-portraits on the internet and as, again, presented before the Pope   Congress, or Congressional subcommittee hearings re: what to do with the pooled wealth (which WELFARE and the right to collect funds and appropriate children here or there, regardless of parentage or existing law) of this enterprise we call our country.

This is addressed to atheists, skeptics, agnostics, and any “a-religious” innocents as to what they’re facing, here… and why the family (unified, conciliation, etc.) courts are producing a helluva a lot of “ex-“converts of these religions, and refusing to support them…  

And such (women/mothers) can document what our various institutions covered up, excused, and how we were degraded in those institutions the moment we rejected domination by a resident male; unless we accepted a replacement dominator (of either gender).

Read the rest of this entry »

Written by Let's Get Honest|She Looks It Up

October 21, 2012 at 10:48 am

%d bloggers like this: