Why does Mike Stenhouse want your daughter to get cervical cancer?


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387
Mike Stenhouse, preserving freedom for white, straight men.
Mike Stenhouse, preserving freedom for white, straight men.

Mike Stenhouse has a talent for finding any cause he can to make himself look important, most recently band-wagoning onto the 38 Studios debacle, and is the Gomer Pyle of the Rhode Island right wing. Whenever I see the Stenhouse name appear in the headlines, I know to lower my expectations by an average of .190 and pull out the tin foil hat.

For those of you just tuning in, Stenhouse has a long record in trafficking in racism, sexism, and just plain stupid. He is the champion of astro-turfed fake populism that promotes a rich man’s agenda, with private funders who talk a big game but are not brave enough to show their faces in public, leaving us instead to deal with this pompous has-been and a select few frothing-at-the-mouth Know-Nothings who are so revved up they should not be allowed near sharp objects, along with a great majority of good-intentioned people who sadly do not realize they have been played by a con man.

There was the time that he claimed HUD was Stalinism, a lunatic bit that was really about making sure those brown people from Spanish are not allowed to afford decent living conditions. Or the time he said Rhode Island had outlawed light bulbs, which really was about him denying climate change. In moments of desperation when I loose hope, I have to simply remind myself that Mike Stenhouse exists and moronic statements fall from his mouth like sand in an hourglass.

Now we have Mike out on the trail again, promoting a notion that is as stupefying as it is dangerous. Apparently Mr. Swing-and-a-Miss is revving up parents by trying to encourage them to not get the HPV vaccination for their kids, insisting that inoculation against cancer-causing genital warts will bring about all sorts of huge side effects and infringes on religious/personal autonomy. Of course, when you ask Mr. Stenhouse about that ultimate issue of medical freedom, abortion, he has no problem signing his name to petitions calling for the defunding of Planned Parenthood. Apparently Mike wants government so small it can fit inside a woman’s tumor-encrusted cervix. That also would mean that someone affiliated with his whacked-out agenda is getting some action, but I digress.

Any baseball manager would avoid these stats like herpes!
Any baseball manager would avoid these stats like herpes!

Is there something wrong with the HPV vaccine? The CDC says 8 percent or fewer people who are vaccinated with Gardasil experience side effects. By contrast, the American Cancer Society says that 4,100 women will die from cervical cancer in 2015 out of the estimated 12,900 diagnosed with it. Likewise, HPV is one of the most common-occuring STIs known to medicine. Not being a woman, I am personally unclear about how it would feel to have tumors growing on that particular part of my anatomy, but I highly doubt it is like walking in a quiet green meadow (a space akin perhaps to outfield when Mr. Stenhouse takes the plate).

The anti-vaccine crowd has existed for some time now on the fringes of the internet, populated by hoaxers, hucksters, and a Kennedy. Yes, they are the gift that just keeps on giving, for it was that doofus Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. that began the whole idiocy about children’s booster shots causing autism with an over-wrought and under-thought article for Rolling Stone (they don’t, and the original doctor that proposed that theory was later stripped of his medical license in the UK). How a washed-up and perpetually silly GOP prima donna ended up in the same clique as the one of the Cape Cod Commissars is anyone’s guess, but it becomes obvious as the days go by that Kennedy and Stenhouse need the attention or they might be forced to do the unthinkable and get real jobs.

The fact I even have to write about this topic is probably leaving my editor befuddled. I can hear Bob Plain now, “what in the name of good gravy do RIFuture readers care about this fool?” I keep looking at the MOVE TO TRASH button longingly as I write this. But here’s the rub: Stenhouse has people falling for this nonsense! There is a group of parents who are actually saying NO to the vaccine just as the school year is beginning and those hormone-addled teens at risk for infection begin to mix and mingle in the hallowed halls of education. And while I do think that Tea Partiers have been a tumor on the body politic, I certainly would not wish cervical cancer on their daughters. And I am likewise all in favor of religious liberty, I think it’s totally wrong that France forbids Muslim women from wearing the hijab. But this is not an issue of religious liberty, it is a con.

I have listened to Stenhouse give an interview on B101, a veritable ode to obnoxious self-importance and false panic that is going to result in kids being put at risk for a chronic illness that cannot be cured. He begins with a lot of obfuscation and nonsense about the issue being ‘very complicated’ and that the vaccine causes more trouble than genital warts, both of which are demonstrably untrue. “Why should Rhode Island be just the second state in the nation to mandate this and why should we have been the only one to have done it by executive fiat?Batten down the hatches, Gina Raimondo’s apparatchiks arrive at midnight! The Block Island Gulag nears completion as we speak! We get conspiracy theories about the CDC, who historically are too underfunded to do much of anything, the argument that an STI has nothing to do with sexually-active teens, and even a segue into teacher union bashing and advocacy for home schooling.

Mike wanders way into right field when he compares poor Sen. Josh Miller, who is in fact Jewish, to a Nazi, a not-so-subliminal message that brings to mind Mr. Burns ordering “Smithers, release the hounds“. I knew B101 broadcast the golden oldies, but I had no idea they also gave airtime to 1950’s-era John Birch Society soap operas. Next thing you know, Stenhouse will be rambling on incoherently about fluoride in the water supply and how Keynesian economics are a Commie plot while TC and Kristen get a traffic report. Why no one is going after the radio station’s broadcasting license after spreading false information about a communicable illness to the public and promoting violence toward an elected official is itself a small scandal.

The HPV virus is not like pubic lice or gonorrhea, it lasts for the rest of your life and can result in cancer. If a woman infected with the virus goes into labor and delivers a baby through a cervix that has HPV warts on it, the baby can be blinded. If the newborn comes into contact with the warts in utero, they can risk of blood infection and suffocation caused by warts forming in the air passage. You want the freedom to inflict this on infants? Stay classy, Stenhouse.

In all likelihood, Mike has discovered the cause of vaccines after making a fool of himself protesting the Affordable Care Act. And into the mix he has pulled people who would otherwise vomit if they knew his wretched agenda, folks who are also going completely nuts for Bernie Sanders and were counter-protesting the anti-choice rally a few weeks ago my colleague Steve Ahlquist covered. This thing has grown some serious legs and is making people who usually would make sane decisions team up with the perfect example of the village idiot.

So I am not writing this as a report on Mike Stenhouse as much as a public safety bulletin.

Stenhouse wants more of this.
Stenhouse wants more of this. Isn’t cancer fun?

The young women of this generation are being given the opportunity to once and for all be nearly rid of the pain caused by cervical cancer. The underlying logic of the opposition to Gardasil is not liberty, it boils down to the usual nonsense about pre-marital sex and whether women should have control over their own bodies. Even if you are a parent who is trying to encourage chastity until marriage, you should get your daughter vaccinated, one cannot be certain that a rapist wears a condom. And considering that 1 in 4 women in college experience some form of sexual assault before graduation, this is a real issue to take into consideration, not false-flag alarmist drivel. As for qualms about personal autonomy and government over-reach, I agree that those things exist, but not in this instance. I am all in favor of a public discussion of reducing the Pentagon budget and closing eight or nine hundred of the foreign bases that make up our tottering imperial footprint, especially considering that we could clothe and feed the homeless while giving free college tuition to everyone if we spent our money on sensible things. But mandatory mass-innoculation against potentially fatal illnesses is part and parcel of a responsible social safety net. The people who say otherwise are those who need the wider population sick and distracted so they cannot properly participate in our democracy and raise these real concerns. Thankfully, Rhode Island has a high percentage of inoculations caused by the fact that, lucky for us, Stenhouse’s brand of idiocy is not as contagious as HPV. We can be proud of that fact and should encourage that trend to continue.

Stenhouse may have repackaged this to sound like ‘freedom’, but cervical cancer is not liberating. It is a painful, sad illness that takes too many women at too young an age. No woman deserves a potentially lethal illness because they have sex outside of marriage. If Mike Stenhouse wants genital warts, more power to him, I will pay good money to see that snuff film. I will even volunteer the labor to film and edit it for free, putting my Film Studies BA to a good public use. But he has no right to insist others, particularly minor children, be made susceptible simply because he needs to score a few political points. So talk to your friends, share this story with vaccine opponents, encourage young women to get vaccinated, and let’s make Stenhouse strike out here as badly as he did in the big leagues.

EDITORIAL NOTE: Following the publication of this story, some readers have come forward and argued that the human papilloma virus clears up. This is a true statement, genital warts can clear up on their own. However, as with every other virus known to man, once it is in your body, it does not go away. If one’s immunity were to weaken, it could result in a recurrence of warts. It also does not serve as a guarantee that the virus will not cause cancer at a later date. The CDC recommends everyone get vaccinated to avoid this disease.

kaGh5_patreon_name_and_message

Tobin, Stenhouse backpeddle on ‘thorny cultural issues’


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Is Bishop Tobin now doing the same thing he accused Gina Raimondo of?

TobinBishopThomasBishop Tobin, despite a lengthy career of advocating against abortion and marriage equality, has said that in the event of a constitutional convention being held in Rhode Island, he didn’t “think it would or should deal with cultural/moral/religious issues. These particular, discrete issues are better dealt with in the normal legislative process.”

The Bishop’s statement stands in stark contrast to his earlier statements regarding marriage equality, which he said should be placed on the ballot for a popular vote, “We will continue to oppose efforts to redefine the institution of marriage in Rhode Island… The citizens of Rhode Island have a right to vote on this crucial issue.’’

One wonders if Bishop Tobin’s backing off on the issue of abortion, as pertains to a ConCon, represents “an inexcusable lack of moral courage” and an abandonment of “teaching of the Church on the dignity of human life for the sake of self-serving political gain” as he recently said of Gina Raimondo when she announced her position on abortion.

Why would Tobin, so dedicated to changing the laws regarding abortion (and marriage equality) give up a potentially powerful tool that might help him accomplish his task? Does Tobin intend to go so far as to oppose any potential resolutions passed by a ConCon that sought to deal with “cultural/moral/religious” issues in a way the church favors? Can you imagine the Bishop taking a stand against an amendment limiting reproductive of LGBTQ rights if one were to make it through the ConCon?

I can’t.

017frontMeanwhile, Mike Stenhouse, of the Rhode Island Center for Freedom and Prosperity, a group devoted to crank economics, has pledged to not “support any amendment in a convention that would infringe on individual rights,” despite a line in the Center’s own report that said a ConCon could, “Resolve some thorny cultural issues – one way or another – through the mechanism that most clearly represents the will of the people.” (page six)

Stenhouse’s attack on Jim Vincent of the NAACP and Steve Brown of the ACLU for pointing out the actual words found in the Center’s report rings false. Stenhouse maintains that, “Any honest reading of this section clearly shows that the Center was not taking a position on those topics. Nor is the Center aware that any pro convention organization has publicly suggested that social or cultural issues should be a convention topic.”

So what does “resolve thorny cultural issues” mean to Stenhouse? It’s hard to know, but Stenhouse defender Justin Katz, in a piece entitled, If not on the Ballot, Where? attacks Vincent and defends the Center’s statement by saying, “Look, cultural issues have to be resolved.” In other words, thorny cultural issues are up for discussion in a ConCon, no matter what Stenhouse says.

Maybe the Center should get its messaging straight.

Whereas Tobin serves the Catholic God, Stenhouse serves the God of the Free Market, whose invisible hand makes the rich richer by picking the pockets of the poor. Stenhouse pledges not to support any amendments that might infringe on individual rights, but the term “individual rights” does not equate to civil rights or human rights. The term “individual rights” is much narrower than that.

Individual rights are not group rights. Individual rights are not environmental rights. Under this narrow conception of rights, corporations are individuals, unions are not. The concept of individual rights is often advanced as a way of avoiding the obligations our rights impose on us. Under this view, everybody is responsible for their own rights, not the rights of others.

Human rights, on the other hand, are understood to be “interrelated, interdependent and indivisible” and to apply to “individuals or groups.”  Stenhouse and the center are cautious to avoid terms like human rights and civil rights because these terms carry a moral, ethical and historical weight that is bigger and more expansive than the narrow limits the narcissistic, Objectivist term “individual rights” allow for.

Human rights are both rights and obligations. When we talk in terms of human rights, we call on the power of states to enforce and enhance those rights. Stenhouse and the Center prefer a world of limited government that is unconcerned with human rights and is concerned only with the narrow limits of individual rights. Civil rights legislation that forces bigoted shopkeepers to serve hated minorities are not allowed under this formulation.

Finally, it’s easy for Bishop Tobin, Mike Stenhouse and the members of Renew RI to pinky swear that they will not go after what they call “thorny cultural issues” because they don’t control all the forces in and out of Rhode Island that may involve themselves in the process. Further, their promise to not involve themselves in such issues are limited and conditional.

So it all comes down to this: Do you trust them?

What does GoLocal’s purported Con-Con poll really show?


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

DSC_5289GoLocal ran a story claiming that a Center for Freedom and Prosperity poll indicates that Rhode Islander’s strongly favor holding a Constitutional Convention. But the poll, as released, doesn’t show that at all. What the poll demonstrates is that 70% of likely Rhode Island voters think “things” are on the “wrong track” in the state, that 59% think the economy is the most important problem we are facing, that 77% believe that our political leadership deals with problems inadequately, and 79% believe that state government is more geared to “special interest groups.”

How is this news?

These results are hardly surprising given the state of the economy and government. Based on these poll results, Center CEO Mike Stenhouse urges voters to approve a Con-Con to address these issues, but the poll does not demonstrate that voters favor a con-con as a remedy. In fact, it seems that the results of the poll that might deal with a con-con, Q.8-Q.18, have been withheld from the public. You can view the poll here, and see plainly that the questions jump from Q.7 to Q.19.

In other words, the information released is only what the Center wants you to see, not a real picture of likely voter attitudes.

Some results from Q.16 were released by the Center. These are statements from participants on why they favor holding a Con-Con, but question 15, which perhaps asks participants if they favor a Con-Con, is not included. There are 96 statements in support of a Con-Con listed, out of 516 participants interviewed and weighted for this poll. If this is everyone in favor of a Con-Con, that’s less than 20% support. Even if this is only half of the support the poll found, we’re still left with less than 40% favoring a Con-Con.

Had the poll indicated a majority of likely Rhode Island voters were in favor of a Con-Con, the Center would certainly have included this in the poll results they released. In the absence of the full poll results, we can only assume that the Center did not get the results they were looking for, and that GoLocal made a huge mistake in mischaracterizing the results.

Based on the information released by the Center so far, it’s obvious that Rhode Island voters see the Con-Con for what it is, a chance for special interests like the Center for Freedom and Prosperity to alter the Rhode Island State Constitution in favor of the corporate interests they front for.

Grover Norquist doesn’t actually know much about a ConCon


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

DSC_5283As I listened to Grover Norquist address the crowd of about 80 people at the swanky and exclusive Squantum Association in East Providence on Thursday afternoon, I couldn’t help but wonder if the slick conservative operative knew what he was talking about.

For instance, Norquist attempted to minimize the danger to civil rights that a con-con represents by touting the good government reforms that might spring from such a venture, saying, “I think you will find, as we have in other states…”

What other states is Norquist talking about? There hasn’t been a con-con in any state in this country in 30 years, and the last one was held here in Rhode Island. In that last con-con, there were several constitutional changes suggested (and passed) that directly impacted civil rights. So what is Norquist talking about, when he mentions “other states”?

“Every day that the legislature meets, they form a constitutional convention,” said Norquist, although what that statement could possibly mean is difficult to figure out. And why he thinks this would make Rhode Islanders want to have a con-con is even more difficult to ascertain.

DSC_5289Norquist says that during the process of a con-con, “one or two amendments might become intriguing and important” failing to note that the last time a con-con was held, 22 amendments were bundled into 14 ballot questions. These amendments were all over the place in terms of civil rights restrictions for minorities and women. There is a big difference between two amendments and 22.

At another point in his 13 minute talk Norquist claims, without offering one bit of proof, that a constitutional convention is a “more open process” than the General Assembly. I know of no study that indicates this to be in any way true or provable.

Obviously, Grover Norquist thinks that a con-con is a good idea, he made a special trip to Rhode Island while visiting his parents in Western Massachusetts to make his case on behalf of Mike Stenhouse, Ken Block and the Center for Freedom and Prosperity. But the sense I got from Norquist’s speech isn’t that he supports the con-con out of a love for the power of democracy or a yearning to put the power of government into the hands of average people.

What Norquist and the rest of the con-con supporters seem to be looking for is access to the document that sets the rules for how government functions in our society. The normal avenues of power are closed to Norquist and Stenhouse: Voters routinely reject candidates, such as Ken Block (who was also a speaker at this event) because they rightly sense that these candidates do not represent the interests of the public. Meanwhile, the General Assembly has been cool to the Center for Freedom and Prosperity’s radical ideas, such as eliminating the sales tax without finding a revenue stream to replace it.

But if Stenhouse and his coalition can crack open the constitution and take to it with scissors and markers, they can possibly create the kind of government that responds better to the crank economic theories his center espouses. These won’t be temporary changes to the constitution either. As Norquist says, a con-con “elevates the debate from who win and who lose this week to ‘what are the rules for the next hundred years.’”

Stenhouse, Norquist and Block repeatedly point out that fears of attacks on civil rights are overblown, and in one sense they are right because rich white men almost never face serious challenges to their civil rights.

Just the prospect of a constitutional convention in Rhode Island has outside money and special interests sharpening their knives in anticipation. Grover Norquist and his extreme right-wing  ideology are just the tip of the spear.

Government FOR the People


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

mark_binder2Last week I wrote an op-ed in response to Mike Stenhouse’s op-ed Left won’t defend failed RI Policies lambasting Tom Sgouros and Sam Bell .

My first draft went to the Providence Journal, but the conversation with the editor didn’t go well for a variety of reasons.

Next I sent it to GoLocalProv with the intention of it being the first of a series of weekly columns. I made the mistake of sending an invoice to GoLocal, and evidently the idea of paying for content was so far out of the framework, that they immediately removed the article.

I’m not saying this is my best piece of work. But it does reflect my thinking these days.

I believe that people are more important than corporations, that government’s job isn’t to prop-up business interests and who also think that the system of our government needs repair. Enjoy the article. Too bad you can’t read the slew of negative comments that popped up on GoLocal.
– Mark Binder

Government FOR the People

Enough about Left versus Right and Liberal or Progressive versus Conservative. Mike Stenhouse is a shill for the wealthy, who thinks that his ideas and opinion should be treated as gospel.

I’m not sure if I’m a leftist, a liberal, or a progressive. I know there’s waste in government: just look how much education funding has been funneled into the testing industry and how many dollars enable cars rather than RIPTA.

Stenhouse claims that the left won’t defend failed RI policies, damned right. Because the State government’s policies aren’t “left” policies, they’re just lame. Our State is run by a pair of appointed “leaders”, who bully our elected legislators, who are funded and buffaloed by corporate lobbiests and are too poorly paid to fight for the interests of citizens. At the same time, Stenhouse and his band of so-called experts spout nonsense, ignore facts and “chuckle” when faced with inconvenient truths.

Let’s lay it out. There is a myth created by followers of Reagan and Rove that cutting taxes will create jobs. It’s bull. We know because we’ve tried it. We’ve seen corporations outsource manufacturing and cut retail price by lowering wages, driving out small businesses, and putting the cost of underpaid employee health care on taxpayers. Then they wonder why nobody’s trained for a “job.”

Here’s what happens when you cut taxes. You also have to cut services and funding for transportation and funding for education. You get a race to the bottom, with municipalities and states trying to “attract” businesses that pit government against government and move on when the next best deal comes. (Hello New London.)

Our government stinks at “job creation.” (Hello 38 Studios.) In the old days, when a politician was running for election, he (not she) created jobs to get votes. This is effective politically, but produces bloat and inefficiency. The job of government is to protect the people and to organize projects that benefit the people.

Now, though, billionaires and multinational corporations fund non-profits and hire consultants to sway the rhetoric. Remember how staunchly George W. Bush denied climate change? (Hello, Matunuck.)

But enough about “them.” Let’s talk about what we, the people, really want.

We want more money for public education so that we can hire more teachers, because the single most important factor in improving learning is the ratio of students to teachers. At the same time, we want to create a testing policy that helps teachers assess students, not one that puts fear in the heart of educators and learners.

We want more money for public and alternative transportations. Europe and Japan had high taxes on petrol for years while we laughed and drove. Now they’ve got rail systems and lead in energy efficiency. We’ve made little progress since the so-called “energy crisis” of the 1970s.

We want corporations to pay to keep our environment clean, not sweep regulation aside to make it easier for them to pollute.

We want universal healthcare, not a bloated compromise designed to keep insurance corporations and non-profit boards fat and healthy.

We want our government to raise taxes so we can stop the borrowing that funnels citizens’ money to investors who manipulate bond ratings to get the best deals.

Don’t cut taxes on the arts and pretend that everybody’s going to run out and buy a painting. This is a benefit for the wealthy. And then, because the arts aren’t generating revenue, don’t push for a so-called bond issue that’s going to be run by the renamed EDC. If government believes that arts generate revenue, increase funding for the arts!

Don’t even consider the pathetic pleas from real estate interests (hello Superman building) to borrow money to bail them out. And face the truth that rebuilding in a flood zone is building on sand.

We want the wealthy to pay more, exactly because their fair share isn’t the same as the poor’s fair share.

And we want the opposition to stop ignoring facts, figures and realities.

My company published Tom Sgouros’s most recent book, “Checking the Banks” because it explains in simple terms how banks and investments firms scam governments. One of the tactics of Stenhouse and his lot is to ignore the facts and restate dogma.

When Tom debated Stenhouse’s out-of-state expert, he realized that the man knew nothing of the actual history, facts and policies of Rhode Island. Tom didn’t say that those failures were good things. Checking the Banks> suggests that rather than borrowing, our taxpayers would do better if Rhode Island created its own internal bank. But the chuckleheads laughed, and then swiped some of the copies of the book that Tom had for sale.

That’s exactly the challenge that honorable human beings face. Wealthy people aren’t satisfied with what they have. They want to us begging for scraps. They blame us for laziness and waste and then steal even more from those of us who are trying to make a living.

Mike Stenhouse, Thomas Jefferson and a ‘functioning democracy’


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

TJ“A properly functioning democracy depends on an informed electorate,” said Thomas Jefferson.

Well, at least that’s what Mike Stenhouse of the RI Center for Freedom & Prosperity tells us. Problem is, that doesn’t sound at all like Jefferson, and I can’t find any reference with a primary source attributed to that quote.* If Rhody’s Littlest Think Tank can’t get a simple quote straight, what’s that say about the level of fact checking that goes on, outside of “I found it on the Internets?”

So what’s got Stenhouse pulling spurious quotations from the Internet anyway? At issue are proposed IRS regulations that might prevent “research organizations,” such as his own, from producing partisan hit pieces or at least prevent them from continuing to pretend these reports are not political activity, distributed under the guise of educating the public. Here’s how Stenhouse describes it:

The Freedom Index is intended as a tool to educate the people of Rhode Island about the activities of their government. However, under many circumstances, the proposed IRS regulations would redefine the publishing of legislator names on any kind of scorecard — such as our Freedom Index — as “political activity.”

Stenhouse frames this as an issue of free speech. But what’s at issue is not his ability to say whatever he likes but rather his organization’s ability to avoiding paying taxes while doing so. And what better way to make that point than to wrap one’s opinions in the “words” of Jefferson? Of course, Jefferson did believe in the importance of an informed electorate and often wrote about the issue. Here’s how Jefferson put it, albeit less concisely:

Whereas it appeareth that however certain forms of government are better calculated than others to protect individuals in the free exercise of their natural rights, and are at the same time themselves better guarded against degeneracy, yet experience hath shewn, that even under the best forms, those entrusted with power have, in time, and by slow operations, perverted it into tyranny; and it is believed that the most effectual means of preventing this would be, to illuminate, as far as practicable, the minds of the people at large, and more especially to give them knowledge of those facts, which history exhibiteth, that, possessed thereby of the experience of other ages and countries, they may be enabled to know ambition under all its shapes, and prompt to exert their natural powers to defeat its purposes.

So what did Jefferson mean by that? He certainly wasn’t envisioning Republican front-groups masquerading as 501(c)(3)s. What Jefferson was actually proposing was the creation of public schools, one of his lifelong passions.

I think by far the most important bill in our whole code is that for the diffusion of knowledge among the people. No other sure foundation can be devised, for the preservation of freedom and happiness…Preach, my dear Sir, a crusade against ignorance; establish & improve the law for educating the common people. Let our countrymen know that the people alone can protect us against these evils [tyranny, oppression, etc.] and that the tax which will be paid for this purpose is not more than the thousandth part of what will be paid to kings, priests and nobles who will rise up among us if we leave the people in ignorance.
1786 August 13. (to George Wythe)

That’s right, Jefferson was in a sense the Founding Father of the public school system and actually proposed increasing taxes to pay for their creation and support, exactly the kind of activity that would have damaged his ranking as a state legislator in this so-called “Freedom Index.” Wahoowa!

 

————————————————–

* I searched as best I could for the source of that quote, but I only found it in blog posts and always without mention of the original source. Also sometimes as “the cornerstone of democracy rests on the foundation of an educated electorate” or as “an educated citizenry is a vital requisite for our survival as a free people.” Monticello lists that as a spurious quotation:

http://www.monticello.org/site/jefferson/educated-citizenry-vital-requisite-our-survival-free-people-quotation

Here is the closest quote (mentioned by Monticello’s reference librarian). Stenhouse probably should have used this one:

If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be. The functionaries of every government have propensities to command at will the liberty and property of their constituents. There is no safe deposit for these but with the people themselves; nor can they be safe with them without information.

As I mentioned, the “problem” with that is that Jefferson was writing about public schools. The sentence before that reads (uh, oh!):

If the legislature would add to that a perpetual tax of a cent a head on the population of the State, it would set agoing at once, and forever maintain, a system of primary or ward schools, and an university where might be taught, in its highest degree, every branch of science useful in our time and country; and it would rescue us from the tax of toryism, fanaticism, and indifferentism to their own State, which we now send our youth to bring from those of New England.

I also searched…

Ex-Red Sox Are Bad For Rhode Island Business


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Here’s an economic analysis that is both true and misleading at the same time: former Boston Red Sox players are bad for non-baseball related business in Rhode Island. It’s true, I’ve analyzed it and the facts prove it.

The most famous example is Big Schill’s failed foray into video games. But who remembers the equally-short lived Roger Clemens Wood-Roasted Chicken on Bald Hill Road in Warwick? Probably only me and Liam Tierney, Dave Shaw and Brian Quattrucci. We waited in a line, consisting only of us, to be the Rocket’s first-ever fast food customers; He was supposed to be there but, as was so often the case in the early 90’s, he just didn’t show up…

Despite the preponderance of evidence, ex-Red Sox Mike Stenhouse, journeyman outfielder and career .190 hitter, thinks Rhode Island should trust his abilities as an economist. His latest analysis, in today’s ProJo, concludes that slashing almost a $1 billion in revenue would be good for the state’s struggling economy. It’s true, he’s analyzed it and the facts prove it.

Of course, Stenhouse’s pseudo-study of sales tax policy is no more valid than my examination of former Red Sox players in Rhode Island. I could have included baseball-related businesses in my study and Sam Horn’s successful hitting school in North Kingstown would have bumped the average up to .333 – that’s MVP-type numbers. And if one includes all ex-Red Sox employees, well then Saul Kaplan would make it a coin-toss – a 50 percent swing, just by crunching the numbers differently!

This is the kind of voodoo economics that Stenhouse’s conservative policy shop, the Center for Freedom and Prosperity, specializes in. It purports to offer economic analysis but it’s far more accurate to call it far right wing propaganda, specifically trafficking in policy that serves to shrink the size of government. (By the way, this is not a scoop – everyone involved in state politics knows this and any contrived outrage from the right is just all part of the kabuki theater.)

But here’s what I think is the really important part: traditional mainstream media doesn’t really have a lot of tools to present this truism to its audience, and the tool that does exist is virtually non-existent in Rhode Island. For a state that is overwhelmingly liberal, the vast majority of mainstream media op/ed voices are conservative. The Journal editorial page is highly unlikely to run a reasonable counter-opinion to this piece.

Policy shops like Stenhouse’s are designed to look like think tanks specifically so that they will be misinterpreted as such by the mainstream media. And locally it works like a charm: The Providence Journal will always label everything Ocean State Action does as being labor-backed because they are transparent about their funding, while Stenhouse will never be labeled a corporate pawn because he isn’t transparent.

This is great politics for fiscal conservatives. I’d say Stenhouse’s Center for Freedom and Prosperity has been really successful at keeping the conversation away from reasonable tax increases on the rich and focused instead on the unreasonable elimination of the sales tax.

But don’t blame Stenhouse. He’s just doing what he went into business to do: use pseudo-economics to rally support for right wing policy. Blame the ProJo op/ed page editors. They are the ones not doing their jobs, which is to inform and educate Rhode Islanders about their community. I’m not saying the newspaper of record ought to join RI Future on the far left, but it ought to be fair and balanced enough to host the occasional counter-balance to the conservative dogma it ascribes to.

In the meantime, I’m going to see if Bill Lee wants to leave his farm in Craftbury, Vermont start a think tank here in Rhode Island…