Joel Rogers – A peak into the brain of Crime inc.

Posted on April 30, 2010 by


Most of what I am going to detail in this article is about the man called “The Wizard behind the Curtain”, Joel Rogers .  Named such by Glenn Beck.


Let me just lead with a quote from one of  Joel Rogers writings.  I will be sourcing this same document often in the article.

Joel Rogers

In American politics, who controls the states controls the nation. The right understands this, and for a generation has waged an unrelenting war to take over state government in America. It has substantially succeeded, in large part because it hasn’t faced any serious progressive counter-effort.

I think already you can see this guy is a leftest zealot just from his assertion that progressives are making steady pace into the progressive agenda because the right is particularly blind to what the progressive movement really is.  By not knowing what the progressives are about yet they should be able to gain access to many new state level positions with the strategies used in “Community Organizing” efforts.  Rogers  goes on to explain about how progressives need to organize, and put forth progressive candidates with progressive agendas’ into local state offices.

Joel is building a machine that understands that leveraging policy across state lines is a way to infiltrate state offices with progressives.   Joel asserts that “of the 7,382 state legislators in America none of them think of themselves as part of, and accountable to, a broad, ambitious, technically savvy and policy-smart progressive movement”  Joel Rogers, in 6 years has changed that thought into a progressive directive.

Joel even calls todays times the era of  ‘The Big Deal devolution’ or “the dismantling of the New Deal welfare state, twentieth-century American liberalism’s greatest domestic achievement”.  He understands that the Big Deal or New Deal created this perpetual  “Welfare State”.   It is disturbing to note that progressives understand that the New Deal created and maintained that class.

He saw the states as a place rich in potential progressive fertilizer and knew he could grow liberal policy here.  His theory is that “States wield control over many ingredients of a well-run economy and polity–from human capital to transportation to campaign finance and election rules–and they have relatively porous political systems that we could in fact organize.”

Rogers stated in in his 2004 essay that he wants to demonstrate how progressive policy really works.  And how it could be TRANSFORMED over all  the states and could develop and grow with many states and an incubation for change.  A bunch of  “laboratories of democracy.”  All working on a different “progressive” style of government policy though.

Some of this policy experiment, of course, is already happening. States are generating far more progressive legislation–in areas from campaign finance to consumer protection, predatory lending to land-use control, school finance reform to inclusionary zoning, worker training and economic development, and of course civil rights–than we’ve seen from recent national administrations, Democratic and Republican alike.

Sounds like the state of California to me Mr. Rogers!  A state that is broken and frankly an embarrassment to the Union of  The Republic.  California has been, not RUN by progressives since 2004 but RUINED by them.  At all levels you have proven that your progressive policies are anything but what you would claim them to be.

The progressive agenda is in deed corruption and it they know it is on its very surface.  Rogers recognized then  what Obama fails to see now.  States can pretty much do as they need to.  The constitution tells the Feds what they cannot do.  Obama sees this but not in the same light.  Rogers goes on to explain why state level infiltration is so key.

“But are states really so important, and so ripe with possibility for progressive invention? Yes, almost self-evidently so, if we just open our eyes. Our national constitutional design enumerates limited powers for national government and assumes plenary powers of states. That means states–consistent with respect for individual rights, and respecting the supremacy of any contrary federal law–can pretty much do whatever they please. “

So what they intend to do is usurp the rights of individuals at the state level.  Rogers could see that to take over and create a “Progressive Utopia” with a ruling class and a workers class. Rogers knew he would have to destroy individual rights at the state level.  I find it interesting how they progressives know and recognize these individual rights while planning the destruction of the Republic but ignore the limited powers of national government when confronted about the abuse of power taking place on the Federal level at the expense of the states and the citizens liberties.  I am pretty sure Rogers understands the usurpation of power at all levels.

Rogers calls the gaining of state power of national power, The Devolution of the New Deal.  Rogers criticizes states for writing annual spending caps and budget law into their respective state constitutions calling it a SCAM.  Rogers even gets upset about “pushing punitive criminal justice”. Imagine that.  Why bother with laws against violent crime if the punishment is not punitive?   Anyone starting to see the picture here?  Rogers then goes on to assail the very individual rights he elluded to earlier as if those rights are in his opinion evil.  He says its the Red meat Game, “playing the red meat game (gay marriage, concealed weapons, etc.)

God grants us the right to live and protect ourselves.  He does not say what extreme is  going to far to spare our own life or that of a loved on.  I guess god thinks guns are OK.  Rogers does not.  Gay people have the SAME rights I do.  They can marry a person of the opposite sex.  So can I.  Same right.  the benefits of the gay couples can be seen as a contention to be addressed but this is not an unalienable rights issue.  Like right to bear arms or the right to marry.

Rogers goes on to try to explain that the right is missing it.  That what the progressives have to offer, for example;

….renewable-energy initiatives, living-wage and minimum-wage hikes, inclusionary housing, expansions in civil rights, alternatives to incarceration,…..

“Alternatives to incarceration”?  Here Rogers sounds like Van Jones doesn’t he?  Sure lets ship all the convicts over to General Electric and put them to work on the assembly lines.  Rogers even goes on to extol the virtues of governor,  are you ready for this… Jim McGreevey’s environmental policy.  Rogers even speaks of how McGreevey survived tax hikes in his state with his ultra progressive policies.  We see how well that is going, now don’t we?

So here is how Rogers explains what to do to take over state level politics and then use the states to control the federal policy.   They are going to have to recruit a very lagre voting base that can have within it those suitable for office.  Those with strong progressive convictions.  They must recruit from within.  He wants to put together a bunch of minds, a “collective” you might say. That can monitor successful legislation and how it was achieved.  What practices were employed to get the bills passed.   What bills failed and why they could not be brought into law.

He needed to network entities together.  Foundations with money and politicians that need help and have progressive views.  He say the power of advocacy groups, Acorn and SEIU to mention just 2.

“We need to maintain that network through regular communication and explicit coordination of efforts across different sites. We need a well-equipped “war room” to provide targeted assistance to progressive electeds in legislative or electoral fights–onsite expert help, campaign coordination, polling, opposition research, whatever it takes to win. Finally, we would need some sort of “table,” seated by interested and committed parties, to get coordination among these efforts, and connect them to progressive work aimed more directly at national politics.”

Rogers goes on about how the network has to be created what has to be done and who has to participate.  The network can be found here.  The Progressives want to do away with capitalism and run things them selves.  Rogers admits that he wants companies to no longer be competitive on price.  this is either state owned and run labor forces or it is price control to the nth degree.  Either way you read it, it is a MARXIST policy.

We want states to get on the “high road” of high-wage, low-waste, democratically accountable economic development, with firms competing on product quality, innovation and distinctness, and drawing on a wide range of productive public goods. We want to close off the “low road” alternative, in which firms compete chiefly on price, and wind up in an endless race-to-the-bottom on labor and environmental standards and the evasion of social responsibility.

No longer will the progressive even regard the constitution as a relevant document if rogers plans get the death grip on Americas liberty.  Rogers wants to destroy the Republic and states that he wants to recreate government HIS WAY.  With over sight from a global government or a Global Bank of some kind.  Perhaps even CCX?

“And we want to reinvent government our way–with a clean and more democratic process, and greater input from popular organizations outside the states.”

We know this program would be popular. We know this not only because it is in the interests of a vast majority of voters–labor, most people of color, most women, high-roading business and the many residents of inner-ring suburbs, depressed rural communities and central cities who are getting killed by present low-roading policy–but because our own organizing experience over the past decade has shown repeatedly that, given a choice, this is the one the majority makes.

Rogers knows this will require massive finance.  It will have to be aimed via foundations and dummy corporations.  This will allow donors form other outside interest to have influence on elections and putting favor on liberal progressive  policy.  As far as electoral financing goes, Progressives have always backed a single candidate.  Now Rogers will be working to finance the agenda.  Not the person.

Some even want to start the conversation about building a national political infrastructure to compete with the right. That means scaled, patient, performance-based investments, growing out of a shared and credible knowledge base of what’s working, what’s not and what’s needed.

Rogers worked on this philosophy until he had created the network to not only finance his dream but to assist in total with the creation of the Progressive states of America.

Here are some other articles penned by this leftist criminal.