Second Vermont Republic Advisory Board Member Endorses Violence Against The Government Officials

Not our government at this point - yet.

Second Vermont Republic advisory board member and assistant professor of political science, State University of New York, Buffalo, as well as founder of the floundering New Hampshire Free State Project, Jason Sorens, wrote in a piece he entitled Why Isn't Violence The Answer?:

"U.S. government officials continue to lecture the Egyptian demonstrators on how to go about their business."

"(President Obama) said he had told Mr Mubarak to respect the rights of the Egyptian people and refrain from using violence against peaceful protesters – but he said the protesters also had a responsibility to express themselves peacefully."

"But why?"

"...Surely many of us of feeling around the world recognize that if the protestors find it prudential or useful at some point to storm the presidential palace and dispense street justice to Mubarak and his minions, there is no conceivable ethical reason for them to shrink from the task. Isn’t it on one of our state flags?"

"Sic semper tyrannis."
Why Isn’t Violence the Answer?
January 28, 2011 by Jason Sorens

Whew! Where to start on this one? Probably right there at the end of his piece. While it's true that Sic Semper Tyrannis is on the Commonwealth of Virginia flag, he wasn't writing about flag heraldry, he was writing about "dispen(ing) street justice to Mubarak."

The last time I heard of the words Sic Semper Tyrannis being used
while dispensing "justice" was when an ardent secessionist, John Wilkes Booth, had leapt to the Ford Theatre stage and shouted them at the audience after having just shot President Abraham Lincoln in the back of the head.

Lincoln hatred has a long and deep connection with the Vermont seceshers. Sorens fellow SVR advisory board member is Thomas J. DiLorenzo, a secesher scholar bullshitter with past ties to League of the South's Institute for the Study of Southern Culture and History, and who has worked for Big Tobacco. DiLorenzo, in addition to his disdain for the bedrock of civil rights in America, the 14th Amendment, as well as organized labor, has made a business of pedaling Lincoln hatred for the secesher community.

Similarly, "Vermont Commons" publisher, Rob Williams, has repeatedly echoed the Lincoln hatred of these extremists. Eighteen months ago, in a Slate.com piece Williams was quoted as saying "Abraham Lincoln did a number on us". Since the seceshers Lincoln opposed were the ones who sought to preserve slavery by seceeding, one needs to ask just who Williams' "us" is?

Whatever the circumstances, assassinations and dispensing street justice are illegal acts. This isn't the first time that someone associated with the Vermont secession movement has advocated for or solicited lawbreaking. As recently as this past fall (12.09.10 - 5:21 AM), Vermont secesher and a leader of the Free Vermont group of misfits, Gary Flomenhoft, put out a call for "someone to... hack their websites," a direct violation of Vermont law. Such a solicitation is a felony.

The Free Vermont group, who Thomas Naylor calls his "twenty internet cowboys," have advocated for confiscation of private property, population caps, income and asset caps, making certain acts by legislators capital offenses; the complete list is quite long and equally shocking.

One has to wonder how this squares with Naylor's claim
to be leading a "Genteel Revolution." His repetitive, muddled, demagogic rants about Vermonters who fall short of his secesher ideal (meaning: Everyone in Vermont not named Thomas H. Naylor); his latching onto imagery of a self-proclaimed murderer (which Naylor and his candidate, Dennis Steele, dumped one day after it was revealed on this blog); his paranoid delusions about conspiracies aimed at his "revolution," also another quite long and equally shocking list that has been subject of many posts on this blog. Oddly, an earlier "genteel evolution," so-named nearly 70 years ago by Time magazine, was that of Fulgencio Batista, who was himself overthown in part by the man whose image Naylor co-opted onto the flag that he co-opted from the Vermont National Guard.

In one of Naylor's most recent rants, The Politics of Violence in America, Naylor wrote:

"Since violence is inextricably linked to the Empire, there may be no escape from violence in America... "

Nor, it would seem, will violence or the criminal mindset be escaped in the brave new world of the Second Vermont Republic - they'll just apply it more hubristically.

Yeah, I know, confusing rationales and coincidences from the mind, ravings and actions of the SVR baas, Thomas H. Naylor and his minions.

Will Naylor, Williams, Flomenhoft and the rest of the nutters that comprise the Free Vermont "movement" renounce their advisor Jason Sorens' call for violence?

The more I learn of and hear from these secesher clowns, the more concerned I grow for my fellow Vermonters should these people ever get close to the levers of power.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
For the archive of the Free Vermont Framework listserv, click here.

The Second Vermont Republic: A Vermont Fairy Tale

The recent Vemont election has finally exposed the Second Vermont Republic polls commissioned by Thomas Naylor to be the misleading and deceitful constructs that I've always said they were. (see Vermont Secession Polls section in the column to the right)

Naylor's handpicked candidate for Vermont governor, Connecticut native Dennis Steele, finished the race at what can only be described as a very distant and abysmal third place. Some of the independents who ran speak of this third place showing in an unreal way, as though the three "top" vote getters were all within a few votes of each other. Of the 241,605 votes cast, nearly 240,000 supported Dennis Steele's opponents. Steele has the support of approximately 0.79% of Vermonters who voted.

Given that Naylor has been telling the out of state press and anyone else who'd listen that a UVM poll (that he rarely tells people that he'd written and commissioned) showed that 13% of Vermont voters supported the notion of secession, something must have gone terribly, terribly wrong over the past 10 months for the tiny band that comprised the Steele campaign. Indeed, Naylor has "extrapolated" that his polls indicated somewhere around 60,000 of Vermont's voters support secession. Yet, now that the counting is finally done, Naylor's "extrapolated" projection of the support in Vermont for his and Steele's "imaginings" for secession has fallen short by more than 58,000 votes.

In Charlotte, VT, the town where Thomas Naylor retired to after spending most of his life in the South, and where people generally roll their eyes at the mere mention of Naylor's ambition for Vermont, only 10 people voted for Steele. That's 0.48% of the 2041 votes cast in Charlotte. In Waitsfield, home to "Vermont Commons" publisher and über propagandist for the SVR and Free Vermont crowd, Rob Williams, Steele got 9 votes. Perhaps worst of all, Steele got only 5 votes in his present hometown of Kirby, VT.

So, what went wrong?

Well, nothing really. You see, the so-called "Vermont secessionist movement," said to be making great strides in moving the secessionist ball forward in the United States, has always been an elaborately constructed hoax. Despite "secession activist Thomas Naylor('s)... left-leaning Second Vermont Republic movement" having been described as successful in generating popular support for Vermont's independence, it just ain't so. Steele's vote total is on a par to that of other bizarro fringe candidates that appear from time to time in Vermont.

A part of the structure of the hoax of a Vermont independence movement has been, in addition to the phony poll results, an academic veneer carefully applied during the past 7 years by people such as Naylor, "Professor" Williams, Ian Baldwin, Kirkpatrick Sale, Donald Livingston, Thomas DiLorenzo, Jason Sorens, and a host of other scholarly bullshitters scattered mostly in the South. These guys grind out papers and books at a remarkable pace for something without much success or substance - secession.

Another part of that hoax has been the writers who "corroborate" the overstatement that a movement is afoot and growing. Often these supposedly objective chroniclers of this story repeat unquestioningly the "facts" put forth by the leaders of secession without presenting other contradictory facts that they are aware of, including those that directly undermine the figment of a movement to address the deficiencies of difficult times - secessionism.

No one would dispute that these are difficult times but, really, when in the experience of humankind haven't the times been difficult? Hasn't there also always been a human need to consider something that might be possible to ease or offer a pleasing alternative to the difficulties? (And no, I'm not about to launch into an equation of secession to that other great opiate, religion.)

One such instance of an easier to think of alternative to the hardships of the time occurred in England during the Great War in 1917. It was embraced by theosophists who looked for evidence of the potential for evolutionary development of man. It had to do with the supposed existence of fairies. And it was a hoax.

In order to perpetrate a fraud, a hoax or a con, you need only the con and those who want so badly to believe in an easy path to something better.

Naylor and company have been industriously working at making their secession plan appealing to whoever, and in whatever manner it takes, so as to sell the gullible on their idea. Naylor's called his plan a Genteel Revolution and has come up with all sorts of cute catch phrases to suggest that nothing could be simpler than to opt out of what he calls "the Empire." Along the way he's mangled quotes attributed to early Vermonters, issued a form of currency that he calls a token, purloined the regimental flag of the Vermont National Guard, and has lashed out at virtually every Vermonter and local institution since we have not slavishly endorsed his enthusiasms as has his "small community of secessionists". I'm surprised that they haven't thought yet to conjure up a Vermont Secession fairy for there movement.

The truth is that the Vermont secession movement, like the Cottingley fairies, is simply a hoax. Naylor at first claimed to have 125 members in SVR and then discontinued membership claims. Based on a variety of sources, a more modest figure of somewhere between 20 to 25 people constitute the hardcore center of "membership" to the Free Vermont independence group. Before launching their campaign late last year, a party registration was discouraged. Obviously that was so the true dearth of secessionists would not be revealed. Even at the January 15 announcement this year of their campaigns for statewide and General Assembly offices, they only gathered the usual 20 or so deadender sesechers that always show up for Naylor's dog and pony shows.

"I've been writing about Vermont independence for nearly ten years... and, more often than not, it was for an audience of one."- Thomas Naylor (starts at 3:07)

Vermont has had a history of oddball candidacies, some more successful than others. Just six years ago Peter Stevenson ran for Lt. Governor on the Liberty Union party ticket and received nearly 1400 more votes (3291) than Steele and a higher percentage of the vote total, 1.08%.

"Umm, I, ahh, it would be my privilege to work as Vermont's next Lt. Governor. Umm, I'm a very loyal person. I'm a hard worker and I would do a lot for the people of the state of Vermont. They say a good friend would help you move. A really good friend would help you move a body. And my message to the people of the state of Vermont is, let me know if I need to bring a shovel. Thank You."- Peter Stevenson (starts at 3:33)

Fact is, fringe candidate Stevenson is more real, as well as a more successful candidate, than the fairy tale that there is a growing Vermont secession movement.

Just in case there is any doubt about the unhinged from reality quality that infects the Vermont secesher community, here's their latest InterTubes communiqué from the "provisional capital of Free Vermont," a dispatch, if you will, meant to cash in on all that nomentum they've built up from the election:

Ribbon Cutting & First Plenary Meeting

Posted on November 4, 2010
Center for Vermont Independence

Sunday 12/12 at the Center in Hancock!

Please keep this day open, bring your expertise and ideas.

In 2006 a single Free Vermont candidate ran for governor, a horse
farmer and a man of the theatre known to us as Ethan Allen. This
year, FORTY independents ran! This has led to many new organisational
initiatives. We want to keep the momentum going. Let’s coordinate, support each other, and be successful. Hancock is now the place to go, the provisional capital of Free Vermont.

Let’s please be clear that this is about Vermont’s Independence:
food/energy relocalization, our constitutional liberties, financial
independence from the corporate oligarchy, the post-carbon future of
Vermont. This is not just painting a pretty picture, this is DOING it. Want in?

Potluck meal, bring a dish if you can, then we’ll roll up our sleeves.

In a day the most we can hope to accomplish is to review the current
and future initiatives, and match up talent with those initiatives and future initiatives, and match up talent with those initiatives and
determine how to coordinate. There’s also dealing with media, lessons
learned from the 2010 election. A 2012 discussion will have to be
left for another day. (I’ve already declared for 2012, on Twitter of
all places.)

If people have concerns they should submit an agenda item in advance. New topics will be identified, interested parties can return to meet.

Cheers,
Robert (Wagner, notably unsuccessful secesher candidate for senator from Ripton, VT)

Likewise, Steele intends to cash in on his mandate by launching a new initiative:

Campaign Reflections and the Road AheadNovember 3, 2010

Today represents a beginning, not an end. When I agreed to take on the difficult and exhausting task of running for Governor as an independent this year, I did so with the hopes that my actions would serve to help lay the foundations for a robust, grass-roots movement that will carry the message of a Free Vermont forward. Towards that end, I’ve been collaborating with several supporters to found a democratic, state-wide organization. Dedicated to spreading the ideas of Vermont Independence, providing support for Independence-minded candidates for public office, and organizing volunteer activities that both serve our neighbors and help lessen our communities’ dependence on the Federal Government, it will serve as our movement’s new center and engine of growth. It will be organized by county, and I encourage anyone who supported my campaign to get involved in their county committee.

... Our next step is to build upon the foundations of this success and take our movement to the next level!

Dennis Steele

No doubt that next level is to be somewhere other than where he found himself at the close of the polls - flat on his face.

In the coming months I'll, of course, be reporting on their usual lack of substantive results and the attendant puffery from the "small community" of local seceshers, as well as their out of state supporters and flacks.

Official Vermont Secretary of State results for the 2010 general election may be found here.

Update 6:00 PM: Bleatings from that wisp of a propaganda minister over at VTCommons, Rob Williams - cheeky as always but not much more to him than that.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

For the archive of the Free Vermont Framework listserv, click here.

It Looks Like Dennis Steele Has Lost Again Even Before the Voting Has Ended

No, I'm not talking about his failed 2009 run for election to his hometown's Planning Board in Kirby, VT.

In additional to making the list of cranks and goofballs that no one really wants to be on, the one with those people on it that the Secret Service has to surveille when a principal comes to town, Vermont's own Brawny Paper Towel Guy, Dennis Steele, has made it onto the this year's Esquire's Best and Worst Dressed Men on the Trail list that came out on October 26 and, no surprise, he's coming in at 9th out of 12:


The idea then, Dennis, would be to wear a blazer, not blaze.


Well, at least Mr. Blackwell didn't live to have to see this.


* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

For the archive of the Free Vermont Framework listserv, click here.

The Second Vermont Republic's "Dennis Steele for Governor" Campaign Responds to Charge of Accepting Contributions from Known Homophobe

Here's the Steele campaign strawman response in it entirety, followed by my comments:

Steele Campaign Response
by: carbonpenguin (Campaign Mgr. Matt Cropp)
Thu Oct 21, 2010 at 16:37:54 PM EDT

I find it quite disappointing that this time of increased awareness of LGBTQ issues has been exploited to take a cheap-shot at my campaign by raising questions about my possibly being a homophobe. Anyone who's talked to me about the issues know I am an ally to Queer people in Vermont, and have actively tried to engage with the LGBTQ community in this campaign. Unlike Brian Dubie, I requested inclusion (but was refused, due to my independent status) in the gubernatorial forum put on in part by Outright Vermont and RU12, and I broadcast the "Winter's a Drag Ball" fundraiser for the VT People with AIDS Coalition on Radio Free Vermont (my online radio station).

Like the other candidates for Governor this election cycle, I don't have an "ideological purity test" that people must take in order to donate to me - rather, they click the link on my website and the dona-
tion goes into the cam-
paign's PayPal account. As such, I find the calls for me to return the donation both odd and counterproductive; why would people who disagree so strongly with this donor want to put resources in his pocket? If he was unaware of my stance on LGBTQ rights before this and doesn't like what I've said, he doesn't have to donate. In the meantime, I will continue working hard on my campaign to bring focus to the issues our state faces that both Dubie and Shumlin refuse to acknowledge. Our communities are being smothered under the weight of an Empire that costs us a trillion dollars a year and has caused the death and displacement of millions of people. It's time for us to stand up together to take political power back from the great corporate banks and the military-industrial complex that has bought and paid for the Federal Government, so we can begin the task of building a Vermont that works for ALL Vermonters.

Imagine... Free Vermont,

Dennis Steele

First, the only person who's raised the question of Steele "possibly being a homophobe" is, queerly, Steele himself.

This is an overused tactic commonly employed by those in service to Thomas Naylor and his Second Vermont Republic. For instance, no one that I know has called Naylor, propaganda minister Rob Williams or any of the other costumed, propeller heads at SVR racists, yet they've whined (Caution: Use of the word "whine" should not by inference confirm one of the myriad conspiracy theories of SVR/VTCommons, that I am, in fact, JD Ryan.) incessantly that they have been so charged, which is nonsense. Do they pal around with and re-print or refer to the works of racists in their publications? Unquestionably.

As for Steele's assertion of solidarity with the "LGBTQ community," nothing could be more misleading about the reality of the Steele campaign. There is no example of such solidarity or public statement by Steele available in the public records that I'm able to find and, believe me, I've looked. Perhaps Matt, Dennis, Rob, Ian, Thomas or some other secesher can point to the overflowing record that I've missed. I'll take his word for it that he broadcast online the fundraiser for the VT PWA Coalition on his content and traffic starved web station, now ranked 1,178,169th on the web (btw Dennis, based on the analytics, if we pull out of Kuwait you'll lose more than 40% of your audience because they'll be home with better options).

What was of more interest to me was that while Steele furiously patted himself on the back for his "hav(ing) actively tried to engage with the LGBTQ community in this campaign," he never quite managed to bring himself to condemn James Duncan's bigoted statements at the listserv even now, if not back when Duncan made his misogynistic, homophobic and racist statements in February and March, and just as Duncan was making his first $100 campaign contribution on March 8. Actually, based on what I've found in addition to the listserv and Secretary of State campaign finance reports, Duncan would seem to be much more of a Strom Thurmond type than his bigoted comments on the listserv would suggest.

I don't buy Steele's rationalization this time, anymore than I did his I-was-just-doing-some-consciousness-raising-bullshit-when-I-started-using-the-Che-Guevara-imagery-on-my-website-and-on-my-handouts. Suggesting that he's merely keeping the "resource" out of the hands of someone that others disagree with (notice that he didn't say that he does, yet again) doesn't pass the smell test:

As such, I find the calls for me to return the donation both odd and counterproductive; why would people who disagree so strongly with this donor want to put resources in his pocket?
- Dennis Steele

Not terribly clever, Matt, er, Dennis.

The fact of the matter is that when the small, by-invitation-only Free Vermont crowd at the listserv first began posting in October of 2009, they reposted a September 9, 2009 advisory on campaign strategy from Gary Flomenhoft:

From: free_vermont_framework at mailmanlist.net
Date: Wed Oct 14 23:29:03 2009
Subject: [free_vermont_framework] Past message from Gary Flo
On 9/9/09 11:35 AM, "Gary Flomenhoft" wrote:

Those who wish to create a political platform for secessionist candidates and/or party are certainly free to do so. I do not think it is advisable beyond advocating independence, and will not put my efforts there.

Here's why: When people asked Thomas (Naylor) in the past what our platform was other than secession and independence his answer was always, "Let the people of sovereign Vermont decide that." I think that is wise.

We need to create as broad a basis for agreement as possible. A political platform is bound to create divisiveness and disagreement from any small piece of it that people don't agree with. I believe it will further marginalize us, just as it did/does to the Greens.

If we just stick with independence and secession then people of all political stripes could be convinced to go along. If we publish a detailed platform, then anyone who disagrees will not support it.

Better to keep the base as broad as possible.
Gary Flo

To which Ian Baldwin of "Vermont Commons" replied:

From: free_vermont_framework at mailmanlist.net
Date: Wed Oct 14 23:31:11 2009
Subject: [free_vermont_framework] Past Message from Ian Baldwin, reply to Gary:

This is extremely provoking, challenging. I myself will not run for office even with a gun to my temple, but I have been unable to imagine a better way to get the idea ? just the thought, the notion ? of secession or independence across to a broader cross section of Vermonters than our 10,000-circulation bi-monthly. If grounded, articulate people can run on a Vermont independence platform that points to all the ways the Federal system tyrannizes us and leaves us impotent to decide our own fate in our own land ? towns, countryside, businesses and farms ? why isn't this one of
the paths we need to take to educate people?

Maybe the prominent Russian political scientist (name escapes me) who recently held fast in public to his earlier prediction that just as the Soviet empire imploded in 1989-91, so too will the USA in 2010 ? maybe we don't need to do a damn thing. Just wait for the fire to start.

We are already "marginalized," and firmly so. Establishing a platform with cajones, in which independence (self-reliance) is the pre-eminent and salient value and goal, and injecting that core idea with many supporting secondary ideas into the various debates held round the state when elections approach can hardly "marginalize" us any more than we now are.

The issue of secession itself comes MUCH later and will indeed be decided by the people as a whole.

Thomas (Naylor) advised, correctly, that we not get involved in the kinds of divisive cultural pot-boiler issues beloved by Karl Rove, gay marriage (Note to seceshers: Gay marriage was settled law as you wrote this), legalized marijuana, women's right to choose, etc., etc. I did not understand him to advise we shirk political life, the political process, altogether.

Ian

Later posts at the listserv made clear that this small group had no intention of letting Vermonters decide much of anything. Private property was to be seized and legislators deemed to be liars executed, to name just a few of their more nutty ideas for Vermont.

Although they've been asked repeatedly, no Free Vermont spokesperson or Steele campaign shill has committed to upholding the Vermont Constitution, the document that they allege created a first republic in Vermont. That's something that all Vermonters should be very, very concerned about.


* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *For the archive of the Free Vermont Framework listserv, click here.

The "Very Foreign Minister" of Thomas Naylor's Second Vermont Republic, ...

... or the "VFM" as Dennis Morrisseau sometimes signs his communications to his subordinate political aspirants on the Free Vermont Framework listserv, has ideas for the new, proposed Second Vermont Republic that should give every thinking Vermonter pause.

Much of their plan is more than a tad frightening.

Here's a small taste from one of Morrisseau's listserv messages regarding his education proposal:

From: dmorso1 at netzero.net (Dennis Morrisseau)
Date: Sat Dec 19 01:13:40 2009
Subject: [Free Vermont Framework] 30 Position Papers 8. Education

"Let me add to this, fundamental hands on skills....."shops" and everyday living skills have to be gained by all.....in community settings. I see kids in shops, in stores, in libraries and hospitals, interning on the farm in tents and with guitars and campfires and guest "lecturers".........

"I see distance learning techniques in place in use heavily in all classrooms and some just marvellous things being taught to kids at a very early age. Small schools with multiple ages present, kids mentoring kids. (K)ids not isolated from, but integrated into their communities. And learning about the world will fit our kids to visit and understand it as well as any others."

--the VFM

All of this in lieu of, well, a real education plan. Nothing about trained educators in any of that, nor of his background in education and development for children. Much of this is what parents normally decide upon for their children but not in Morrisseau's "Brave New Republic" apparently.

Senate candidate Robert Wagner weighed in with a hearty,

From sticomythia (one of the pseudonyms used at the listserv) at gmail.com Sat Dec 19 11:24:17 2009
From: sticomythia at gmail.com (Sticomythia)
Date: Sat Dec 19 11:24:19 2009
Subject: [Free Vermont Framework] 30 Position Papers 8. Education

"...This is a great vision. I could not say this better. Would you mind cloning yourself please and becoming Minister of Education :) ?"

Yah, cool.

Connecticut native Dennis Steele, Thomas Naylor's hand-picked gubernatorial candidate, was asked by one Vermonter at a recent Vermont forum, just how do the SVR self-styled education experts intend to square their various proposals to return education responsibilities entirely to local communities, and to fund their local, extremely pared down, walk-to school programs throughout the state, with the Vermont Supreme Court's Brigham decision and the Vermont General Assembly's resultant Act 60? Little surprise that Steele completely ducked the question. He was asked,

Question: "Reliance on purely local resources for schools ignores the fact that across Vermont the funding capacity for individual towns varied by 99 to 1 prior to the passage of Act 60. That's one of the strongest reasons why the Vermont Supreme Court held that school funding based principally on local only resources was unconstitutional. How would Mr. Steele expect to reconcile his proposal with the Vermont constitution?"

Steele: "The fact is we have a $60 to $90 million dollar budget shortfall. Decentralising our schools... locally owned and locally funded schools, is important to the communities. I am the father of two young children. I would love nothing more to be able to work with the community, the parents and the teachers, to be able to come up with a curriculum for my children. I don't have that say in this, in the school. The only thing that we can control... we control very little as far as the local school control goes... It's important for that to be there... We need the diversity. If someone wants to in Burlington, if they want to teach their children musical arts, they should be able to do that. If the Northeast Kingdom decides that they want to go agriculture, then they should be able to do that. It's based on what the community wants and what the community needs. We're going to have to look at taking control of our local schools. It's important... centralizing our schools is not the answer. Decentralizing back them to the community and giving the power back to the community is whats important. That's what has to be looked at, especially with these budget shortfalls that we're facing and the fact that the schools are just too big now, and they don't meet the needs of the students. It's important."

Wow! I don't think that Sarah Palin could have ducked the substance of the question, that is, reconciling Steele's proposal with the Vermont constitution and Act 60, as badly or quite as inarticulately for what is basically an unsupportable, poorly thought out, unconstitutional reorganization.

There's a lot that Steele and his group aren't telling Vermonters about their intentions for governance, education, the courts, the constitution and the many institutions that Vermonters rely on for the social and safety network. Actually, the SVR, VTCommons, Free Vermont crowd have been taking steps to address all of this but have made little or no effort to inform the public of their acts. I will post next week about a particularly assuming, overt act.

But back in Morrisseau's "Brave New Republic" he,

"... suggest(s) that the VT Republic limit personal assets to $1,000,000 and personal annual income to the same $1,000.000.

In perpetuity."

Morrisseau has a history of making such screwy, arbitrary proposals. Nearly 22 years ago, one such proposal earned him national notoriety for his idea to give one-way tickets out of town (Burlington) for the homeless and immigrants.

From the New York Times:

Homeless Get Ticket To Leave
By Sally Johnson
Special to the New York Times
November 20, 1988

BURLINGTON, Vt., Nov. 15— Church Street Marketplace is a merchant's dream: a cobblestone mall ringed by the sort of trendy boutiques and cafes that attract the affluent shoppers of this prosperous city. But the area also attracts street people, who are not so welcome.

Dennis Morrisseau, who owns Leunig's Old World Cafe, has devised an answer to the aggressive homeless people he says have harassed his customers and his staff.

His plan is to get rid of the problem, literally: he offers those he people a one-way ticket out of town. A homeless man who Mr. Morrisseau said ''was terrorizing people in town every night'' has taken advantage of the offer.

''He had a long arrest record,'' the cafe owner said. ''He was usually blind drunk and often violent. We called the cops, but often the incident was over before they arrived.''

'It Didn't Seem So Crazy'

The proposal has called attention to a problem that everyone seems to agree will not go away on its own. The proposal has drawn both opposition and support. Recently, 30 opponents of the plan demonstrated in front of Mr. Morrisseau's cafe.

''The problem of homelessness is national tragedy caused by major cutbacks in Federal spending,'' said Bernard Sanders, a socialist who is Mayor of Burlington. ''The solution is not transporting homeless people from one end of this country to another. The solution is to provide affordable housing and counseling.''

Mr. Morrisseau said the idea of relocating the homeless man came to him over dinner with his wife, Laura Thompson. ''At first,'' he said, ''we thought the idea was crazy, but a couple days later, it didn't seem so crazy.''

Their idea became a nonprofit organization, Westward Ho!, which consists of Mr. Morrisseau, Ms. Thompson and Tim Halvorson, another cafe owner on the Marketplace. The group set up a checking account of a few hundred dollars, mostly the members' own funds, along with some donations. Through intermediaries, the group offered the offending homeless man a one-way airplane ticket to Portland, Ore., his hometown. He accepted.

Lucille Bonvouloir, executive director of the Committee on Temporary Shelter, a private, nonprofit organization that operates shelters in Burlington, said she feared that Westward Ho! was part of a growing backlash against the homeless, who number as many as 300 in Burlington, a city of 38,000.

''It's frightening,'' Ms. Bonvouloir said. ''As the people who have more continue to have more, it's harder to be tolerant of the people who have less and less. There are never good economic times for people who don't have a home.'' Practice May Have Precedent

Mr. Morrisseau insists that the relocation effort he expounds is an unofficial policy in many states. ''Law-enforcement people and social workers do it all the time,'' he said, ''but Vermont is normally on the receiving end.''

A woman who has spent several years working with refugees confirmed that the practice exists. ''It's done,'' said the worker, who spoke on the condition that she not be identified. ''I've had one person sent here from New York, and I've heard it talked about at national conferences. The cases are troublesome, and they want them out. But I don't know of any social worker who's done it who would admit to it.''

Mr. Morrisseau estimated that there were ''probably one to two dozen people causing the problem at any given time.'' He insists that their lack of housing is irrelevant to his effort. His goal, he says, is to curb abusive behavior.

Jon Svitazsky, director of the Burlington Emergency Shelter, said: ''I don't think he's a bigot toward the homeless. He is a frustrated man who is trying to raise some important issues. He knew he would sound like a fool and it was worth it to him.'' Support for Proposal

Mr. Morrisseau is not alone in his complaints. While some other Marketplace merchants have said they do not like his idea, he says others have donated money. And William Bradley, vice president and general manager of WVNY-TV, the local ABC network affiliate, supported the idea in an editorial.

''Westward Ho! is an idea that should be welcomed,'' Mr. Bradley said. ''It's being distorted and misrepresented as some sort of Machiavellian plan to force undesirables to leave our city. It's no such thing, but we're not surprised that our local bleeding hearts have chosen to vilify a respected local citizen who's doing something constructive about a real problem.''

While Mr. Morrisseau pointed to complaints of assault and harassment in making his proposal, his critics cite police statistics showing that homeless people are responsible for less than 10 percent of the cases of disorderly conduct and assaults in the Marketplace.

''I don't feel there have been clear distinctions made here,'' said Ms. Bonvouloir of the Committee on Temporary Shelter. ''I don't doubt there are some people on Church Street who are disruptive and anti-social, but that is a police matter.'' Ms. Bonvouloir's group operates two shelters for the homeless in Burlington. One of the committee's shelters, the Waystation, is at the lower end of Church Street. A third shelter in Burlington is operated by a coalition of churches.

Despite the adverse reaction to his proposal, Mr. Morrisseau is undeterred. He indicated he may offer as many as four one-way tickets a year.

Ms. Bonvouloir said her group would not object to a fund to relocate people who truly wanted it, if the offers were made in a spirit of generosity.

Mr. Morrisseau said one such arrangement is in the offing for a homeless woman. ''I had a friend approach me about transporting a refugee from El Salvador, a woman who had been badly tortured, to a torture rehabilitation center in Minnesota,'' he said. ''We agreed to do that.''

Apparently, in addition to some folks being too rich for the liking of the "Very Foreign Minisiter" Morrisseau, some are too poor and disadvantaged. Add to this sort of sentiment SVR's proposed population cap for the state and you have to wonder, who will SVR's Very Foreign Minister Morrisseau come for next?

Rather than a "Brave New Republic," think of it more as a "Back to the Third World" plan. With a ruritanian ruling elite. On steroids.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

For the archive of the Free Vermont Framework listserv, click here.

Oath Keepers and More From The Free Vermont Listserv Gift That Just Keeps On Giving

Back in March of 2010, James Duncan (the Dennis Steele contributor who first led this blog to the Free Vermont Framework listserv [1] ) reposted on the listserv a piece from DumpDC about the extremist group called Oath Keepers, a group supposedly made up of present and former law enforcement and military personnel. [2]

At the same time that some listserv participants were about to get themselves all charged up about the Oath Keepers, this piece in Mother Jones was on the newstands and the web.

"Glenn Beck, Lou Dobbs, and Pat Buchanan have all sung its praises..."
- Mother Jones

You'll find in Mother Jones that Oath Keepers shares many of the same conspiracy delusions common to some members of Free Vermont, SVR and "Vermont Commons" bloggers - 9/11 Truthers, Birthers, impending round-ups by the Empire, as well as ties to the white supremacist community.

It was already a matter of public record at the time of these listserv posts that one high profile member of the Oath Keepers, Charles Dyer, had been arrested on Federal weapons charges that arose from a sexual molestation investigation and arrest by state authorities. [3] More arrests of Oath Keeper members on a variety of weapons related charges have followed.

Dennis Morrisseau, Foreign Minister of Thomas Naylor's Second Vermont Republic and the Free Vermont candidate for the state Senate wrote on the listserv in response to Duncan's repost,

From: dmorso1 at netzero.com (Dennis Morrisseau)
Date: Fri Mar 12 02:04:31 2010
Subject: [Free Vermont Framework] FW: [New post] Oath Keepers and Oath Takers: Does It Really Matter?
Message-ID: <20100311.210243.24605.3@webmail13.vgs.untd.com>

"I like this Oath keeper group a lot!

Jim, How can we make inroads to them i wonder....and try to get a few of their VT members to join our Senate effort??? Do you know anybody inside?"

Maybe Morrisseau had seen Dyer's YouTube hit (so creepy that YouTube requires a sign-in to view it). Here's a more family friendly version of the Dyer vid that's not quite so high on the nutbar scale:



"Fear of ridicule?" Maybe it's just that mouthguard that's so off-putting to people, son.

Free Vermont Senate candidate Robert Wagner chimed in:

Date: Fri Mar 12 03:25:46 2010
Subject: [Free Vermont Framework] FW: [New post] Oath Keepers and Oath Takers: Does It Really Matter?
Message-ID: <1286712873-1268364341-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-
1349255639-@bda584.bisx.prod.on.blackberry>

"I like this much better than trying to convince servicemen to not serve."

Really? Are we actually talking about a potential alliance between our kookie group of Vermont secessionists and a collection of flipped out militia types that underscore their allegiance to the the US Constitution? (See this also.)

Then comes this from Duncan, one of the few Dennis Steele contributors, alluding to the coming trials(!) in the future Second Vermont Republic :

From: jd882u at hotmail.com (james duncan)
Date: Fri Mar 12 14:25:53 2010
Subject: [Free Vermont Framework] FW: [New post] Oath Keepers and Oath
Take rs: Does It Really Matter?
Message-ID:

"Sorry, my encounters with law enforcement were always of the non-oath keepers types."

"You know, the socieopathic toadies of the plutocracy whose defense when we put them on trial will be ......"I was only following orders"."

"Remember, most of the servants of the Empire oppress and tyrannize you for a mere pat on the back and a Scobby snack from their masters. If you want to pursue making contact, their leader seems to be a Stuart Rhodes and this is his website http://oathkeepers.org/oath/ On the plus side, he is on SPLC shit list along with the rest of us."

All right, now we're getting somewhere! SVR Foreign Minister Denny?! Take us home!

From: dmorso1 at netzero.com (Dennis Morrisseau)
Date: Fri Mar 12 14:36:11 2010
Subject: [Free Vermont Framework] FW: [New post] Oath Keepers and Oath Takers: Does It Really Matter?
Message-ID: <20100312.093431.22003.7@webmail12.vgs.untd.com>

"I am more familiar than i care to say with the ones that you describe....and also second how few twinkies it takes to cement their stupic and brutal loyalty."

"Still, i have met others....always UNheralded, inside....and so i do have some hope for this outfit."

There's more, but you get the idea.

In a later post by Duncan to Morrisseau about some other Canadian secessionists called Atlantica or Novacadia or NewFrance-istan or some other nonsense, Duncan says,

"I agree foreign minister. Has the smell of kooks about it."

I couldn't have said it better, Jim. Of course, I'd be talking about just about everything you guys have said thus far.

Watch for more here in the near future about just how far the Vermont secession crowd has moved forward with their examination and, ultimately, replacement of the present form of governance in Vermont.

Is the Small Free Vermont/Vt Commons/Second Vermont Republic Juggernaut Running Out of Gas?

When the fringers finally made it into a forum (it couldn't really be called a debate), there was plenty to write about in its aftermath. One "candidate" had a proposal that sounded more like a weird take-off, sort of, on The Running Man. Thomas Naylor's hand-picked gubernatorial candidate, Dennis Steele, who's fronting for the Second Vermont Republic while posing as an independent contributed, "Vermont should build an “industrial hemp barrier” around (Lake Champlain) to suck out the phosphorous." Since the lake isn't solely a Vermont body of water, one imagines that the details for Steeles' ambitious "plan" will be worked out by the SVR Foreign Minister (I kid you not) Dennis Morrisseau, the remaining United States (if New York hasn't declared independence by then), the Canadian federation and the Province de Québec. Good times.

While nutty notions aren't exclusively the property of the Free Vermont gang, they've explored quite a few, including tossing around the idea putting out feelers that could lead to alliances with other fringers, Tea Baggers and the always fun to look at, Oath Keepers. Since this post is more about the dwindling relevance of the FVers, those are subjects for future posts.

Those posts will be based on information gleaned from the Free Vermont Framework listserv.

The location of the listserv archive was obtained during the course of research on the true support for secessionists in Vermont (not the junk polling "commissioned" by Naylor - see Polling Section in the column to the right) based on the public records available from the Vermont Secretary of State's website for Elections - Campaign Finance (July, Aug, Sept).

Examining the list of contributions and contributors to the Steele campaign showed the top three to be #1 Naylor - $810; #2 Robert Wagner - $350; #3 (tied) Ian Baldwin/James Duncan - $300 each, and whose contributions constitute more than 80% of the $2175 raised to date from the 9 identified contributors. A third of the contributors give out of state residence addresses (NY/CO/SC). [1] [2] [3]

Seven years of SVR bloviating on and on about its growing support in Vermont; 9 known contributors, most who belong to the group's leadership. The sense of the excitement that's been generated across the state of Vermont is unmistakeable. Who knew?

While researching the backgrounds on the out-of-state contributors by using keywords associated with the Free Vermont group and the contributors names, one Google search caused the listserv for the Free Vermont Framework to show and, voilà, a more detailed look into the crazy of a Vermont fringe group that considers itself poised to assume leadership for all Vermonters.

The listserv, the Mailman.net Pipermail, is known to be an insecure archive. It's sort of The InterTubes version of walking around in public in your underwear, with you seemingly being the only one not aware. You'd have thought that the media and security "experts" on the list would have known that.



More to come.