Angels in the Silicon

President Clinton’s pro-globalization, pro-technology, and fiscal responsibility led to a strong United States economic surge. The 1992 “New Change Democratic” policy led to better jobs, the purchase of new homes, and crime free neighborhoods. However, the “dot com” boom went bust. California families became part of the double-digit divorce rate statistics, which led to an increase in the number family law attorneys. During his eight-year term, Bill Clinton convinced Americans to “recognize and accept a world of continual economic and social change”.[3] To have men become stay-at-home child caretakers and women to become the new workforce of business and government leaders, was one of many goals of the early National Organization for Women (NOW). As Mary Frances Berry wrote, in the 1600s and 1700s, “First in the colonies and then in the young nation, fathers had the primary responsibility for child care beyond the early nursing period.” Men oversaw what children learned, ate, wore and, when they went to work. Childhood development was the father’s, not the mother’s, responsibility because women are sinful and moral inferiors. Children could not choose the right path, and certainly women were too corrupt by nature to have been trusted to show it to them.”[4] Early United States Jeffersonian views lay on the foundation of an agrarian lifestyles and urban woman would have little experience in understanding that this was incorrect. The rural woman was always the center of the family and men worked the fields from dawn to dusk. It was the Industrial Revolution, the numerous World Wars forced women out of those nurturing mother roles into the factories and gave them a taste of sexuality, and role freedoms, which women had perhaps never experienced before. The Industrial Revolution ignited an exclusionary political movement within the United States at the later turn of the 20th Century. As Berry wrote, “I am hopeful that people realize that there is a correlation between women’s rights and these family issues...between gender roles and women’s rights...Women feel guilty and ambivalent in the roles they have and they need to know why. People need to know this stuff, whether they agree or not.”[4] From the very experiences outlined and narrative in Berry’s book, the illusion and, reality are co-partners in the destruction of United States children as the court system has had a clear political agenda to redefine the roles of women. The appointment of women judges was a political extension of the mass propaganda of the women’s movement that had been founded on the lesbian, gay, bisexual and, transgender (LGBT) liberation movement of the 1960s and 1970s. By the 1970s, the Democratic Party added the leftist in the environmental movement, the feminist movement, the black liberalization movement, government unions, trial lawyers, and others to its “rainbow coalition”.[5] During the 1970s, as a Democratic Party organizer for the San Francisco women’s rights movement, clear insights grew. From numerous San Francisco street protest efforts with Flo Kennedy and the National Organization of Women (NOW) it became clear that the foundation for (NOW) rested on the LGBT mainstream inclusion agenda. On December 6,2011, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton told the United Nations in Geneva "Now, raising this issue, I know, is sensitive for many people and that the obstacles standing in the way of protecting the human rights of LGBT people rest on deeply held personal, political, cultural, and religious beliefs.” Hillary Clinton suggested that religious beliefs’ were standing in the way of protecting Human Rights of LGBT People. [6] The feminist movement’s early purity of establishing a co-parenting connection within the traditional and divorced families never became a reality for at its very mainstream flow was a legal and judicial system objective not to interfere with the “natural laws” and boundaries of the traditional American Family. The goal of the “new change” Democrats, which began as a direct result of the Vietnam War and Lyndon Johnson’s “Great Society” was to remake American and Global societies into one centralized top down social economic model that would free women from the roles of mother and nurturer. Next national sovereignty became the United Nations and the International Monetary Fund control objective. Global media narratives and controllable commercial markets were employed to neutralize cultural differences. The consequences of this lawyer dominated political strategy to develop a powerful “progressive” voting block have been profound in realigning and marginalizing America’s economic strength. Starting in 1975, under Governor Jerry Brown, California’s Superior Courts were exclusively awarding sole custody of the children to women. In the majority of Family Law Court cases, men had to pay the bills associated with a divorce case. Because of the attorney’s tactics to advise women to declare domestic violence or false accusations of sexual harassment, the Silicon Valley Superior Court routinely ordered fathers to have limited visitation access and to stay out of their children’s life. United States Hollywood films that portrayed the false narratives that children controlled by progressive and compassionate judges could overshadow the truth that the Court had gone political. The hidden agenda for the legalist was to make as much money from a case as possible. The economic and educational resources of an entire American generation have been discarded as a necessary part of the “burn and plunder” lawyering process. America’s generation that followed the upheavals of the 1960s and 1970s anti-war Democratic Party found themselves dumped by the political and corporate elites into the dumpster of history and replaced by the avalanche of third world technologist. The “new” outsourced knowledge workers from India, Pakistan, and China had the advantage of family centric cultures without the need for expensive legalist problem solutions. Silicon Valley Technology Cartels encouraged the transition away from American engineers and managers by establishing the Cartel’s own product training campuses in India, Pakistan, and China. The CEOs of these Information Technology firms had only two principal goals; namely, to lower the cost of United States’ high tech labor and to increase their own wealth. The future for all Americans changed forever by these strategies.