From elibeck at gmail.com Tue Jul 1 16:20:15 2008 From: elibeck at gmail.com (Eli Beckerman) Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2008 16:20:15 -0400 Subject: [ComCom] Green-Rainbow Presence at Global Warming Day of Action - tomorrow! In-Reply-To: <56a5dd3e0807011316j7842ca4fie9a2565f7fc1ae99@mail.gmail.com> References: <56a5dd3e0807011308l78cbd4e3p626075022d3d43bb@mail.gmail.com> <56a5dd3e0807011316x4c361fe1h7ff3da7f6fe08497@mail.gmail.com> <56a5dd3e0807011316j7842ca4fie9a2565f7fc1ae99@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <56a5dd3e0807011320q35ee932ey7b96279ea9b2f64e@mail.gmail.com> To the ComCom list: It would be nice to get out a press release that distinguishes the GRP on this issue from the new green tide... from corporate greenwashing to legislative greenwashing... I probably won't get to it before tomorrow (and possibly not then) but if anyone wants to take a crack at it that'd be just lovely! eli ( echo? ) The Green-Rainbow Party has endorsed the Code Green Declaration of a State of Emergency, calling for a reduction of greenhouse gas emissions 80% by 2020, and has initiated a Secure Green Future ballot question that calls for these reductions in the state of Massachusetts. Meanwhile, the GRP Fossil Fuels Subcommittee has endorsed -- as a small step in the right direction -- the Global Warming Solutions Act which calls for 20% reductions by 2020 and 80% by 2050. We now hear that the Patrick Administration is trying to negotiate the 2020 goal from 20% to 10%. And the legislation is currently stalled on Beacon Hill. At a Global Warming Rally planned to support passage of the Global Warming Solutions Act tomorrow -- Wednesday, July 2 -- the GRP has an opportunity to distinguish itself as standing for the urgent, transformative action necessary to stop the slide into the climate change abyss, instead of what's politically feasible. There are two things you can do: 1) Come out to the State House with signs that call for 80% by 2020, that call for getting dirty money out of the political process, and that call for the secure green future we need to build from the ground up. 2) Put the Secure Green Future question on the ballot in your community. Send out a message to climate activists and concerned planetary citizens in your community, invite them to this day of action, and see if they'll help you collect 200 valid signatures in your state rep. district to put a Secure Green Future on the ballot in November. Show up to the rally with a legal-sized clipboard and look for a sign that says "Stand for the Secure Green Future NOW!" to get petitions from Eli (or call 617-821-1453). For more information visit the Secure Green Future website: http://www.masschc.org/Secure_Green_Future.php //----------------------//-----------------------//-------------------------// >From Boston Climate Action Network Hi there, You're invited to join a 350 action tomorrow at the Global Warming Solutions Act rally at the State House at noon. Wear blue and bring snorkels and masks and help us draw the links between the near-term goal of passing this bill and our 2009 goal of an international treaty based on 350 ppm. And if you can't attend, take a couple of minutes to call Governor Patrick, Secretary of Energy and Environment Ian Bowles, and Speaker DiMasi need to hear your voices calling for action on this bill now. Call let them know you're hoping that they will endorse the Global Warming Solutions Act at the rally. Governor Patrick 617-725-4005 Sec't Bowles 617-626-1000 Speaker DiMasi 617-722-2500 "Global Warming Day of Action" Date: Wednesday, July 2nd Time: noon rally followed by lobbying Location: In front of the State House Description: A gathering of concerned citizens to demand that Massachusetts make a commitment to reducing our carbon emissions by passing a Global Warming Solutions Act that reduces greenhouse gas emissions by 20% by 2020 and 80% by 2050. The MA Senate has already passed this bill and we have the votes to pass it in the House but political leaders are blocking it from coming up for a vote. They say, it's too ambitious! We say, whose profits are you protecting? Whose children are you neglecting? This week climatologist James Hansen, head of Nasa's Goddard Institute for Space Studies, told the House Select Committee for Energy Independence and Climate Change that the chief executives of large fossil fuel companies should be put on trial for crimes against humanity and nature. He also asserted that because we haven't done anything yet to curb our emissions, he is certain that the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere is already beyond the safe level ? we're already at 385 parts per million of carbon dioxide, and it's increasing at a rate of 2ppm a year. The "safe" level, according to Hansen, is 350. (Read excerpts from his testimony at http://gristmill.grist.org/story/2008/6/23/164650/123?source=daily) Twenty years after James Hansen first testified about the dangers of global warming, we are still waiting for federal legislation. Massachusetts can help lead the way and join states like California and Connecticut in passing a Global Warming bill. We have until the end of July to pass this bill before the legislative session is adjourned and we're forced back to square one. Time is running out to pass this monumental bill for the commonwealth. Show your support and come on out to fight global warming and support a clean energy revolution! --- Loie Hayes Coordinator, Boston Climate Action Network Roxbury MA 02120 617-278-1885 www.bostoncan.org From merelice at gmail.com Fri Jul 25 17:12:22 2008 From: merelice at gmail.com (Merelice) Date: Fri, 25 Jul 2008 17:12:22 -0400 Subject: [ComCom] [adcom] Proposed text for robocall In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi, In the hopes that we can work out a way to proceed with this project, I will prepare this copy for recording. Whatever way we proceed, it cannot be a joint GRP-McKinney campaign effort since that would not honor the StateCom consensus. Grace, I don't really understand what is meant by losing 58.9 billion in household wealth. As written, that could apply to stock market gyrations. Please describe, and maybe provide several stats for me to choose from. Thanks, Merelice On 7/25/08, Gracegrnrnbw at aol.com wrote: > Hello, Green-Rainbow voter! > We are calling to ask for your immediate action to help stem the foreclosure > crisis in Massachusetts. If our legislature does not act by July31st, > Massachusetts residents are on track to lose 58.9 billion in household > wealth by the end of 2009 - yes, 58.9 billion in our state alone. > > Please call you legislator as soon as you can; you only need to give your > name and ask them to pass House bills 4733, 4734 and 4735. > you can find out your legislator on the web at wheredoivotema.com and call > 617-722-2000 and ask to be transferred to your legislator. > > Ask them for the 6 month moratorium on sub-prime foreclosures, to extend > protections for tenants in foreclosed properties and a day in court before > home-owners lose their mortgage! > > This message brought to you by the Green-Rainbow Party and Power to the > People, the McKinney for President Campaign. > From Gracegrnrnbw at aol.com Fri Jul 25 18:18:57 2008 From: Gracegrnrnbw at aol.com (Gracegrnrnbw at aol.com) Date: Fri, 25 Jul 2008 18:18:57 EDT Subject: [ComCom] [adcom] Proposed text for robocall Message-ID: Actually, Merelice - this is an okay length... I am not sure what the question about household wealth is - this is money that is being lost from the households of the residents of Massachusetts - I am attaching the Congressional report... As for being made up of resources of the McKinney Campaign and the GRP - that is accurate... MAAPL was started by the Rainbow Caucus and presumably if we plan to build the party, getting credit for our foreclosure work would be a required building block????? Not sure - should we fall back to the Rainbow Caucus... thanks, Grace In a message dated 7/25/08 5:12:50 PM, merelice at gmail.com writes: > Hi, > > In the hopes that we can work out a way to proceed with this project, > I will prepare this copy for recording. Whatever way we proceed, it > cannot be a joint GRP-McKinney campaign effort since that would not > honor the StateCom consensus. > > Grace, I don't really understand what is meant by losing 58.9 billion > in household wealth. As written, that could apply to stock market > gyrations. Please describe, and maybe provide several stats for me to > choose from. > > Thanks, > Merelice > > > On 7/25/08, Gracegrnrnbw at aol.com wrote: > > Hello, Green-Rainbow voter! > >? We are calling to ask for your immediate action to help stem the > foreclosure > >? crisis in Massachusetts.? If our legislature does not act by July31st, > >? Massachusetts residents are on track to lose 58.9 billion in household > >? wealth by the end of 2009 - yes, 58.9 billion in our state alone. > > > >? Please call you legislator as soon as you can; you only need to give your > >? name and ask them to pass House bills 4733, 4734 and 4735. > >? you can find out your legislator on the web at wheredoivotema.com and > call > >? 617-722-2000 and ask to be transferred to your legislator. > > > >? Ask them for the 6 month moratorium on sub-prime foreclosures, to extend > >? protections for tenants in foreclosed properties and a day in court > before > >? home-owners lose their mortgage! > > > >? This message brought to you by the Green-Rainbow Party and? Power to the > >? People, the McKinney for President Campaign. > > > _______________________________________________ > AdCom mailing list > AdCom at green-rainbow.org > http://www.green-rainbow.org/mailman/listinfo/adcom > To email Administration Committee members: adcom.members AT green-rainbow > DOT org > > ************** Get fantasy football with free live scoring. Sign up for FanHouse Fantasy Football today. (http://www.fanhouse.com/fantasyaffair?ncid=aolspr00050000000020) -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pdf Size: 17011 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://www.green-rainbow.org/pipermail/comcom/attachments/20080725/a7fb1c75/attachment-0001.pdf From merelice at gmail.com Fri Jul 25 18:34:58 2008 From: merelice at gmail.com (Merelice) Date: Fri, 25 Jul 2008 18:34:58 -0400 Subject: [ComCom] [adcom] Proposed text for robocall; basis for decision Message-ID: On 7/25/08, Gracegrnrnbw at aol.com wrote: > Actually, Merelice - this is an okay length... I still have some thoughts about making it clearer. > > I am not sure what the question about household wealth is - this is money > that is being lost from the households of the residents of Massachusetts - I > am attaching the Congressional report... Thank you. The key words that are missing are "house prices." Just to say household wealth, without identifying house prices, leaves it open to ANY source of household wealth, not specifically the value of one's house. > > As for being made up of resources of the McKinney Campaign and the GRP - > that is accurate... > > MAAPL was started by the Rainbow Caucus and presumably if we plan to build > the party, getting credit for our foreclosure work would be a required > building block????? Of course; so this argues for trying to make this project a GRP project? > > Not sure - should we fall back to the Rainbow Caucus... Worth a try to see whether the Rainbow thinks it could raise enough funds. Otherwise, on what basis do you decide when you will -- or won't -- honor a Statecom consensus? (Or, for that matter, a Rainbow vote.) Merelice From john.walsh at umassmed.edu Fri Jul 25 19:53:20 2008 From: john.walsh at umassmed.edu (John Walsh) Date: Fri, 25 Jul 2008 19:53:20 -0400 Subject: [ComCom] [adcom] Proposed text for robocall In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <73F13C70-AF59-464E-AB3A-485A413C2DFE@umassmed.edu> How long will it be until Grace does what she "threatened" to do not so long ago - go over to the Democrat Party? Begging the legislature is much more in tune with the Democrat pwogs than the Green strategy which is to pose an alternative. Grace really stakes out the former position rather than the latter. She really should join the Democrat Party pwogs. She belongs there base both on her outlook and her tactics which we have all observed over the last six months. And if MIke and Gary are more comfortable with that, they should go there too. (Gary's parent organization the "C"PUSA believes that we should all work to elect Dems anyway. And he is in the GRP to deflect our best efforts to the Democrat Party. He will not deny this.) But what the hell are Grace and Gary doing in the GRP anyway? They belong with the Democrat Party. jw On Jul 25, 2008, at 5:12 PM, Merelice wrote: > Hi, > > In the hopes that we can work out a way to proceed with this project, > I will prepare this copy for recording. Whatever way we proceed, it > cannot be a joint GRP-McKinney campaign effort since that would not > honor the StateCom consensus. > > Grace, I don't really understand what is meant by losing 58.9 billion > in household wealth. As written, that could apply to stock market > gyrations. Please describe, and maybe provide several stats for me to > choose from. > > Thanks, > Merelice > > > On 7/25/08, Gracegrnrnbw at aol.com wrote: >> Hello, Green-Rainbow voter! >> We are calling to ask for your immediate action to help stem the >> foreclosure >> crisis in Massachusetts. If our legislature does not act by >> July31st, >> Massachusetts residents are on track to lose 58.9 billion in >> household >> wealth by the end of 2009 - yes, 58.9 billion in our state alone. >> >> Please call you legislator as soon as you can; you only need to >> give your >> name and ask them to pass House bills 4733, 4734 and 4735. >> you can find out your legislator on the web at wheredoivotema.com >> and call >> 617-722-2000 and ask to be transferred to your legislator. >> >> Ask them for the 6 month moratorium on sub-prime foreclosures, to >> extend >> protections for tenants in foreclosed properties and a day in >> court before >> home-owners lose their mortgage! >> >> This message brought to you by the Green-Rainbow Party and Power >> to the >> People, the McKinney for President Campaign. >> > _______________________________________________ > ComCom mailing list > ComCom at green-rainbow.org > http://www.green-rainbow.org/mailman/listinfo/comcom > John V. Walsh, MD Professor of Physiology University of Massachusetts Medical School 508-856-3360 (Office) 508-868-1653 (Cell) john.walsh at umassmed.edu From gracegrnrnbw at aol.com Fri Jul 25 20:43:52 2008 From: gracegrnrnbw at aol.com (gracegrnrnbw at aol.com) Date: Fri, 25 Jul 2008 20:43:52 -0400 Subject: [ComCom] [adcom] Proposed text for robocall; basis for decision In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <8CABCCFCFB5C816-177C-1059@WEBMAIL-MB10.sysops.aol.com> Merelice - sorry for shortness of reply - as I said before - most of my time really needs to stay on the foreclosure bills - why I was actually trying to get this done. I have no problem with this acknowledging the GRP role - I think you raised that concern? As dealt with elsewhere, Proposal K from June 29th can be implemented as soon as the appropriate conflicting bylaw is suspended or changed. Until that time, it remains a clear desire form those who were part of the consensus - but not implementable. I posted elsewhere the bylaw - and Eli posted the actual language - hope that clarifies... Grace -----Original Message----- From: Merelice To: Gracegrnrnbw at aol.com Cc: adcom at green-rainbow.org; comcom at green-rainbow.org Sent: Fri, 25 Jul 2008 6:34 pm Subject: Re: [adcom] Proposed text for robocall; basis for decision On 7/25/08, Gracegrnrnbw at aol.com wrote: > Actually, Merelice - this is an okay length... I still have some thoughts about making it clearer. > > I am not sure what the question about household wealth is - this is money > that is being lost from the households of the residents of Massachusetts - I > am attaching the Congressional report... Thank you. The key words that are missing are "house prices." Just to say household wealth, without identifying house prices, leaves it open to ANY source of household wealth, not specifically the value of one's house. > > As for being made up of resources of the McKinney Campaign and the GRP - > that is accurate... > > MAAPL was started by the Rainbow Caucus and presumably if we plan to build > the party, getting credit for our foreclosure work would be a required > building block????? Of course; so this argues for trying to make this project a GRP project? > > Not sure - should we fall back to the Rainbow Caucus... Worth a try to see whether the Rainbow thinks it could raise enough funds. Otherwise, on what basis do you decide when you will -- or won't -- honor a Statecom consensus? (Or, for that matter, a Rainbow vote.) Merelice _______________________________________________ AdCom mailing list AdCom at green-rainbow.org http://www.green-rainbow.org/mailman/listinfo/adcom To email Administration Committee members: adcom.members AT green-rainbow DOT org From merelice at gmail.com Sat Jul 26 09:35:51 2008 From: merelice at gmail.com (Merelice) Date: Sat, 26 Jul 2008 09:35:51 -0400 Subject: [ComCom] [adcom] Proposed text for robocall; basis for decision In-Reply-To: <8CABCCFCFB5C816-177C-1059@WEBMAIL-MB10.sysops.aol.com> References: <8CABCCFCFB5C816-177C-1059@WEBMAIL-MB10.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: Grace, I realize you have not kept up with GRP emails (though since you weigh in on everything, I question that assumption and also wonder, yet again, just exactly which working committees you consider to be your active ones). Anyway, several people have pointed out that proposal K does NOT, in fact, go contrary to the bylaws. And even if you think it does, that does not give you leave to act unilaterally in opposition to the State Committee and the Rainbow Caucus, as if you were the central authority on what is right and wrong. Merelice On 7/25/08, gracegrnrnbw at aol.com wrote: > Merelice - sorry for shortness of reply - as I said before - most of my > time really needs to stay on the foreclosure bills - why I was actually > trying to get this done. > > I have no problem with this acknowledging the GRP role - I think you > raised that concern? > > As dealt with elsewhere, Proposal K from June 29th can be implemented > as soon as the appropriate conflicting bylaw is suspended or changed. > Until that time, it remains a clear desire form those who were part of > the consensus - but not implementable. > > I posted elsewhere the bylaw - and Eli posted the actual language - > hope that clarifies... > > Grace > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Merelice > To: Gracegrnrnbw at aol.com > Cc: adcom at green-rainbow.org; comcom at green-rainbow.org > Sent: Fri, 25 Jul 2008 6:34 pm > Subject: Re: [adcom] Proposed text for robocall; basis for decision > > On 7/25/08, Gracegrnrnbw at aol.com wrote: > > Actually, Merelice - this is an okay length... > > I still have some thoughts about making it clearer. > > > > > I am not sure what the question about household wealth is - this is > money > > that is being lost from the households of the residents of > Massachusetts - I > > am attaching the Congressional report... > > Thank you. The key words that are missing are "house prices." Just to > say household wealth, without identifying house prices, leaves it open > to ANY source of household wealth, not specifically the value of one's > house. > > > > As for being made up of resources of the McKinney Campaign and the > GRP - > > that is accurate... > > > > MAAPL was started by the Rainbow Caucus and presumably if we plan to > build > > the party, getting credit for our foreclosure work would be a required > > building block????? > > Of course; so this argues for trying to make this project a GRP project? > > > > > Not sure - should we fall back to the Rainbow Caucus... > > Worth a try to see whether the Rainbow thinks it could raise enough > funds. Otherwise, on what basis do you decide when you will -- or > won't -- honor a Statecom consensus? (Or, for that matter, a Rainbow > vote.) > > Merelice From Gracegrnrnbw at aol.com Sat Jul 26 10:52:37 2008 From: Gracegrnrnbw at aol.com (Gracegrnrnbw at aol.com) Date: Sat, 26 Jul 2008 10:52:37 EDT Subject: [ComCom] [adcom] Proposed text for robocall; basis for decision Message-ID: Merelice? We are publicly discussing a robocall text (which is mostly what emails I have been reading...). You are accusing me of acting unilaterally when all I have done is propose something to accomplish one of our Party's only a couple of stated commitments? Proposing to others that we do somehting and staying engaged in the conversation to get that done is "acting unilaterally" and "as if you are a central authority"? This is how daring to suggest anything is treated? Is the goal here that no one suggest any action? No one try to accomplish what we say is our Party's priority? Doing what Mel said and the Rainbow agreed to about focusing on our foreclosure organizing (he had also specifically mentioned CORI) is going against the Party? Nothing seems to be what we say any more... Grace In a message dated 7/26/08 9:36:01 AM, merelice at gmail.com writes: > Grace, > > I realize you have not kept up with GRP emails (though since you weigh > in on everything, I question that assumption and also wonder, yet > again, just exactly which working committees you consider to be your > active ones). > > Anyway, several people have pointed out that proposal K does NOT, in > fact, go contrary to the bylaws. And even if you think it does, that > does not give you leave to act unilaterally in opposition to the State > Committee and the Rainbow Caucus, as if you were the central authority > on what is right and wrong. > > Merelice > > > > On 7/25/08, gracegrnrnbw at aol.com wrote: > > Merelice - sorry for shortness of reply - as I said before - most of my > >? time really needs to stay on the foreclosure bills - why I was actually > >? trying to get this done. > > > >? I have no problem with this acknowledging the GRP role - I think you > >? raised that concern? > > > >? As dealt with elsewhere, Proposal K from June 29th can be implemented > >? as soon as the appropriate conflicting bylaw is suspended or changed. > >? Until that time, it remains a clear desire form those who were part of > >? the consensus - but not implementable. > > > >? I posted elsewhere the bylaw - and Eli posted the actual language - > >? hope that clarifies... > > > >? Grace > > > > > >? -----Original Message----- > >? From: Merelice > >? To: Gracegrnrnbw at aol.com > >? Cc: adcom at green-rainbow.org; comcom at green-rainbow.org > >? Sent: Fri, 25 Jul 2008 6:34 pm > >? Subject: Re: [adcom] Proposed text for robocall; basis for decision > > > >? On 7/25/08, Gracegrnrnbw at aol.com wrote: > >? > Actually, Merelice - this is an okay length... > > > >? I still have some thoughts about making it clearer. > > > >? > > >? >? I am not sure what the question about household wealth is - this is > >? money > >? > that is being lost from the households of the residents of > >? Massachusetts - I > >? > am attaching the Congressional report... > > > >? Thank you. The key words that are missing are "house prices." Just to > >? say household wealth, without identifying house prices, leaves it open > >? to ANY source of household wealth, not specifically the value of one's > >? house. > >? > > >? >? As for being? made up of resources of the McKinney Campaign and the > >? GRP - > >? > that is accurate... > >? > > >? >? MAAPL was started by the Rainbow Caucus and presumably if we plan to > >? build > >? > the party, getting credit for our foreclosure work would be a required > >? > building block????? > > > >? Of course; so this argues for trying to make this project a GRP project? > > > >? > > >? >? Not sure? - should we fall back to the Rainbow Caucus... > > > >? Worth a try to see whether the Rainbow thinks it could raise enough > >? funds. Otherwise, on what basis do you decide when you will -- or > >? won't -- honor a Statecom consensus? (Or, for that matter, a Rainbow > >? vote.) > > > >? Merelice > _______________________________________________ > ComCom mailing list > ComCom at green-rainbow.org > http://www.green-rainbow.org/mailman/listinfo/comcom > > ************** Get fantasy football with free live scoring. Sign up for FanHouse Fantasy Football today. (http://www.fanhouse.com/fantasyaffair?ncid=aolspr00050000000020) From john.walsh at umassmed.edu Sat Jul 26 11:24:25 2008 From: john.walsh at umassmed.edu (John Walsh) Date: Sat, 26 Jul 2008 11:24:25 -0400 Subject: [ComCom] [adcom] Proposed text for robocall; basis for decision In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <0CF5BDE7-0FB6-4F76-8ACC-362C1ACAA741@umassmed.edu> Hello all, As I mentioned before, we in the Nader/Gonzalez campaign here in MA have raised many thousands of dollars and got about 19,000 signatures to put Nader/Gonzalez on the ballot. As I watch this conversation unfold, I have to wonder how much Grace has raised for the candidate she prominently embraced on the stage at the national convention. If the answer is not a substantial amount, then I do not think Grace is serious. I know the leadership of the GPUS is not. I know that Cynthia deserves better than this GPUS/Identity Politics crowd - and so does the GRP. I think in 2009 when new political formations take shape after the election of the Messiah. the question will be asked of the GRP, "Quo vadis"? And "Cum quo"? jw On Jul 26, 2008, at 10:52 AM, Gracegrnrnbw at aol.com wrote: > Merelice? We are publicly discussing a robocall text (which is > mostly what > emails I have been reading...). You are accusing me of acting > unilaterally > when all I have done is propose something to accomplish one of our > Party's only > a couple of stated commitments? > > Proposing to others that we do somehting and staying engaged in the > conversation to get that done is "acting unilaterally" and "as if > you are a central > authority"? > > This is how daring to suggest anything is treated? > > Is the goal here that no one suggest any action? No one try to > accomplish > what we say is our Party's priority? Doing what Mel said and the > Rainbow > agreed to about focusing on our foreclosure organizing (he had also > specifically > mentioned CORI) is going against the Party? > > Nothing seems to be what we say any more... Grace > In a message dated 7/26/08 9:36:01 AM, merelice at gmail.com writes: > > >> Grace, >> >> I realize you have not kept up with GRP emails (though since you >> weigh >> in on everything, I question that assumption and also wonder, yet >> again, just exactly which working committees you consider to be your >> active ones). >> >> Anyway, several people have pointed out that proposal K does NOT, in >> fact, go contrary to the bylaws. And even if you think it does, that >> does not give you leave to act unilaterally in opposition to the >> State >> Committee and the Rainbow Caucus, as if you were the central >> authority >> on what is right and wrong. >> >> Merelice >> >> >> >> On 7/25/08, gracegrnrnbw at aol.com wrote: >>> Merelice - sorry for shortness of reply - as I said before - most >>> of my >>> time really needs to stay on the foreclosure bills - why I was >>> actually >>> trying to get this done. >>> >>> I have no problem with this acknowledging the GRP role - I >>> think you >>> raised that concern? >>> >>> As dealt with elsewhere, Proposal K from June 29th can be >>> implemented >>> as soon as the appropriate conflicting bylaw is suspended or >>> changed. >>> Until that time, it remains a clear desire form those who were >>> part of >>> the consensus - but not implementable. >>> >>> I posted elsewhere the bylaw - and Eli posted the actual >>> language - >>> hope that clarifies... >>> >>> Grace >>> >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Merelice >>> To: Gracegrnrnbw at aol.com >>> Cc: adcom at green-rainbow.org; comcom at green-rainbow.org >>> Sent: Fri, 25 Jul 2008 6:34 pm >>> Subject: Re: [adcom] Proposed text for robocall; basis for >>> decision >>> >>> On 7/25/08, Gracegrnrnbw at aol.com wrote: >>> > Actually, Merelice - this is an okay length... >>> >>> I still have some thoughts about making it clearer. >>> >>> > >>> > I am not sure what the question about household wealth is - >>> this is >>> money >>> > that is being lost from the households of the residents of >>> Massachusetts - I >>> > am attaching the Congressional report... >>> >>> Thank you. The key words that are missing are "house prices." >>> Just to >>> say household wealth, without identifying house prices, leaves >>> it open >>> to ANY source of household wealth, not specifically the value >>> of one's >>> house. >>> > >>> > As for being made up of resources of the McKinney Campaign >>> and the >>> GRP - >>> > that is accurate... >>> > >>> > MAAPL was started by the Rainbow Caucus and presumably if we >>> plan to >>> build >>> > the party, getting credit for our foreclosure work would be a >>> required >>> > building block????? >>> >>> Of course; so this argues for trying to make this project a GRP >>> project? >>> >>> > >>> > Not sure - should we fall back to the Rainbow Caucus... >>> >>> Worth a try to see whether the Rainbow thinks it could raise >>> enough >>> funds. Otherwise, on what basis do you decide when you will -- or >>> won't -- honor a Statecom consensus? (Or, for that matter, a >>> Rainbow >>> vote.) >>> >>> Merelice >> _______________________________________________ >> ComCom mailing list >> ComCom at green-rainbow.org >> http://www.green-rainbow.org/mailman/listinfo/comcom >> >> > > > > > ************** > Get fantasy football with free live scoring. Sign up for > FanHouse Fantasy Football today. > > (http://www.fanhouse.com/fantasyaffair?ncid=aolspr00050000000020) > _______________________________________________ > ComCom mailing list > ComCom at green-rainbow.org > http://www.green-rainbow.org/mailman/listinfo/comcom > John V. Walsh, MD Professor of Physiology University of Massachusetts Medical School 508-856-3360 (Office) 508-868-1653 (Cell) john.walsh at umassmed.edu From john.walsh at umassmed.edu Sat Jul 26 11:24:25 2008 From: john.walsh at umassmed.edu (John Walsh) Date: Sat, 26 Jul 2008 11:24:25 -0400 Subject: [ComCom] [adcom] Proposed text for robocall; basis for decision In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <0CF5BDE7-0FB6-4F76-8ACC-362C1ACAA741@umassmed.edu> Hello all, As I mentioned before, we in the Nader/Gonzalez campaign here in MA have raised many thousands of dollars and got about 19,000 signatures to put Nader/Gonzalez on the ballot. As I watch this conversation unfold, I have to wonder how much Grace has raised for the candidate she prominently embraced on the stage at the national convention. If the answer is not a substantial amount, then I do not think Grace is serious. I know the leadership of the GPUS is not. I know that Cynthia deserves better than this GPUS/Identity Politics crowd - and so does the GRP. I think in 2009 when new political formations take shape after the election of the Messiah. the question will be asked of the GRP, "Quo vadis"? And "Cum quo"? jw On Jul 26, 2008, at 10:52 AM, Gracegrnrnbw at aol.com wrote: > Merelice? We are publicly discussing a robocall text (which is > mostly what > emails I have been reading...). You are accusing me of acting > unilaterally > when all I have done is propose something to accomplish one of our > Party's only > a couple of stated commitments? > > Proposing to others that we do somehting and staying engaged in the > conversation to get that done is "acting unilaterally" and "as if > you are a central > authority"? > > This is how daring to suggest anything is treated? > > Is the goal here that no one suggest any action? No one try to > accomplish > what we say is our Party's priority? Doing what Mel said and the > Rainbow > agreed to about focusing on our foreclosure organizing (he had also > specifically > mentioned CORI) is going against the Party? > > Nothing seems to be what we say any more... Grace > In a message dated 7/26/08 9:36:01 AM, merelice at gmail.com writes: > > >> Grace, >> >> I realize you have not kept up with GRP emails (though since you >> weigh >> in on everything, I question that assumption and also wonder, yet >> again, just exactly which working committees you consider to be your >> active ones). >> >> Anyway, several people have pointed out that proposal K does NOT, in >> fact, go contrary to the bylaws. And even if you think it does, that >> does not give you leave to act unilaterally in opposition to the >> State >> Committee and the Rainbow Caucus, as if you were the central >> authority >> on what is right and wrong. >> >> Merelice >> >> >> >> On 7/25/08, gracegrnrnbw at aol.com wrote: >>> Merelice - sorry for shortness of reply - as I said before - most >>> of my >>> time really needs to stay on the foreclosure bills - why I was >>> actually >>> trying to get this done. >>> >>> I have no problem with this acknowledging the GRP role - I >>> think you >>> raised that concern? >>> >>> As dealt with elsewhere, Proposal K from June 29th can be >>> implemented >>> as soon as the appropriate conflicting bylaw is suspended or >>> changed. >>> Until that time, it remains a clear desire form those who were >>> part of >>> the consensus - but not implementable. >>> >>> I posted elsewhere the bylaw - and Eli posted the actual >>> language - >>> hope that clarifies... >>> >>> Grace >>> >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Merelice >>> To: Gracegrnrnbw at aol.com >>> Cc: adcom at green-rainbow.org; comcom at green-rainbow.org >>> Sent: Fri, 25 Jul 2008 6:34 pm >>> Subject: Re: [adcom] Proposed text for robocall; basis for >>> decision >>> >>> On 7/25/08, Gracegrnrnbw at aol.com wrote: >>> > Actually, Merelice - this is an okay length... >>> >>> I still have some thoughts about making it clearer. >>> >>> > >>> > I am not sure what the question about household wealth is - >>> this is >>> money >>> > that is being lost from the households of the residents of >>> Massachusetts - I >>> > am attaching the Congressional report... >>> >>> Thank you. The key words that are missing are "house prices." >>> Just to >>> say household wealth, without identifying house prices, leaves >>> it open >>> to ANY source of household wealth, not specifically the value >>> of one's >>> house. >>> > >>> > As for being made up of resources of the McKinney Campaign >>> and the >>> GRP - >>> > that is accurate... >>> > >>> > MAAPL was started by the Rainbow Caucus and presumably if we >>> plan to >>> build >>> > the party, getting credit for our foreclosure work would be a >>> required >>> > building block????? >>> >>> Of course; so this argues for trying to make this project a GRP >>> project? >>> >>> > >>> > Not sure - should we fall back to the Rainbow Caucus... >>> >>> Worth a try to see whether the Rainbow thinks it could raise >>> enough >>> funds. Otherwise, on what basis do you decide when you will -- or >>> won't -- honor a Statecom consensus? (Or, for that matter, a >>> Rainbow >>> vote.) >>> >>> Merelice >> _______________________________________________ >> ComCom mailing list >> ComCom at green-rainbow.org >> http://www.green-rainbow.org/mailman/listinfo/comcom >> >> > > > > > ************** > Get fantasy football with free live scoring. Sign up for > FanHouse Fantasy Football today. > > (http://www.fanhouse.com/fantasyaffair?ncid=aolspr00050000000020) > _______________________________________________ > ComCom mailing list > ComCom at green-rainbow.org > http://www.green-rainbow.org/mailman/listinfo/comcom > John V. Walsh, MD Professor of Physiology University of Massachusetts Medical School 508-856-3360 (Office) 508-868-1653 (Cell) john.walsh at umassmed.edu From merelice at gmail.com Sat Jul 26 11:51:21 2008 From: merelice at gmail.com (Merelice) Date: Sat, 26 Jul 2008 11:51:21 -0400 Subject: [ComCom] [adcom] Proposed text for robocall; basis for decision In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Grace, I have clearly described the options for making the robocalls happen while still honoring the StateCom consensus and Rainbow vote. I have offered to help with the script. I have offered to be in touch with the McKinney campaign. I have NOT mistreated your "daring to suggest anything." Quite the contrary. Your charges are as baseless as so many of them have been over the last many months. Merelice On 7/26/08, Gracegrnrnbw at aol.com wrote: > Merelice? We are publicly discussing a robocall text (which is mostly what > emails I have been reading...). You are accusing me of acting unilaterally > when all I have done is propose something to accomplish one of our Party's > only a couple of stated commitments? > > Proposing to others that we do somehting and staying engaged in the > conversation to get that done is "acting unilaterally" and "as if you are a > central authority"? > > This is how daring to suggest anything is treated? > > Is the goal here that no one suggest any action? No one try to accomplish > what we say is our Party's priority? Doing what Mel said and the Rainbow > agreed to about focusing on our foreclosure organizing (he had also > specifically mentioned CORI) is going against the Party? > > Nothing seems to be what we say any more... Grace > > In a message dated 7/26/08 9:36:01 AM, merelice at gmail.com writes: > > > > Grace, > > I realize you have not kept up with GRP emails (though since you weigh > in on everything, I question that assumption and also wonder, yet > again, just exactly which working committees you consider to be your > active ones). > > Anyway, several people have pointed out that proposal K does NOT, in > fact, go contrary to the bylaws. And even if you think it does, that > does not give you leave to act unilaterally in opposition to the State > Committee and the Rainbow Caucus, as if you were the central authority > on what is right and wrong. > > Merelice > > > > On 7/25/08, gracegrnrnbw at aol.com wrote: > > Merelice - sorry for shortness of reply - as I said before - most of my > > time really needs to stay on the foreclosure bills - why I was actually > > trying to get this done. > > > > I have no problem with this acknowledging the GRP role - I think you > > raised that concern? > > > > As dealt with elsewhere, Proposal K from June 29th can be implemented > > as soon as the appropriate conflicting bylaw is suspended or changed. > > Until that time, it remains a clear desire form those who were part of > > the consensus - but not implementable. > > > > I posted elsewhere the bylaw - and Eli posted the actual language - > > hope that clarifies... > > > > Grace From Gracegrnrnbw at aol.com Sat Jul 26 11:57:34 2008 From: Gracegrnrnbw at aol.com (Gracegrnrnbw at aol.com) Date: Sat, 26 Jul 2008 11:57:34 EDT Subject: [ComCom] [adcom] Proposed text for robocall; basis for decision Message-ID: Merelice - yes, and I called you. And anyone can be in touch with the McKinney campaign. And Statecom has not made a final decision since it has not suspended the relevant bylaw. I made no charges, you said I was acting "unilaterally" - Please stop the accusations... I am again asking others to help sort this out... Thanks, Grace In a message dated 7/26/08 11:51:39 AM, merelice at gmail.com writes: > Grace, > > I have clearly described the options for making the robocalls happen > while still honoring the StateCom consensus and Rainbow vote. I have > offered to help with the script. I have offered to be in touch with > the McKinney campaign. I have NOT mistreated your "daring to suggest > anything." Quite the contrary. > > Your charges are as baseless as so many of them have been over the > last many months. > > Merelice > > > On 7/26/08, Gracegrnrnbw at aol.com wrote: > > Merelice?? We are publicly discussing a robocall text (which is mostly > what > > emails I have been reading...).? You are accusing me of acting > unilaterally > > when all I have done is propose something to accomplish one of our Party's > > only a couple of stated commitments? > > > >? Proposing to others that we do somehting and staying engaged in the > > conversation to get that done is "acting unilaterally" and "as if you are > a > > central authority"? > > > >? This is how daring to suggest anything is treated? > > > >? Is the goal here that no one suggest any action?? No one try to > accomplish > > what we say is our Party's priority?? Doing what Mel said and the Rainbow > > agreed to about focusing on our foreclosure organizing (he had also > > specifically mentioned CORI) is going against the Party? > > > >? Nothing seems to be what we say any more...? Grace > > > >? In a message dated 7/26/08 9:36:01 AM, merelice at gmail.com writes: > > > > > > > > Grace, > > > >? I realize you have not kept up with GRP emails (though since you weigh > >? in on everything, I question that assumption and also wonder, yet > >? again, just exactly which working committees you consider to be your > >? active ones). > > > >? Anyway, several people have pointed out that proposal K does NOT, in > >? fact, go contrary to the bylaws. And even if you think it does, that > >? does not give you leave to act unilaterally in opposition to the State > >? Committee and the Rainbow Caucus, as if you were the central authority > >? on what is right and wrong. > > > >? Merelice > > > > > > > >? On 7/25/08, gracegrnrnbw at aol.com wrote: > >? > Merelice - sorry for shortness of reply - as I said before - most of my > >? >? time really needs to stay on the foreclosure bills - why I was > actually > >? >? trying to get this done. > >? > > >? >? I have no problem with this acknowledging the GRP role - I think you > >? >? raised that concern? > >? > > >? >? As dealt with elsewhere, Proposal K from June 29th can be implemented > >? >? as soon as the appropriate conflicting bylaw is suspended or changed. > >? >? Until that time, it remains a clear desire form those who were part of > >? >? the consensus - but not implementable. > >? > > >? >? I posted elsewhere the bylaw - and Eli posted the actual language - > >? >? hope that clarifies... > >? > > >? >? Grace > _______________________________________________ > ComCom mailing list > ComCom at green-rainbow.org > http://www.green-rainbow.org/mailman/listinfo/comcom > > ************** Get fantasy football with free live scoring. Sign up for FanHouse Fantasy Football today. (http://www.fanhouse.com/fantasyaffair?ncid=aolspr00050000000020) From merelice at gmail.com Sat Jul 26 12:08:43 2008 From: merelice at gmail.com (Merelice) Date: Sat, 26 Jul 2008 12:08:43 -0400 Subject: [ComCom] [adcom] Proposed text for robocall; basis for decision In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 7/26/08, Gracegrnrnbw at aol.com wrote: > .... And Statecom has not made a final decision since it has not > suspended the relevant bylaw. Just because you keep saying this does not make it true. From mikeheichman at verizon.net Sat Jul 26 15:15:13 2008 From: mikeheichman at verizon.net (Mike Heichman) Date: Sat, 26 Jul 2008 15:15:13 -0400 Subject: [ComCom] [adcom] Proposed text for robocall; basis for decision In-Reply-To: <0CF5BDE7-0FB6-4F76-8ACC-362C1ACAA741@umassmed.edu> References: <0CF5BDE7-0FB6-4F76-8ACC-362C1ACAA741@umassmed.edu> Message-ID: <488B77C1.3010605@verizon.net> Hi Everyone, We have differenes in our party. However, we are members who have a stake in working things out. John Walsh has left our party-his choice. He supports another candidate for President-his choice. He has consistently behaved in ways that are disruptive, insulting and divisive. I ask again--what can we do to remove him from our e-mail lists? Mike Heichman PS Please forward this to the Adcom list. John Walsh wrote: >Hello all, >As I mentioned before, we in the Nader/Gonzalez campaign here in MA >have raised many thousands of dollars and got about 19,000 signatures >to put Nader/Gonzalez on the ballot. >As I watch this conversation unfold, I have to wonder how much Grace >has raised for the candidate she prominently embraced on the stage at >the national convention. >If the answer is not a substantial amount, then I do not think Grace >is serious. I know the leadership of the GPUS is not. > >I know that Cynthia deserves better than this GPUS/Identity Politics >crowd - and so does the GRP. I think in 2009 when new political >formations take shape after the election of the Messiah. the question >will be asked of the GRP, "Quo vadis"? And "Cum quo"? >jw > > >On Jul 26, 2008, at 10:52 AM, Gracegrnrnbw at aol.com wrote: > > > >>Merelice? We are publicly discussing a robocall text (which is >>mostly what >>emails I have been reading...). You are accusing me of acting >>unilaterally >>when all I have done is propose something to accomplish one of our >>Party's only >>a couple of stated commitments? >> >>Proposing to others that we do somehting and staying engaged in the >>conversation to get that done is "acting unilaterally" and "as if >>you are a central >>authority"? >> >>This is how daring to suggest anything is treated? >> >>Is the goal here that no one suggest any action? No one try to >>accomplish >>what we say is our Party's priority? Doing what Mel said and the >>Rainbow >>agreed to about focusing on our foreclosure organizing (he had also >>specifically >>mentioned CORI) is going against the Party? >> >>Nothing seems to be what we say any more... Grace >>In a message dated 7/26/08 9:36:01 AM, merelice at gmail.com writes: >> >> >> >> >>>Grace, >>> >>>I realize you have not kept up with GRP emails (though since you >>>weigh >>>in on everything, I question that assumption and also wonder, yet >>>again, just exactly which working committees you consider to be your >>>active ones). >>> >>>Anyway, several people have pointed out that proposal K does NOT, in >>>fact, go contrary to the bylaws. And even if you think it does, that >>>does not give you leave to act unilaterally in opposition to the >>>State >>>Committee and the Rainbow Caucus, as if you were the central >>>authority >>>on what is right and wrong. >>> >>>Merelice >>> >>> >>> >>>On 7/25/08, gracegrnrnbw at aol.com wrote: >>> >>> >>>>Merelice - sorry for shortness of reply - as I said before - most >>>>of my >>>> time really needs to stay on the foreclosure bills - why I was >>>>actually >>>> trying to get this done. >>>> >>>> I have no problem with this acknowledging the GRP role - I >>>>think you >>>> raised that concern? >>>> >>>> As dealt with elsewhere, Proposal K from June 29th can be >>>>implemented >>>> as soon as the appropriate conflicting bylaw is suspended or >>>>changed. >>>> Until that time, it remains a clear desire form those who were >>>>part of >>>> the consensus - but not implementable. >>>> >>>> I posted elsewhere the bylaw - and Eli posted the actual >>>>language - >>>> hope that clarifies... >>>> >>>> Grace >>>> >>>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: Merelice >>>> To: Gracegrnrnbw at aol.com >>>> Cc: adcom at green-rainbow.org; comcom at green-rainbow.org >>>> Sent: Fri, 25 Jul 2008 6:34 pm >>>> Subject: Re: [adcom] Proposed text for robocall; basis for >>>>decision >>>> >>>> On 7/25/08, Gracegrnrnbw at aol.com wrote: >>>> > Actually, Merelice - this is an okay length... >>>> >>>> I still have some thoughts about making it clearer. >>>> >>>> > >>>> > I am not sure what the question about household wealth is - >>>>this is >>>> money >>>> > that is being lost from the households of the residents of >>>> Massachusetts - I >>>> > am attaching the Congressional report... >>>> >>>> Thank you. The key words that are missing are "house prices." >>>>Just to >>>> say household wealth, without identifying house prices, leaves >>>>it open >>>> to ANY source of household wealth, not specifically the value >>>>of one's >>>> house. >>>> > >>>> > As for being made up of resources of the McKinney Campaign >>>>and the >>>> GRP - >>>> > that is accurate... >>>> > >>>> > MAAPL was started by the Rainbow Caucus and presumably if we >>>>plan to >>>> build >>>> > the party, getting credit for our foreclosure work would be a >>>>required >>>> > building block????? >>>> >>>> Of course; so this argues for trying to make this project a GRP >>>>project? >>>> >>>> > >>>> > Not sure - should we fall back to the Rainbow Caucus... >>>> >>>> Worth a try to see whether the Rainbow thinks it could raise >>>>enough >>>> funds. Otherwise, on what basis do you decide when you will -- or >>>> won't -- honor a Statecom consensus? (Or, for that matter, a >>>>Rainbow >>>> vote.) >>>> >>>> Merelice >>>> >>>> >>>_______________________________________________ >>>ComCom mailing list >>>ComCom at green-rainbow.org >>>http://www.green-rainbow.org/mailman/listinfo/comcom >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >>************** >>Get fantasy football with free live scoring. Sign up for >>FanHouse Fantasy Football today. >> >>(http://www.fanhouse.com/fantasyaffair?ncid=aolspr00050000000020) >>_______________________________________________ >>ComCom mailing list >>ComCom at green-rainbow.org >>http://www.green-rainbow.org/mailman/listinfo/comcom >> >> >> > >John V. Walsh, MD >Professor of Physiology >University of Massachusetts Medical School >508-856-3360 (Office) >508-868-1653 (Cell) >john.walsh at umassmed.edu > > > >_______________________________________________ >ComCom mailing list >ComCom at green-rainbow.org >http://www.green-rainbow.org/mailman/listinfo/comcom > > > From mikeheichman at verizon.net Sat Jul 26 22:36:51 2008 From: mikeheichman at verizon.net (Mike Heichman) Date: Sat, 26 Jul 2008 22:36:51 -0400 Subject: [ComCom] [adcom] Proposed text for robocall In-Reply-To: <73F13C70-AF59-464E-AB3A-485A413C2DFE@umassmed.edu> References: <73F13C70-AF59-464E-AB3A-485A413C2DFE@umassmed.edu> Message-ID: <488BDF43.7030000@verizon.net> Why are we continuing to allow somebody who is not even a member of our party to continue to spew his poison? Mike Heichman John Walsh wrote: >How long will it be until Grace does what she "threatened" to do not >so long ago - go over to the Democrat Party? >Begging the legislature is much more in tune with the Democrat pwogs >than the Green strategy which is to pose an alternative. >Grace really stakes out the former position rather than the latter. >She really should join the Democrat Party pwogs. She belongs there >base both on her outlook and her tactics which we have all observed >over the last six months. >And if MIke and Gary are more comfortable with that, they should go >there too. (Gary's parent organization the "C"PUSA believes that we >should all work to elect Dems anyway. And he is in the GRP to >deflect our best efforts to the Democrat Party. He will not deny this.) > But what the hell are Grace and Gary doing in the GRP anyway? >They belong with the Democrat Party. >jw > >On Jul 25, 2008, at 5:12 PM, Merelice wrote: > > > >>Hi, >> >>In the hopes that we can work out a way to proceed with this project, >>I will prepare this copy for recording. Whatever way we proceed, it >>cannot be a joint GRP-McKinney campaign effort since that would not >>honor the StateCom consensus. >> >>Grace, I don't really understand what is meant by losing 58.9 billion >>in household wealth. As written, that could apply to stock market >>gyrations. Please describe, and maybe provide several stats for me to >>choose from. >> >>Thanks, >>Merelice >> >> >>On 7/25/08, Gracegrnrnbw at aol.com wrote: >> >> >>>Hello, Green-Rainbow voter! >>> We are calling to ask for your immediate action to help stem the >>>foreclosure >>> crisis in Massachusetts. If our legislature does not act by >>>July31st, >>> Massachusetts residents are on track to lose 58.9 billion in >>>household >>> wealth by the end of 2009 - yes, 58.9 billion in our state alone. >>> >>> Please call you legislator as soon as you can; you only need to >>>give your >>> name and ask them to pass House bills 4733, 4734 and 4735. >>> you can find out your legislator on the web at wheredoivotema.com >>>and call >>> 617-722-2000 and ask to be transferred to your legislator. >>> >>> Ask them for the 6 month moratorium on sub-prime foreclosures, to >>>extend >>> protections for tenants in foreclosed properties and a day in >>>court before >>> home-owners lose their mortgage! >>> >>> This message brought to you by the Green-Rainbow Party and Power >>>to the >>> People, the McKinney for President Campaign. >>> >>> >>> >>_______________________________________________ >>ComCom mailing list >>ComCom at green-rainbow.org >>http://www.green-rainbow.org/mailman/listinfo/comcom >> >> >> > >John V. Walsh, MD >Professor of Physiology >University of Massachusetts Medical School >508-856-3360 (Office) >508-868-1653 (Cell) >john.walsh at umassmed.edu > > > >_______________________________________________ >ComCom mailing list >ComCom at green-rainbow.org >http://www.green-rainbow.org/mailman/listinfo/comcom > > > From Gracegrnrnbw at aol.com Sat Jul 26 22:58:57 2008 From: Gracegrnrnbw at aol.com (Gracegrnrnbw at aol.com) Date: Sat, 26 Jul 2008 22:58:57 EDT Subject: [ComCom] [adcom] Proposed text for robocall Message-ID: John - This is over the top - I have NEVER said I would go over to the Dems... Please take your negative fantasies elsewhere... In a message dated 7/26/08 10:39:54 PM, mikeheichman at verizon.net writes: > Why are we continuing to allow somebody who is not even a member of our > party to continue to spew his poison? > > Mike Heichman > > > > John Walsh wrote: > > >How long will it be until Grace does what she "threatened" to do not? > >so long ago - go over to the Democrat Party? > >Begging the legislature is much more in tune with the Democrat pwogs? > >than the Green strategy which is to pose an alternative. > >Grace really stakes out the former position rather than the latter.? ? > >She really should join the Democrat Party pwogs.? She belongs there? > >base both on her outlook and her tactics which we have all observed? > >over the last six months. > >And if MIke and Gary are more comfortable with that, they should go? > >there too.? (Gary's parent organization the "C"PUSA believes that we? > >should all work to elect Dems anyway.? And he is in the GRP to? > >deflect our best efforts to the Democrat Party.? He will not deny this.) > >?? But what the hell are Grace and Gary doing in the GRP anyway??? > >They belong with the Democrat Party. > >jw > > > >On Jul 25, 2008, at 5:12 PM, Merelice wrote: > > > >? > > > >>Hi, > >> > >>In the hopes that we can work out a way to proceed with this project, > >>I will prepare this copy for recording. Whatever way we proceed, it > >>cannot be a joint GRP-McKinney campaign effort since that would not > >>honor the StateCom consensus. > >> > >>Grace, I don't really understand what is meant by losing 58.9 billion > >>in household wealth. As written, that could apply to stock market > >>gyrations. Please describe, and maybe provide several stats for me to > >>choose from. > >> > >>Thanks, > >>Merelice > >> > >> > >>On 7/25/08, Gracegrnrnbw at aol.com wrote: > >>? ? > >> > >>>Hello, Green-Rainbow voter! > >>> We are calling to ask for your immediate action to help stem the? > >>>foreclosure > >>> crisis in Massachusetts.? If our legislature does not act by? > >>>July31st, > >>> Massachusetts residents are on track to lose 58.9 billion in? > >>>household > >>> wealth by the end of 2009 - yes, 58.9 billion in our state alone. > >>> > >>> Please call you legislator as soon as you can; you only need to? > >>>give your > >>> name and ask them to pass House bills 4733, 4734 and 4735. > >>> you can find out your legislator on the web at wheredoivotema.com? > >>>and call > >>> 617-722-2000 and ask to be transferred to your legislator. > >>> > >>> Ask them for the 6 month moratorium on sub-prime foreclosures, to? > >>>extend > >>> protections for tenants in foreclosed properties and a day in? > >>>court before > >>> home-owners lose their mortgage! > >>> > >>> This message brought to you by the Green-Rainbow Party and? Power? > >>>to the > >>> People, the McKinney for President Campaign. > >>> > >>>? ? ? > >>> > >>_______________________________________________ > >>ComCom mailing list > >>ComCom at green-rainbow.org > >>http://www.green-rainbow.org/mailman/listinfo/comcom > >> > >>? ? > >> > > > >John V. Walsh, MD > >Professor of Physiology > >University of Massachusetts Medical School > >508-856-3360 (Office) > >508-868-1653 (Cell) > >john.walsh at umassmed.edu > > > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > >ComCom mailing list > >ComCom at green-rainbow.org > >http://www.green-rainbow.org/mailman/listinfo/comcom > > > >? > > > > _______________________________________________ > ComCom mailing list > ComCom at green-rainbow.org > http://www.green-rainbow.org/mailman/listinfo/comcom > > ************** Get fantasy football with free live scoring. Sign up for FanHouse Fantasy Football today. (http://www.fanhouse.com/fantasyaffair?ncid=aolspr00050000000020) From owen.broadhurst at gmail.com Mon Jul 28 10:43:25 2008 From: owen.broadhurst at gmail.com (Owen Broadhurst) Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2008 10:43:25 -0400 Subject: [ComCom] [adcom] Proposed text for robocall In-Reply-To: <73F13C70-AF59-464E-AB3A-485A413C2DFE@umassmed.edu> References: <73F13C70-AF59-464E-AB3A-485A413C2DFE@umassmed.edu> Message-ID: <8e192b120807280743t442202f8u6c6640a688cc7a15@mail.gmail.com> May the Communications Director please exercise his or her prerogatives regarding behavioral expectations for list subscribers and contributors? This would be most appreciated. OB On Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 7:53 PM, John Walsh wrote: > How long will it be until Grace does what she "threatened" to do not > so long ago - go over to the Democrat Party? > Begging the legislature is much more in tune with the Democrat pwogs > than the Green strategy which is to pose an alternative. > Grace really stakes out the former position rather than the latter. > She really should join the Democrat Party pwogs. She belongs there > base both on her outlook and her tactics which we have all observed > over the last six months. > And if MIke and Gary are more comfortable with that, they should go > there too. (Gary's parent organization the "C"PUSA believes that we > should all work to elect Dems anyway. And he is in the GRP to > deflect our best efforts to the Democrat Party. He will not deny this.) > But what the hell are Grace and Gary doing in the GRP anyway? > They belong with the Democrat Party. > jw From gooberthink06 at yahoo.com Mon Jul 28 10:49:50 2008 From: gooberthink06 at yahoo.com (gary hicks) Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2008 07:49:50 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ComCom] [Needtoknow] [adcom] Proposed text for robocall; basis for decision In-Reply-To: <488B77C1.3010605@verizon.net> Message-ID: <285142.77505.qm@web38205.mail.mud.yahoo.com> all: ? personally i am against removing john walsh from the email lists, just as i have been against removing aimee smith in past years. ? john is a handful to be sure. but just because one can't use a delete button or their own spam button doesn't mean that the party should engage in bad precedent i.e. censorship. ? besides, he's on leave of absence sort of. what do you want to do when he returns? purge him? ? gary hicks --- On Sat, 7/26/08, Mike Heichman wrote: From: Mike Heichman Subject: Re: [Needtoknow] [ComCom] [adcom] Proposed text for robocall; basis for decision To: "This is the Communication/Media working committee email list." Cc: "Green-Rainbow Party (GRP) Administrative Committee" , NeedToKnow at green-rainbow.org Date: Saturday, July 26, 2008, 3:15 PM Hi Everyone, We have differenes in our party. However, we are members who have a stake in working things out. John Walsh has left our party-his choice. He supports another candidate for President-his choice. He has consistently behaved in ways that are disruptive, insulting and divisive. I ask again--what can we do to remove him from our e-mail lists? Mike Heichman PS Please forward this to the Adcom list. John Walsh wrote: >Hello all, >As I mentioned before, we in the Nader/Gonzalez campaign here in MA >have raised many thousands of dollars and got about 19,000 signatures >to put Nader/Gonzalez on the ballot. >As I watch this conversation unfold, I have to wonder how much Grace >has raised for the candidate she prominently embraced on the stage at >the national convention. >If the answer is not a substantial amount, then I do not think Grace >is serious. I know the leadership of the GPUS is not. > >I know that Cynthia deserves better than this GPUS/Identity Politics >crowd - and so does the GRP. I think in 2009 when new political >formations take shape after the election of the Messiah. the question >will be asked of the GRP, "Quo vadis"? And "Cum quo"? >jw > > >On Jul 26, 2008, at 10:52 AM, Gracegrnrnbw at aol.com wrote: > > > >>Merelice? We are publicly discussing a robocall text (which is >>mostly what >>emails I have been reading...). You are accusing me of acting >>unilaterally >>when all I have done is propose something to accomplish one of our >>Party's only >>a couple of stated commitments? >> >>Proposing to others that we do somehting and staying engaged in the >>conversation to get that done is "acting unilaterally" and "as if >>you are a central >>authority"? >> >>This is how daring to suggest anything is treated? >> >>Is the goal here that no one suggest any action? No one try to >>accomplish >>what we say is our Party's priority? Doing what Mel said and the >>Rainbow >>agreed to about focusing on our foreclosure organizing (he had also >>specifically >>mentioned CORI) is going against the Party? >> >>Nothing seems to be what we say any more... Grace >>In a message dated 7/26/08 9:36:01 AM, merelice at gmail.com writes: >> >> >> >> >>>Grace, >>> >>>I realize you have not kept up with GRP emails (though since you >>>weigh >>>in on everything, I question that assumption and also wonder, yet >>>again, just exactly which working committees you consider to be your >>>active ones). >>> >>>Anyway, several people have pointed out that proposal K does NOT, in >>>fact, go contrary to the bylaws. And even if you think it does, that >>>does not give you leave to act unilaterally in opposition to the >>>State >>>Committee and the Rainbow Caucus, as if you were the central >>>authority >>>on what is right and wrong. >>> >>>Merelice >>> >>> >>> >>>On 7/25/08, gracegrnrnbw at aol.com wrote: >>> >>> >>>>Merelice - sorry for shortness of reply - as I said before - most >>>>of my >>>> time really needs to stay on the foreclosure bills - why I was >>>>actually >>>> trying to get this done. >>>> >>>> I have no problem with this acknowledging the GRP role - I >>>>think you >>>> raised that concern? >>>> >>>> As dealt with elsewhere, Proposal K from June 29th can be >>>>implemented >>>> as soon as the appropriate conflicting bylaw is suspended or >>>>changed. >>>> Until that time, it remains a clear desire form those who were >>>>part of >>>> the consensus - but not implementable. >>>> >>>> I posted elsewhere the bylaw - and Eli posted the actual >>>>language - >>>> hope that clarifies... >>>> >>>> Grace >>>> >>>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: Merelice >>>> To: Gracegrnrnbw at aol.com >>>> Cc: adcom at green-rainbow.org; comcom at green-rainbow.org >>>> Sent: Fri, 25 Jul 2008 6:34 pm >>>> Subject: Re: [adcom] Proposed text for robocall; basis for >>>>decision >>>> >>>> On 7/25/08, Gracegrnrnbw at aol.com wrote: >>>> > Actually, Merelice - this is an okay length... >>>> >>>> I still have some thoughts about making it clearer. >>>> >>>> > >>>> > I am not sure what the question about household wealth is - >>>>this is >>>> money >>>> > that is being lost from the households of the residents of >>>> Massachusetts - I >>>> > am attaching the Congressional report... >>>> >>>> Thank you. The key words that are missing are "house prices." >>>>Just to >>>> say household wealth, without identifying house prices, leaves >>>>it open >>>> to ANY source of household wealth, not specifically the value >>>>of one's >>>> house. >>>> > >>>> > As for being made up of resources of the McKinney Campaign >>>>and the >>>> GRP - >>>> > that is accurate... >>>> > >>>> > MAAPL was started by the Rainbow Caucus and presumably if we >>>>plan to >>>> build >>>> > the party, getting credit for our foreclosure work would be a >>>>required >>>> > building block????? >>>> >>>> Of course; so this argues for trying to make this project a GRP >>>>project? >>>> >>>> > >>>> > Not sure - should we fall back to the Rainbow Caucus... >>>> >>>> Worth a try to see whether the Rainbow thinks it could raise >>>>enough >>>> funds. Otherwise, on what basis do you decide when you will -- or >>>> won't -- honor a Statecom consensus? (Or, for that matter, a >>>>Rainbow >>>> vote.) >>>> >>>> Merelice >>>> >>>> >>>_______________________________________________ >>>ComCom mailing list >>>ComCom at green-rainbow.org >>>http://www.green-rainbow.org/mailman/listinfo/comcom >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >>************** >>Get fantasy football with free live scoring. Sign up for >>FanHouse Fantasy Football today. >> >>(http://www.fanhouse.com/fantasyaffair?ncid=aolspr00050000000020) >>_______________________________________________ >>ComCom mailing list >>ComCom at green-rainbow.org >>http://www.green-rainbow.org/mailman/listinfo/comcom >> >> >> > >John V. Walsh, MD >Professor of Physiology >University of Massachusetts Medical School >508-856-3360 (Office) >508-868-1653 (Cell) >john.walsh at umassmed.edu > > > >_______________________________________________ >ComCom mailing list >ComCom at green-rainbow.org >http://www.green-rainbow.org/mailman/listinfo/comcom > > > _______________________________________________ NeedToKnow mailing list NeedToKnow at green-rainbow.org http://www.green-rainbow.org/mailman/listinfo/needtoknow From merelice at gmail.com Mon Jul 28 15:55:44 2008 From: merelice at gmail.com (Merelice) Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2008 15:55:44 -0400 Subject: [ComCom] Fwd: Globe oped tomorrow (Tuesday) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Merelice Date: Jul 28, 2008 3:46 PM Subject: Globe oped tomorrow (Tuesday) To: [long MAAPL list] Greetings, Chuck and I have just sent our comments to the Boston Globe on their edited version of an oped that we submitted about the foreclosure legislation. I am happy to report that the column is scheduled to run tomorrow, Tuesday. We hope everyone can put it to good use and that readers will respond. Merelice From jokeefe at jamesokeefe.org Tue Jul 29 13:20:52 2008 From: jokeefe at jamesokeefe.org (Jamie O'Keefe) Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2008 13:20:52 -0400 Subject: [ComCom] Fwd: [state-assoc] Repeat call for state, caucus or committee reports In-Reply-To: <037301c8f11b$cc01cc20$b59b5344@cn630921a> References: <037301c8f11b$cc01cc20$b59b5344@cn630921a> Message-ID: ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: David McCorquodale Date: Mon, Jul 28, 2008 at 9:38 PM Subject: [state-assoc] Repeat call for state, caucus or committee reports To: state-assoc at gp-us.org State reports (max 300 words) or Caucus or committee reports (max 300 words) should be sent by August 15 to Deidre Helfferich at green at esterrepublic.com or contact if expecting late breaking news. Please note that any state report concerning election results may be included in the elections section. Folks, we've only gotten one item for this section so far. David McCorquodale Co-chair, Green Pages -- peace, Jamie -- James O'Keefe www.jamesokeefe.org From yen.yarden at verizon.net Thu Jul 31 16:55:57 2008 From: yen.yarden at verizon.net (Yarden) Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2008 16:55:57 -0400 Subject: [ComCom] [usgp-nc] Paint the White House Green video now on You tube In-Reply-To: <2080.127.0.0.1.1217536820.squirrel@swift.riseup.net> References: <2080.127.0.0.1.1217536820.squirrel@swift.riseup.net> Message-ID: <7750ACAF-F6A9-46E5-888A-D69757F6F550@verizon.net> On Jul 31, 2008, at 4:40 PM, stevethegreen at riseup.net wrote: > I recently completed a short 8 minute video on the national > convention in > Chicago called "Paint the White House Green". This video features the > debate between Green presidential nomination hopefuls and of course > Cynthia McKinney. > > I didn't have a tripod, so the hand held camera on zoom is a little > shaky, > but I think it captures the essence of this years nominees and our > presidential candidate Cynthia McKinney. > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xs8f9W5fjNY > > Let me know what you think! > -Steve Geiger > Oregon > > _______________________________________________ > Natlcomvotes mailing list > To send a message to the list, write to: > Natlcomvotes at green.gpus.org > To unsubscribe or change your list options, go to: > http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/natlcomvotes > > If your state delegation changes, please see: > http://gp.org/committees/nc/documents/delegate_change.html > > To report violations of listserv protocol, write to forummanagers at lists.gp-us.org > > For other information about the Coordinating Committee, see: > http://gp.org/committees/nc/