[GNC] After November? What's wrong with now?
Gil Obler
greengil at comcast.net
Thu Aug 5 08:30:51 EDT 2004
My two cents:
What is wrong with now is that Kerry is not yet in office and
betraying the progressive agenda.
I suggest: not now, not in November, but in Spring/Summer 2005
after Kerry turns corporate with his agenda.
Right now, Kerry is playing the politicians game and saying
enough of the "right things" not to convince us Greens (and
Green-Rainbows) but to convince the Kucinich Dems that he is
"secretly a progressive".
We need to be smart, show a little patience, and not overplay
our hand too early.
Gil Obler
GRP Alternate (MA), USGP Coordinating Committee
Middlesex Delegate, Green-Rainbow Party State Committee
======================================================================
email greengil at comcast.net
home phone (978)455-3984
cell phone (617)388-5445
======================================================================
-----Original Message-----
From: gnc-bounces at green-rainbow.org
[mailto:gnc-bounces at green-rainbow.org] On Behalf Of gary hicks
Sent: Thursday, August 05, 2004 2:28 AM
To: GRP Membership and Diversity Committee; Green National Convention;
needtoknow at green-rainbow.org; afalsafi at igc.org
Subject: [GNC] After November? What's wrong with now?
Adam Sacks <adam_artist at yahoo.com> wrote:
Well, as a former Green Kucinich "official", I know lots of his
Massachusetts supporters, and would be happy to send them all an e-mail
suggesting that they may be in the wrong Party and that there's another
Party that's more consistent with their beliefs and would welcome their
membership and participation.
Adam
--- Aram Falsafi wrote:
> Assuming Kerry wins (if for no other reason than the fact that Wall
> Street has
> decided that Bush is bad for profits) what will happen to all of
> those
> disillusioned Kucinich Democrats that finally realize that there is
> no hope for
> "their" party after President Kerry calls up another 25,000
> reservists?
>
> I propose that we start outreach to as many Kucinich supporters as we
> can,
> immediately after November.
>
> -Aram
>
>
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: [GreenAllianceUSA] Fwd: How Democratic Convention Muzzled
> Anti-War
> Delegates (fwd)
> Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2004 20:27:33 -0000
> From: "obeynow20001"
> Reply-To: GreenAllianceUSA at yahoogroups.com
> To: solidaritygp at yahoogroups.com, ralphnader2004 at yahoogroups.com,
> green_all_views at yahoogrouops.com, greenallianceusa at yahoogroups.com,
> chiantiwar-disc at yahoogroups.com,
> logansquareagainstthewar at yahoogroups.com,
> opctj at yahoogroups.com, progressiverogerspark at yahoogroups.com,
> saicactivism at yahoogroups.com, uicnowariraq at yahoogroups.com
>
> Another reason to vote Nader and build the Green Party:
>
> Volunteer at www.votenader.org
>
> More information at: www.greensfornader.org
>
>
> Alex Briscoe
>
> Illinois Green Party
> Green Alliance
> etc.
>
>
>
>
> --- In IllinoisGreensTalk at yahoogroups.com, huckelberry at s... wrote:
> What a farce. I'm still waiting for someone, anyone in the ABB crowd
>
> to
> explain what they're doing to fight the BS described in this
> statement.
>
> In short, here's a Democratic delegate from Minnesota who found the
> convention so offensive that he honestly doesn't know what to do,
> except to
> keep fighting, somehow, somewhere. The Democrats are actually
> ostracizing
> people from within their own ranks now.
>
> - Phil
>
> --------------------
>
> A Kucinich Convention Delegate Statement: [Excerpts]
>
> Sunday 1st August 2004
>
> "I have been home a bit more than a day, and I wanted to give my
> perspective on the convention in Boston.=20
>
> The first thing I want to say is that the entire convention was a
> sham. Perhaps I was na=EFve, but I went in with the perspective of
> Duluth (the MN Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party State Convention in
> May), where there was lots of _expression from the delegates,
> including wrangling over platform, motions from the floor,
> significant interactions with other delegates. None of that was true
> in Boston; there were no discussions of platform, no microphones on
> the floor at all, no negotiations of any kind, no input of any kind
> from the delegates.
>
> By the end of the first night, I was very deeply
> upset, muttering things about "Stepford delegates" and wondering why
> they didn't just get the crowd as extras from Central Casting,
> instead of going through the delegate selection process they did.
>
> "Lock-step" doesn't begin to cover the management of delegates by
> our minders. Since we were told that we could not bring in signs, I
> didn't, but I made a sign on-site that said simply "Peace." It was
> confiscated, and in a very clever way that left me with no
> possibility of
> confrontation. For the first two days, they were
> ambivalent about the pink scarves we had printed that said "Give
> Bush The Pink Slip; Delegate for Peace." By Tuesday night, they were
> confiscating them by the hundreds at the metal detectors, and then
> going around the hall taking them from individuals. We confronted
> them on that one and got them to back off, but it was a tense battle
> that carried the risk of being ejected from the hall.
>
> There was very tight control, even over the choreographed signs they
> passed out. If you held up a sign too early or too late, you got a
> reprimand. For example, if you held up a basically red Edwards sign
> from 15 minutes ago when everyone else was holding up the blue
> Edwards sign, you were in a bit of trouble. I saved myself grief by
> not holding up any of their silly signs.
>
> So I want to say very clearly that this convention had absolutely
> nothing to do with grassroots politics or representative democracy.
> It was designed as a high-end infomercial. There was a constant
> drumbeat for "unity" and "message." Sadly, the message was entirely
> about how qualified John Kerry was to lead our nation in war. There
> was no mention of our desire for peace, except for some of Dennis's
> comments and a few unscripted remarks by Sharpton.
>
> One of my biggest goals in attending the convention was to deliver a
> warning to a high level Kerry advisor. I believe that their strategy
> of selling Kerry as a more efficient war-monger is extremely
> dangerous. They run the risk of tens of millions of people staying
> home, since they see little distinction between Kerry and Bush when
> it comes to the war.
>
> I got my chance on Sunday, when I attended a teachers' union meeting
> with Kerry's pollster Mark Millner. After his semi-rousing speech,
> they asked for questions, and I obliged. I asked if he didn't think
> it was dangerous to ignore the millions of people who want us to end
> the occupation in Iraq, since it risks them staying home instead of
> voting.
>
> He replied that it was all the fault of the God-damned
> Republicans who were paying to get Nader on the ballot. I came back,
> saying that I was not talking about Nader or Republicans, but loyal
> Democrats who wanted to vote for somebody against the war in Iraq.
> He repeated his Republicans/Nader mantra again.
>
> In other words, they have their plan: Run like Bush-lite, then blame
> Nader when you lose.
>
> As I talk to you now about the actual delegate vote, I want to be
> very specific about the exact sorts of pressure we were all feeling.
>
> Going into the convention, Kucinich had already released his
> delegates and strongly requested that they vote for Kerry on the
> first ballot. After Sunday's emotional meeting, Dennis became clear
> that he could not direct our votes that easily, that many felt bound
> by conscience to vote for him, despite his unity urgings. Or perhaps
> it was rather that many delegates could not morally vote for Kerry
> while he voiced support for war and for the occupation.
>
> At our Minnesota state delegation level, the pressure was enormous.
> I imagine it was the same in other states. Dennis had released our
> votes; if we didn't follow our leader, he would lose all credibility
> at the national level. Dennis was not even on the ballot; if we
> voted for him, it would only be recorded as "present" - - a sort of
> abstention. We were in a life or death fight against Bush and party
> unity was paramount; if we voted for Kucinich, it would be our fault
> if Bush won, and the state and local Democrats would be unwilling to
> work with us on anything - - our credibility with the party would be
> finished.
>
> In that context, there was absolutely nothing to be gained by voting
> for Dennis, but everything to lose. In that context, our Kucinich
> votes would not be seen as votes in favor of peace and progressive
> issues, merely signs of party disloyalty which would benefit the
> Republicans. Nearly all of my fellow delegates, in deep anguish,
> abandoned what they saw as a quixotic fight, in favor of building
> alliances within the party.
>
> I held out for some language of withdrawal from Iraq as a condition,
> got stubborn, and became very much the spoiler in what would have
> been a very practical deal.
>
> In the end, I became weary of so much talk about strategy. I just
> couldn't vote for a guy who spoke so fondly about a more
> international and more efficient occupation of another country. It
> just doesn't fit with what Mrs. Walker taught me back in the 3rd
> grade, about self-determination, the Declaration of Independence,
> and who has the right to rule a people.
>
> The next morning, I gave a speech to the Minnesota delegation,
> explaining my vote of conscience, and my hopes for cooperation. In
> the end, I do not know whether the DFLers will work with the Dean
> and Kucinich types among them, or carry an ongoing resentment toward
> us
> because of my own willful decision. Time will tell. I only know what
> the consequent loss will be as great for them as it is for us, if we
> are shut out and cannot find ourselves in the DFL.
>
> I hope you can forgive us all for any decisions we made in Boston.
> Please understand that we were all isolated, sleep-deprived, living
> in circumstances where others dictated our choices and asked for our
> moral decisions in a context controlled by them and totally new to
> all of us. With each hour since my return to Minnesota, I see more
> clearly that it was a situation, in fact, much like the context of
> brainwashing or the psychological operations used in Guantanamo. We
> were never tortured, and never stripped naked (although the security
> checkpoints at the entrance and at the airport had hints of that).
> We were, however, isolated from our community, from our usual
> context, and even perhaps from the moral parameters we usually have.
>
> The question arises: Should we now support Kerry? It's a hard one.
>
> How can we support someone whose idea of progress is to put a velvet
> glove on the iron fist of colonialism? How can we support someone
> who speaks of a willingness to support unilateral wars (under the
> right conditions) and whose campaign is so overwhelmingly military
> in his values.
>
> But what would happen if we all stayed home or voted for Nader?
> Wouldn't we then risk the true hell of what W. and his neocons would
> do if they won an actual mandate of sorts?
>
> I do not know what you can morally do in this situation. Perhaps you
> can find it in your heart to go to the polls with a clothespin on
> your nose and vote for Kerry. Perhaps you can even find the energy
> to do voter registration or phone canvases or door-knocking. Perhaps
> you will not find any energy at all for the non-choice of this
> presidential campaign, but you will throw yourself into something
> like Patty Wetterling's race or one of the Legacy Project's
> candidates for Minnesota House.
>
> In the end, we must still support all candidates who reflect our
> ideals. In the end, we must examine our own beliefs and
> temperaments, and throw our energies into the causes and
> institutions we want. So keep buying your food at the co-ops. Keep
> marching and conducting vigils, when you can. Keep writing your
> senators and writing the
> president and sending letters to the local papers.
>
> If you are tired or discouraged, take a break. But please don't quit
> altogether. Go to the grass roots and keep organizing like crazy. In
> the end, we will need these millions behind us, whether Kerry or
> Bush holds the title of president.
>
> Peace, Charley Underwood"
>
> by : Charley Underwood
> Sunday 1st August 2004
> --- End forwarded message ---
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
> --------------------~-->
> Yahoo! Domains - Claim yours for only $14.70
> http://us.click.yahoo.com/Z1wmxD/DREIAA/yQLSAA/FdSolB/TM
>
--------------------------------------------------------------------~->
>
>
> If you support rank-and-file democracy in our politics and our
> economy, build
> the Green Alliance. Send $45 dues to P.O. Box 794, Sierra Madre, CA
> 91024.
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
> <*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/GreenAllianceUSA/
>
> <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> GreenAllianceUSA-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com
>
> <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> _______________________________________________
> Membership mailing list
> Membership at green-rainbow.org
> http://www.green-rainbow.org/mailman/listinfo/membership
>
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
_______________________________________________
Membership mailing list
Membership at green-rainbow.org
http://www.green-rainbow.org/mailman/listinfo/membership
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers!
More information about the GNC
mailing list