From wrolley at charter.net Tue Nov 1 20:25:43 2005 From: wrolley at charter.net (Wes Rolley) Date: Tue, 01 Nov 2005 20:25:43 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Prop 13 effect in Santa Clara County Message-ID: <43683FC7.9060409@charter.net> The following was sent today as a future column for the Morgan Hill Times. INfo source is the County Assessors Annual Report 2005-2006 available at their web site: http://www.scc-assessor.org/scc/assets/docs/95344505_final_report_8-23.pdf ---- When Proposition 13 was implemented in 19778-78, it was heralded as the way to save the family home. No more would home owners, especially seniors on fixed incomes, be forced to move or to sell their homes just to avoid tax increases. Since that is approximately the time that I purchased my home in Morgan Hill, I have had the benefit of Proposition 13 for a long time. Now, we are not only dealing with the benefits of Proposition 13, but also the problems of Proposition 8. Between the two, they have opened up enough loop holes for corporations and other businesses that our Governor could drive his Hummer through, as he famously chided Ariana Huffington in one debate. The result of these loopholes and other measures is a change in who bears the burden of local, real estate based taxation. In 1977-78, the valuation in Santa Clara County, and with it the tax burden, was divided about 50/50 between single family residential ? condominium owners and business or other collective ownership. In the Santa Clara County Assessors's latest Annual Report covering 2005-2006 fiscal year, that division has shifted to 67% of the tax burden falling on the home owner and only 33% falling on other holders. In many cases, this might only be because businesses have been better positioned to take advantage of Proposition 8 rules to lower their evaluations. In other cases it has been possible for business interests to change ownership gradually so as to never trigger the ?sale? of a property and its revised assessment. The net result is the fact that we, the home owners are being asked to pay more and more or to give up services. While the City of Morgan Hill is running a deficit, the development community is walking around smiling. While Santa Clara County is talking about layoffs for next year, we find that there is no way make things work except by raising sales tax revenue buying more things that we don't really need. . While business complain about the lack of well educated workers, the burden of supporting our schools falls increasingly on the home owner and California Schools rank near the bottom in terms of per capita student funding. Something just does not make sense out of this. While the Howard Jarvis folks continue to agitate for less and less taxes for the home owner, they are letting the rest get off with not carrying their fair share. The Jarvis folks don't want to talk about real estate taxation on businesses. Now, they are at it again, proclaiming on their web site a : ?Huge threat to Prop. 13. Silicon Valley tax raisers would dismantle taxpayer protections?. It is truly time to revisit both Proposition 13 and Proposition 8 and to close the loopholes. Maybe we can not roll things back to the way they were, but we surely should be able to find a way to fund City and County Government without putting such a heavy tax burden on young families who are buying their first new home. Yes, we have to make hard decisions about what services we want to have from government and then how we are going to fund them. But keeping the status as it is forces governments into making short range decisions for short range revenue gain when they should be making decisions with a view on the sustainability of specific economic development and the long term health of the community. -- "I find I have a great lot to learn ? or unlearn. I seem to know far too much and this knowledge obscures the really significant facts, but I am getting on." -- Charles Rennie Mackintosh Wesley C. Rolley 17211 Quail Court Morgan Hill, CA 95037 (408)778-3024 http://www.refpub.com/ From alexcathy at aol.com Wed Nov 2 07:03:35 2005 From: alexcathy at aol.com (alexcathy at aol.com) Date: Wed, 02 Nov 2005 10:03:35 -0500 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Prop 13 effect in Santa Clara County In-Reply-To: <43683FC7.9060409@charter.net> References: <43683FC7.9060409@charter.net> Message-ID: <8C7ADD5BB4CC20E-1E04-FD@mblk-d31.sysops.aol.com> The latest breaking news is that those crazy Bushies want to screw around with the mortgage deduction on Federal Income Taxes. This used to be one of the "Third Rails" of American politics. It shows you the arrogance of this crew that they would even consider it. So, "conservatiaves" want to paralyse the California State Government, in the name of the supposedly "forgotten" Middle-Class even while playing games in Washington to screw the middle-class! And tax law is one of these things that is just complicated enough that if you try to explain to people how they are getting screwed, you come off sounding like Al Gore ("Oh, you must be one of those smart-assed liberals!"). Here again, is one of those issues where the Green Party is in a unique position to make an important contribution. The Democrats around here are so intimately connected to the "in-crowd" in all our local governments, that everything they say is immediately dismissed as an attempt by "Tax 'n Spend democrats" to maintain their machines and "buy" votes. Greens can come in as true independents. Alex From gpmail at blackmond.com Wed Nov 2 10:47:14 2005 From: gpmail at blackmond.com (Ed Blackmond) Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2005 10:47:14 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Prop 13 effect in Santa Clara County In-Reply-To: <8C7ADD5BB4CC20E-1E04-FD@mblk-d31.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: <15B46E74-4BD1-11DA-A82C-000393446A72@blackmond.com> On Wednesday, November 2, 2005, at 07:03 AM, alexcathy at aol.com wrote: > The latest breaking news is that those crazy Bushies want to screw > around with the mortgage deduction on Federal Income Taxes. I don't think this is a bad idea. I think *all* tax deductions should be eliminated and *all* income should be treated equally. If need be, the tax deductions can be replaced with programs that can be properly accounted for and include sunset clauses for when they are no longer needed. For example, as long as banks need subsidies, there could be the mortgage bank subsidy act that pays people to take out mortgages. The larger the mortgage, the bigger the payment to the individual (and indirectly, the larger the revenue for the bank). Actually, to make it even more clear, the payments should be sent directly to the banks. In this way, the cost of the program becomes a line item on the country's financial report (budget) and everyone can see what it costs. When the act sunsets, it can be determined if banks continue to need this subsidy and if the benefits are worth the cost. If so, the act can be renewed. Similar acts could be enacted to replace all the other subsidies (tax deductions). For example, we could have the wealth subsidy act that would subsidize wealthy people who buy expensive things and pay them back a percentage of what they spend. No longer would these people have to deal with determining if something is a five year or 30 year asset and if they should use straight line depreciation or dollar cost averaging. Or simply eliminate all the deductions and not replace them with anything. Not only would this balance the budget, but would generate a huge surplus to pay down the incredible national debt. In the process, payroll taxes should be eliminated, or applied to all income regardless of the source or amount. Why should income earned by someone hammering a nail into a board be taxed to fund social security while income derived from selling a share of stock not contribute to social security? Eliminate payroll taxes and include social security as a line item on the budget. Doing this would certainly make the tax code much less complex. It might even be called simple. Ed From wrolley at charter.net Tue Nov 1 10:06:27 2005 From: wrolley at charter.net (Wes Rolley) Date: Tue, 01 Nov 2005 10:06:27 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Santa Clara County Property Taxes / Prop 13 Message-ID: <4367AEA3.1050208@charter.net> When Proposition 13 was implemented in 19778-78, it was heralded as the way to save the family home. No more would home owners, especially seniors on fixed incomes, be forced to move or to sell their homes just to avoid tax increases. Since that is approximately the time that I purchased my home in Morgan Hill, I have had the benefit of Proposition 13 for a long time. Now, we are not only dealing with the benefits of Proposition 13, but also the problems of Proposition 8. Between the two, they have opened up enough loop holes for corporations and other businesses that our Governor could drive his Hummer through, as he famously chided Ariana Huffington in one debate. The result of these loopholes and other measures is a change in who bears the burden of local, real estate based taxation. In 1977-78, the valuation in Santa Clara County, and with it the tax burden, was divided about 50/50 between single family residential ? condominium owners and business or other collective ownership. In the Santa Clara County Assessors's latest Annual Report covering 2005-2006 fiscal year, that division has shifted to 67% of the tax burden falling on the home owner and only 33% falling on other holders. In many cases, this might only be because businesses have been better positioned to take advantage of Proposition 8 rules to lower their evaluations. In other cases it has been possible for business interests to change ownership gradually so as to never trigger the ?sale? of a property and its revised assessment. The net result is the fact that we, the home owners are being asked to pay more and more or to give up services. While the City of Morgan Hill is running a deficit, the development community is walking around smiling. While Santa Clara County is talking about layoffs for next year, we find that there is no way make things work except by raising sales tax revenue buying more things that we don't really need. . While business complain about the lack of well educated workers, the burden of supporting our schools falls increasingly on the home owner and California Schools rank near the bottom in terms of per capita student funding. Something just does not make sense out of this. While the Howard Jarvis folks continue to agitate for less and less taxes for the home owner, they are letting the rest get off with not carrying their fair share. The Jarvis folks don't want to talk about real estate taxation on businesses. Now, they are at it again, proclaiming on their web site a : ?Huge threat to Prop. 13. Silicon Valley tax raisers would dismantle taxpayer protections?. It is truly time to revisit both Proposition 13 and Proposition 8 and to close the loopholes. Maybe we can not roll things back to the way they were, but we surely should be able to find a way to fund City and County Government without putting such a heavy tax burden on young families who are buying their first new home. Yes, we have to make hard decisions about what services we want to have from government and then how we are going to fund them. But keeping the status as it is forces governments into making short range decisions for short range revenue gain when they should be making decisions with a view on the sustainability of specific economic development and the long term health of the community. -- "I find I have a great lot to learn ? or unlearn. I seem to know far too much and this knowledge obscures the really significant facts, but I am getting on." -- Charles Rennie Mackintosh Wesley C. Rolley 17211 Quail Court Morgan Hill, CA 95037 (408)778-3024 http://www.refpub.com/ From TNHarter at aol.com Wed Nov 2 15:04:37 2005 From: TNHarter at aol.com (TNHarter at aol.com) Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2005 18:04:37 EST Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Fwd: Notes from last evenings GPSClC Meeting Message-ID: <21b.1aeb0c2.309aa005@aol.com> Email of meeting data taken: November 1, 2005 Tabeling at Foothill College with Mtn View Voices for Peace and Veterans for Peace 12:00-1:00 Wednesday Nov. 2nd. A chance to know the Green Party 5 Delegate spots- Davis-- Agenda packet in process Tuesday before the meeting: Dec. 6th 1st Tuesday in December. Decentralized Democracy Collective Decisions at all County Chapters Decision Items-- Drafted Decision Proposal Campaigne Finance Reform; Elections Co. draft: Election reform Fair Wage Initiative National Delegation Election Goals and Strategies Advanced (paid position) -- Paid Funding Afiliation Agreement-- National Pary Afiliation Sat Sun 2 items Threshold/ Abstension Rule Platform Plank and Bi-Laws amendment. ? Restorative Justice--Gwen's Group County List ? 5 Slots & 5 alternatives and Election of Delegates later ? Nov. 16th Discussion of Agenda Packet: State Meeting to make a comprehensive State meeting. ? 14th District Anna Eshoo's Seat. District Redwood City to Sunnyvale and Santa Cruz Mtns. Deceit Dollars-- Bush Jim Shannon/Pat Gray-- Running for Congress includes San Mateo County District Carol Brioulet-- To Discuss if she is the candidate for this office. ? Mid December ? Annual Peace Fair-- 1st Sat: December 11:00 A.M. - 4 p.m. (Tabeling Event). -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From j.m.doyle at sbcglobal.net Wed Nov 2 19:50:13 2005 From: j.m.doyle at sbcglobal.net (Jim Doyle) Date: Wed, 02 Nov 2005 19:50:13 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] whales and the mexican constitution Message-ID: <436988F5.8050701@sbcglobal.net> To join NAFTA, Mexico had to change its constitution to allow for the privatization and sale of ejidos, communal property. That was the underlying bone of contention of the Zapatistas. That law has just been put to use in a conservation agreement to protect some of the migratory breeding grounds of the whales. http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20051026/news_1n26save.html http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20051022/news_1n22save.html From TNHarter at aol.com Wed Nov 2 20:17:18 2005 From: TNHarter at aol.com (TNHarter at aol.com) Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2005 23:17:18 EST Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Fwd: Notes from last evenings GPSClC Meeting Message-ID: <90.6a10f266.309ae94e@aol.com> I would like to add that we voted on button designs. Four types were okayed: Green Party over peace sign Green Party over sunflowers Tux says FREE YOUR PC Sustainability green party If the ones I left with Fred to put on the table "sell", I'll make more. -- Tian Most recent change to my website: Added my step sisters wedding pictures http://tian.greens.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From TNHarter at aol.com Wed Nov 2 20:35:45 2005 From: TNHarter at aol.com (TNHarter at aol.com) Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2005 23:35:45 EST Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Pictures from Saturday's MVVP, LAVP & SVP march! Message-ID: <197.4a89a0f5.309aeda1@aol.com> http://tian.greens.org/MVVP/October05/index.html -- Tian Most recent change to my website: Added pictures from the 2000th casualty in Iraq mark march. http://tian.greens.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From adamczech at yahoo.com Wed Nov 2 20:28:41 2005 From: adamczech at yahoo.com (ADAM CZECH) Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2005 20:28:41 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Mend Your Fuelish Ways! Message-ID: <20051103042841.90252.qmail@web34604.mail.mud.yahoo.com> I saw Tian's play on words used on The Daily Show with John Stewart tonight. Foolish and/or Fuelish =) All right Tian ! __________________________________ Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005 http://mail.yahoo.com From wrolley at charter.net Wed Nov 2 21:35:26 2005 From: wrolley at charter.net (Wes Rolley) Date: Wed, 02 Nov 2005 21:35:26 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] So here is the problem Message-ID: <4369A19E.3090804@charter.net> The national media has much more power than it should have to direct where our national attention is focused. The same goes for the state level. This week the national media has been focusing on: The Death of Rosa Parks, The Visit of Prince Charles and his lady. The confirmation hearings for the Supreme Court. Scooter Libby and the Senate in closed session. The Iraq war. The State Media is giving us a play by play analysis of Schwarzenegger vs. the unions. While all of this is occupying our attention, Congress is working on an "omnibus budget reconcilliation package." The media won't touch this story because eyes roll to the back of the head as soon as you say the word 'budget'. Meanwhile, this budget does some very funny things besides building a multimillion $ bridge to nowhere except Alaskan Rep Con Young's relatives place. It implements policy decisions that no one ever voted on per se: It cuts $60 Million from the District of Columbia Education Budget while mandating that they spend $118 Million to purchase park land from the Federal Government and brags about the federal revenue gain. It provide more federal revenue by telling the Secretary of the Interior to sell all land that has now or ever has had mining claims or operation on them, even it the mine has been close for a hundered years and never had any gold anyway. And, of course they brags about the increased revenue. It is too bad that most of that land is in National Forests and Parks. It provides for drilling for oil in the Alaska National Wildlife Refuge and increases the area for offshore drillign to the Outer Continental Shelf...120 miles. None of those are policy decisions that would pass if voted on by themselves, but wrap them in a budget and who knows because no one is looking. The senate started to discuss this November 1, 2005. I want what Bush wants, an up or down vote on ANWR. I want an up or down vote on Offshore Drilling. I want an up or down vote on whether the District of Columbia would really spend their money on bailing out the Feds or on education. As Alex tells us, they are all a bunch of sneaky bastards. -- "I find I have a great lot to learn ? or unlearn. I seem to know far too much and this knowledge obscures the really significant facts, but I am getting on." -- Charles Rennie Mackintosh Wesley C. Rolley 17211 Quail Court Morgan Hill, CA 95037 (408)778-3024 http://www.refpub.com/ From alexcathy at aol.com Thu Nov 3 11:52:58 2005 From: alexcathy at aol.com (alexcathy at aol.com) Date: Thu, 03 Nov 2005 14:52:58 -0500 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] The Love Bush/Hate Clinton Wall Street Journal Message-ID: <8C7AEC752D6A81C-1694-10E76@mblk-d37.sysops.aol.com> Dear Green Friends, I am posting excerpts from an editorial published by The Wall Street Journal today as an example of the political insanity of our time in America. Consider two editorials from the Wall Street Journal. EDITORIAL #1 -- NOVEMBER 3, 2005 Published today WSJ argues, in a nutshell, that Bush's lies about Iraq are okay because "Bush-Hating" Democrats told the same lies. They simply quote all these hawkish statements by various Democrats Al Gore, Hillary Clinton, and Jay Rockefeller, Democratic Vice Chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee. It's capped off with a rhetorical question: "If Mr. Bush is a liar, what does the use of the phrase 'unmistakable evidence' make Mr. Rockefeller? A fool?" Well, as a good Green Party man, my reply, Rockefeller, Gore, Clinton, and our own Sen. Diane Feinstein, are indeed. . . FOOLS! EDITORIAL #2 -- FEBRUARY 19, 1999 Published just after the Clinton impeachment in 1999, WSJ indulges in a paroxysm of totally over-the-top, Clinton-Hating. Whatever we may feel about William Jefferson Clinton, we must never forget just how utterly insane these people about Clinton and that, frankly, trivial Whitewater scandal. Remember how special prosecutor Kenneth Starr turned over every rock in Arkansas digging up dirt on the Clintons? Notice how these ideologues try to argue that Clinton's personal weaknesses were somehow "proof" of the decadence of "Reactionary Liberalism" (I love the way reactionaries play games with words like "reactionary"). It is amusing (and terrifying) to replay some of this shit from 1999: ". . . Susan McDougal goes on trial next month for criminal contempt in refusing to say whether Mr. Clinton perjured himself over the key Whitewater loan. . ." Nobody high up in the Clinton Adminstration was ever convicted of any crime, though poor Susan McDougal served hard time for "contempt" for not telling Ken Starr what he wanted to hear. ". . . delicious prospect of Hillary Clinton running for the Senate in New York will provide occasion to revisit the $100,000 commodities coup, the Castle Grande land flips, missing billing records and the rest." Hillary was elected by landslide. ". . . Robert Rubin and Larry Summers, on whose watch the world economic crisis erupted, are preparing to blame it on too free markets and too much foreign investment." Summers, as president of "liberal" Harvard became an instant "conservative" hero for denouncing Cornel West and saying "girls" are too dumb for science. The whole thing is incredible rant. Clinton's appointment of Janet Reno as Attorney General is "a sexual quota as Attorney General." These are same people who praised John Ashcroft and Alberto Gonzales. Clinton's corporate-friendly health-care plan was an attempt "to nationalize 14% of GDP." Republicans in Congress, by some twisted logic, get credit for "enormous financial boom that still runs today." Clinton was reelected in 1996 with the help of "financial contributions from Chinese with intelligence connections." These are the same people who go into a rage whenever somebody brings up Bush and Cheney's direct and obvious connections in Middle Eastern oil interests. Check out this peroration: "Today the Democratic Party still counts traditional loyalties fairly won in its glory days. But it draws its muscle from labor unions unable to recruit private sector members, black leaders who can deliver votes but not advancement for their constituents, tort lawyers made rich with parasitic lucre, hypocritical feminists, stop-the-world environmentalists, lifestyle gays and the like. . ." What do they mean by "lifestyle gays and the like"? The Wall Street Journal is the second largest circulation newspaper in the United States and read by important people in government and commerce around the wrote. They ranted and foamed in this way about a middle-of-the-road, pro-corporate, pro-free trade Democratic Administration in a time of relative peace and prosperity. I shudder to think what these FASCISTS think about folks like you and me. Alex Walker = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Published by The Wall Street Journal, November 03, 2005. EDITORIAL #1: THE CLARE LUCE DEMOCRATS HOW THEY'RE LYING ABOUT "HE LIED US INTO WAR" Harry Reid pulled the Senate into closed session Tuesday, claiming that "The Libby indictment provides a window into what this is really all about, how this Administration manufactured and manipulated intelligence in order to sell the war in Iraq." But the Minority Leader's statement was as demonstrably false as his stunt was transparently political. What Mr. Reid's pose is "really all about" is the emergence of the Clare Boothe Luce Democrats. We're referring to the 20th-century playwright, and wife of Time magazine founder Henry Luce, who was most famous for declaring that Franklin D. Roosevelt had "lied us into war" with the Nazis and Tojo. So intense was the hatred of FDR among some Republicans that they held fast to this slander for years, with many taking their paranoia to their graves. We are now seeing the spectacle of Bush-hating Democrats adopting a similar slander against the current President regarding the Iraq War. The indictment by Patrick Fitzgerald of Vice Presidential aide I. Lewis Libby has become their latest opening to promote this fiction, notwithstanding the mountains of contrary evidence. To wit: . . . Everyone, that is, except Joseph Wilson IV. He first became the Democrats' darling in July 2003, when he published an op-ed claiming he'd debunked Mr. Bush's "16 words" on Iraqi attempts to purchase African yellowcake and that the Administration had distorted the evidence about Saddam's weapons programs to fit its agenda. This Wilson tale fit the "lied us into war" narrative so well that he was adopted by the John Kerry presidential campaign. Only to be dropped faster than a Paris Hilton boyfriend after the Senate Intelligence and Butler reports were published. Those reports clearly showed that, while Saddam had probably not purchased yellowcake from Niger, the dictator had almost certainly tried--and that Mr. Wilson's own briefing of the CIA after his mission supported that conclusion. Mr. Wilson somehow omitted that fact from his public accounts at the time. . . . Yet, incredibly, Mr. Wilson has once again become the Democrats' favorite mascot because they want him as a prop for their "lied us into war" revival campaign. They must think the media are stupid, because so many Democrats are themselves on the record in the pre-Iraq War period as declaring that Saddam had WMD. Here is Al Gore from September 23, 2002, amid the Congressional debate over going to war: "We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country." Or Hillary Rodham Clinton, from October 10, 2002: "In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members. . . ." Or Senator Jay Rockefeller, the Democratic Vice Chairman of the Intelligence Committee, who is now leading the "Bush lied" brigades (from October 10, 2002): "There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years. . . .We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction." If Mr. Bush is a liar, what does the use of the phrase "unmistakable evidence" make Mr. Rockefeller? A fool? The scandal here isn't what happened before the war. The scandal is that the same Democrats who saw the same intelligence that Mr. Bush saw, who drew the same conclusions, and who voted to go to war are now using the difficulties we've encountered in that conflict as an excuse to rewrite history. Are Republicans really going to let them get away with it? = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Published by The Wall Street Journal, February 19, 1999. EDITORIAL #2: IMPEACHING REACTIONARY LIBERALISM The 50-50 Senate vote on booting President Clinton from office is by no means the final curtain of the drama these columns have been following so closely for seven years. But it is certainly an occasion to reflect, and in the end we return to where we began. It is not entirely an accident that so flawed a personality became President, for great dynasties typically decline into personal and political corruption. In this sense Mr. Clinton represents the last gasp of New Deal liberalism. With the end of the Senate proceedings, our friends and fans keep asking how we feel. Be of good cheer. The President has "won," clinging to office behind the Constitutional requirement of a two-thirds Senate majority. But whoever expected to reach that final barricade? The stonewall was skillfully constructed, and the Clinton scandals have been repeatedly declared dead. Yet the House has officially impeached for the second time in history, and the public is broadly convinced the President is indeed guilty of perjury and obstruction of justice, still felonies in most law books. Justice should require that he be convicted and removed, and we do indeed worry about what lame-duck mischief he may wreak. Yet politically, there are compensations for leaving him in office and keeping the books open. If he had been somehow removed, he could parade as martyr and no one would much rise to say him nay. Acquittal, if that's what we're to call the hung jury, is instead freeing withheld truth. Judge Susan Webber Wright is considering holding him in contempt for his lies to her court in the Paula Jones case. With the revelations about the Juanita Broaddrick story by Dorothy Rabinowitz alongside, perhaps NBC President Andy Lack will stop censoring his news division (See related editorial: "Juanita Broaddrick Meets the Press"--WSJ Feb. 19, 1999). Webb Hubbell is still in court, albeit before Clintonista Judge James Robertson. Susan McDougal goes on trial next month for criminal contempt in refusing to say whether Mr. Clinton perjured himself over the key Whitewater loan. The delicious prospect of Hillary Clinton running for the Senate in New York will provide occasion to revisit the $100,000 commodities coup, the Castle Grande land flips, missing billing records and the rest. Mr. Clinton's continued tenure, too, provides the opportunity to explore how similar habits have bent public policy. The Cox report on technology transfer to China is still pending, for example. We divine from rivers of ink in The New York Times that Robert Rubin and Larry Summers, on whose watch the world economic crisis erupted, are preparing to blame it on too free markets and too much foreign investment. We hope we're not alone in exploring what part the late Ron Brown and his Commerce Department's flying fund-raisers played in the investment process. In the largest sense, though, it is not Mr. Clinton's small lies that matter. His whole career has been a lie. He came to the national scene as a New Democrat, a centrist governor pruning the excesses of his party. His first initiative, not counting gays in the military and a sexual quota for Attorney General, proposed to nationalize 14% of GDP. The health-care debacle elected a Republican Congress, and, with the bond market bottoming out on election day, this started the enormous financial boom that still runs today. Tacking back to the right with welfare reform (not to mention garnering financial contributions from Chinese with intelligence connections) he won re-election. In the midst of impeachment, he comes again with a State of the Union mimicking the platform so roundly rejected when offered by George McGovern in 1972. While we would not exactly accuse Mr. Clinton of believing anything beyond the time it takes him to say it, his political instincts lead him to run to the center, but otherwise to return to his roots. That is to say, to the tax-and-spend liberalism so boldly announced by Harry Hopkins before World War II. Under Franklin Roosevelt and Harry Truman, of course, this liberalism had a far less cynical side. There were good reasons in their times for Social Security for the retired, for protecting labor unions, for federal efforts to end odious segregation in the South. The experience of winning World War II created a young and visionary leadership cadre that carried the Republic, and the Democratic Party, for many years. Long before Mr. Clinton, though, the vision had degenerated into a parody of itself, and the political coalition had ossified into calculating interest groups. While the idea of a social safety net is universally accepted, no one any longer believes in government largesse as an engine of uplift. Today the Democratic Party still counts traditional loyalties fairly won in its glory days. But it draws its muscle from labor unions unable to recruit private sector members, black leaders who can deliver votes but not advancement for their constituents, tort lawyers made rich with parasitic lucre, hypocritical feminists, stop-the-world environmentalists, lifestyle gays and the like. . . . We were especially proud to publish Peggy Noonan's Friday article, "The Little Clintons." She discerns our dilemma; our politicians of both parties suffer a milder case of the personality disorder Mr. Clinton carries to an extreme. "More and more, politicians seem like weak egomaniacs, people so weak they let polls push them around and so egomaniacal they have to jump into the parade." The current President aside, "I am sure that in some ways it was ever thus, and yet I'm also sure that we can't afford this modern political personality anymore." What we need are political leaders who believe in ideas and believe in themselves. In the House managers we saw a whiff of this, a rarity since Ronald Reagan left the scene. They failed to convict Bill Clinton, but they found something within themselves. If they bring the same sense of conviction to other issues they may win a larger accomplishment, impeaching reactionary liberalism. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = From alexcathy at aol.com Thu Nov 3 11:55:30 2005 From: alexcathy at aol.com (alexcathy at aol.com) Date: Thu, 03 Nov 2005 14:55:30 -0500 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] The Love Bush/Hate Clinton Wall Street Journal Message-ID: <8C7AEC7AD6AF36C-1694-10ED0@mblk-d37.sysops.aol.com> Dear Green Friends, I am posting excerpts from an editorial published by The Wall Street Journal today as an example of the political insanity of our time in America. Consider two editorials from the Wall Street Journal. EDITORIAL #1 -- NOVEMBER 3, 2005 Published today WSJ argues, in a nutshell, that Bush's lies about Iraq are okay because "Bush-Hating" Democrats told the same lies. They simply quote all these hawkish statements by various Democrats Al Gore, Hillary Clinton, and Jay Rockefeller, Democratic Vice Chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee. It's capped off with a rhetorical question: "If Mr. Bush is a liar, what does the use of the phrase 'unmistakable evidence' make Mr. Rockefeller? A fool?" Well, as a good Green Party man, my reply, Rockefeller, Gore, Clinton, and our own Sen. Diane Feinstein, are indeed. . . FOOLS! EDITORIAL #2 -- FEBRUARY 19, 1999 Published just after the Clinton impeachment in 1999, WSJ indulges in a paroxysm of totally over-the-top, Clinton-Hating. Whatever we may feel about William Jefferson Clinton, we must never forget just how utterly insane these people about Clinton and that, frankly, trivial Whitewater scandal. Remember how special prosecutor Kenneth Starr turned over every rock in Arkansas digging up dirt on the Clintons? Notice how these ideologues try to argue that Clinton's personal weaknesses were somehow "proof" of the decadence of "Reactionary Liberalism" (I love the way reactionaries play games with words like "reactionary"). It is amusing (and terrifying) to replay some of this shit from 1999: ". . . Susan McDougal goes on trial next month for criminal contempt in refusing to say whether Mr. Clinton perjured himself over the key Whitewater loan. . ." Nobody high up in the Clinton Adminstration was ever convicted of any crime, though poor Susan McDougal served hard time for "contempt" for not telling Ken Starr what he wanted to hear. ". . . delicious prospect of Hillary Clinton running for the Senate in New York will provide occasion to revisit the $100,000 commodities coup, the Castle Grande land flips, missing billing records and the rest." Hillary was elected by landslide. ". . . Robert Rubin and Larry Summers, on whose watch the world economic crisis erupted, are preparing to blame it on too free markets and too much foreign investment." Summers, as president of "liberal" Harvard became an instant "conservative" hero for denouncing Cornel West and saying "girls" are too dumb for science. The whole thing is incredible rant. Clinton's appointment of Janet Reno as Attorney General is "a sexual quota as Attorney General." These are same people who praised John Ashcroft and Alberto Gonzales. Clinton's corporate-friendly health-care plan was an attempt "to nationalize 14% of GDP." Republicans in Congress, by some twisted logic, get credit for "enormous financial boom that still runs today." Clinton was reelected in 1996 with the help of "financial contributions from Chinese with intelligence connections." These are the same people who go into a rage whenever somebody brings up Bush and Cheney's direct and obvious connections in Middle Eastern oil interests. Check out this peroration: "Today the Democratic Party still counts traditional loyalties fairly won in its glory days. But it draws its muscle from labor unions unable to recruit private sector members, black leaders who can deliver votes but not advancement for their constituents, tort lawyers made rich with parasitic lucre, hypocritical feminists, stop-the-world environmentalists, lifestyle gays and the like. . ." What do they mean by "lifestyle gays and the like"? The Wall Street Journal is the second largest circulation newspaper in the United States and read by important people in government and commerce around the wrote. They ranted and foamed in this way about a middle-of-the-road, pro-corporate, pro-free trade Democratic Administration in a time of relative peace and prosperity. I shudder to think what these FASCISTS think about folks like you and me. Alex Walker = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Published by The Wall Street Journal, November 03, 2005. EDITORIAL #1: THE CLARE LUCE DEMOCRATS HOW THEY'RE LYING ABOUT "HE LIED US INTO WAR" Harry Reid pulled the Senate into closed session Tuesday, claiming that "The Libby indictment provides a window into what this is really all about, how this Administration manufactured and manipulated intelligence in order to sell the war in Iraq." But the Minority Leader's statement was as demonstrably false as his stunt was transparently political. What Mr. Reid's pose is "really all about" is the emergence of the Clare Boothe Luce Democrats. We're referring to the 20th-century playwright, and wife of Time magazine founder Henry Luce, who was most famous for declaring that Franklin D. Roosevelt had "lied us into war" with the Nazis and Tojo. So intense was the hatred of FDR among some Republicans that they held fast to this slander for years, with many taking their paranoia to their graves. We are now seeing the spectacle of Bush-hating Democrats adopting a similar slander against the current President regarding the Iraq War. The indictment by Patrick Fitzgerald of Vice Presidential aide I. Lewis Libby has become their latest opening to promote this fiction, notwithstanding the mountains of contrary evidence. To wit: . . . Everyone, that is, except Joseph Wilson IV. He first became the Democrats' darling in July 2003, when he published an op-ed claiming he'd debunked Mr. Bush's "16 words" on Iraqi attempts to purchase African yellowcake and that the Administration had distorted the evidence about Saddam's weapons programs to fit its agenda. This Wilson tale fit the "lied us into war" narrative so well that he was adopted by the John Kerry presidential campaign. Only to be dropped faster than a Paris Hilton boyfriend after the Senate Intelligence and Butler reports were published. Those reports clearly showed that, while Saddam had probably not purchased yellowcake from Niger, the dictator had almost certainly tried--and that Mr. Wilson's own briefing of the CIA after his mission supported that conclusion. Mr. Wilson somehow omitted that fact from his public accounts at the time. . . . Yet, incredibly, Mr. Wilson has once again become the Democrats' favorite mascot because they want him as a prop for their "lied us into war" revival campaign. They must think the media are stupid, because so many Democrats are themselves on the record in the pre-Iraq War period as declaring that Saddam had WMD. Here is Al Gore from September 23, 2002, amid the Congressional debate over going to war: "We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country." Or Hillary Rodham Clinton, from October 10, 2002: "In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members. . . ." Or Senator Jay Rockefeller, the Democratic Vice Chairman of the Intelligence Committee, who is now leading the "Bush lied" brigades (from October 10, 2002): "There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years. . . .We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction." If Mr. Bush is a liar, what does the use of the phrase "unmistakable evidence" make Mr. Rockefeller? A fool? The scandal here isn't what happened before the war. The scandal is that the same Democrats who saw the same intelligence that Mr. Bush saw, who drew the same conclusions, and who voted to go to war are now using the difficulties we've encountered in that conflict as an excuse to rewrite history. Are Republicans really going to let them get away with it? = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Published by The Wall Street Journal, February 19, 1999. EDITORIAL #2: IMPEACHING REACTIONARY LIBERALISM The 50-50 Senate vote on booting President Clinton from office is by no means the final curtain of the drama these columns have been following so closely for seven years. But it is certainly an occasion to reflect, and in the end we return to where we began. It is not entirely an accident that so flawed a personality became President, for great dynasties typically decline into personal and political corruption. In this sense Mr. Clinton represents the last gasp of New Deal liberalism. With the end of the Senate proceedings, our friends and fans keep asking how we feel. Be of good cheer. The President has "won," clinging to office behind the Constitutional requirement of a two-thirds Senate majority. But whoever expected to reach that final barricade? The stonewall was skillfully constructed, and the Clinton scandals have been repeatedly declared dead. Yet the House has officially impeached for the second time in history, and the public is broadly convinced the President is indeed guilty of perjury and obstruction of justice, still felonies in most law books. Justice should require that he be convicted and removed, and we do indeed worry about what lame-duck mischief he may wreak. Yet politically, there are compensations for leaving him in office and keeping the books open. If he had been somehow removed, he could parade as martyr and no one would much rise to say him nay. Acquittal, if that's what we're to call the hung jury, is instead freeing withheld truth. Judge Susan Webber Wright is considering holding him in contempt for his lies to her court in the Paula Jones case. With the revelations about the Juanita Broaddrick story by Dorothy Rabinowitz alongside, perhaps NBC President Andy Lack will stop censoring his news division (See related editorial: "Juanita Broaddrick Meets the Press"--WSJ Feb. 19, 1999). Webb Hubbell is still in court, albeit before Clintonista Judge James Robertson. Susan McDougal goes on trial next month for criminal contempt in refusing to say whether Mr. Clinton perjured himself over the key Whitewater loan. The delicious prospect of Hillary Clinton running for the Senate in New York will provide occasion to revisit the $100,000 commodities coup, the Castle Grande land flips, missing billing records and the rest. Mr. Clinton's continued tenure, too, provides the opportunity to explore how similar habits have bent public policy. The Cox report on technology transfer to China is still pending, for example. We divine from rivers of ink in The New York Times that Robert Rubin and Larry Summers, on whose watch the world economic crisis erupted, are preparing to blame it on too free markets and too much foreign investment. We hope we're not alone in exploring what part the late Ron Brown and his Commerce Department's flying fund-raisers played in the investment process. In the largest sense, though, it is not Mr. Clinton's small lies that matter. His whole career has been a lie. He came to the national scene as a New Democrat, a centrist governor pruning the excesses of his party. His first initiative, not counting gays in the military and a sexual quota for Attorney General, proposed to nationalize 14% of GDP. The health-care debacle elected a Republican Congress, and, with the bond market bottoming out on election day, this started the enormous financial boom that still runs today. Tacking back to the right with welfare reform (not to mention garnering financial contributions from Chinese with intelligence connections) he won re-election. In the midst of impeachment, he comes again with a State of the Union mimicking the platform so roundly rejected when offered by George McGovern in 1972. While we would not exactly accuse Mr. Clinton of believing anything beyond the time it takes him to say it, his political instincts lead him to run to the center, but otherwise to return to his roots. That is to say, to the tax-and-spend liberalism so boldly announced by Harry Hopkins before World War II. Under Franklin Roosevelt and Harry Truman, of course, this liberalism had a far less cynical side. There were good reasons in their times for Social Security for the retired, for protecting labor unions, for federal efforts to end odious segregation in the South. The experience of winning World War II created a young and visionary leadership cadre that carried the Republic, and the Democratic Party, for many years. Long before Mr. Clinton, though, the vision had degenerated into a parody of itself, and the political coalition had ossified into calculating interest groups. While the idea of a social safety net is universally accepted, no one any longer believes in government largesse as an engine of uplift. Today the Democratic Party still counts traditional loyalties fairly won in its glory days. But it draws its muscle from labor unions unable to recruit private sector members, black leaders who can deliver votes but not advancement for their constituents, tort lawyers made rich with parasitic lucre, hypocritical feminists, stop-the-world environmentalists, lifestyle gays and the like. . . . We were especially proud to publish Peggy Noonan's Friday article, "The Little Clintons." She discerns our dilemma; our politicians of both parties suffer a milder case of the personality disorder Mr. Clinton carries to an extreme. "More and more, politicians seem like weak egomaniacs, people so weak they let polls push them around and so egomaniacal they have to jump into the parade." The current President aside, "I am sure that in some ways it was ever thus, and yet I'm also sure that we can't afford this modern political personality anymore." What we need are political leaders who believe in ideas and believe in themselves. In the House managers we saw a whiff of this, a rarity since Ronald Reagan left the scene. They failed to convict Bill Clinton, but they found something within themselves. If they bring the same sense of conviction to other issues they may win a larger accomplishment, impeaching reactionary liberalism. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = From vdf at juno.com Thu Nov 3 13:06:01 2005 From: vdf at juno.com (Valerie D. Face) Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2005 21:06:01 GMT Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Fwd: Notes from last evenings GPSClC Meeting Message-ID: <20051103.130608.25709.104@webmail39.lax.untd.com> An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- Email of meeting data taken: November 1, 2005 Tabeling at Foothill College with Mtn View Voices for Peace and Veterans for Peace 12:00-1:00 Wednesday Nov. 2nd. A chance to know the Green Party 5 Delegate spots- Davis-- Agenda packet in process Tuesday before the meeting: Dec. 6th 1st Tuesday in December. Decentralized Democracy Collective Decisions at all County Chapters Decision Items-- Drafted Decision Proposal Campaigne Finance Reform; Elections Co. draft: Election reform Fair Wage Initiative National Delegation Election Goals and Strategies Advanced (paid position) -- Paid Funding Afiliation Agreement-- National Pary Afiliation Sat Sun 2 items Threshold/ Abstension Rule Platform Plank and Bi-Laws amendment. ? Restorative Justice--Gwen's Group County List ? 5 Slots & 5 alternatives and Election of Delegates later ? Nov. 16th Discussion of Agenda Packet: State Meeting to make a comprehensive State meeting. ? 14th District Anna Eshoo's Seat. District Redwood City to Sunnyvale and Santa Cruz Mtns. Deceit Dollars-- Bush Jim Shannon/Pat Gray-- Running for Congress includes San Mateo County District Carol Brioulet-- To Discuss if she is the candidate for this office. ? Mid December ? Annual Peace Fair-- 1st Sat: December 11:00 A.M. - 4 p.m. (Tabeling Event). -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From wrolley at charter.net Thu Nov 3 13:12:16 2005 From: wrolley at charter.net (Wes Rolley) Date: Thu, 03 Nov 2005 13:12:16 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Pombo yet again...even the Murky News gets it. Message-ID: <436A7D30.3090501@charter.net> Just in case any of you have any doubts at all about Richard Pombo and think that I am one of the biased extremist radial environmentalists he talks about, consider the following from the Murky News Editorial pages yesterday. -- Earth needs protection from Pombo Richard Pombo, the rancher and member of Congress from Tracy, has been on a roll. He's been rolling over the Endangered Species Act. He's been rolling over the moratorium on offshore oil and gas drilling. He's been rolling over the notion that public lands ought to be managed for the public good. In general, Pombo has been using his position as chairman of the House Natural Resources committee to flatten the laws that protect the natural wonders of his home state and the rest of the states as well. Pombo can't do this by himself, of course. His fellow Republicans (and some Democrats) in the House have been all too willing to go along with the notion that environmental rules are oppressing property owners and strangling the nation's energy supply. At the end of September, the House voted 229-193 to approve a Pombo rewrite of the Endangered Species Act, which he has campaigned to eviscerate since he was elected to Congress 13 years ago. Pombo claims that the act is ineffective, despite studies that show it has arrested the decline of half the species protected under it. What Pombo really wants the act to protect is his excessive notion of property-owner rights. The rewritten act would require the government to compensate property owners who say an endangered species thwarts their development plans. It's an open invitation to dream up developments and get bought out of them at exorbitant prices by taxpayers. Last week, Pombo persuaded the House Resources Committee to approve language for the budget act that erodes the national moratorium on offshore oil and gas leasing in federal waters by offering states who agree to drilling a bigger share of the royalties. The budget language also would revive a dormant practice of selling public lands to companies that have mining permits on them. And -- this can hardly be a surprise -- it endorses drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. This environmental destruction is written into the budget act as a way -- a shortsighted way -- of raising revenues. Environmental blindness is a Pombo specialty. He's pushing for a highway from the Central Valley over Mount Hamilton into East San Jose. There's only one reason to build it. A river of concrete through an unspoiled landscape would be a symbol of the swath of destruction Pombo is cutting through environmental protections. Talk back Tell Rep. Richard Pombo what you think: E-mail him by clicking on the ``Contact me'' link at his home page: www.house.gov/pombo. Write him at his Stockton office, 2495 W. March Lane, Suite 104, Stockton, Calif. 95207. Phone him at (209) 951-3091. -- "I find I have a great lot to learn ? or unlearn. I seem to know far too much and this knowledge obscures the really significant facts, but I am getting on." -- Charles Rennie Mackintosh Wesley C. Rolley 17211 Quail Court Morgan Hill, CA 95037 (408)778-3024 http://www.refpub.com/ From j.m.doyle at sbcglobal.net Thu Nov 3 17:28:34 2005 From: j.m.doyle at sbcglobal.net (Jim Doyle) Date: Thu, 03 Nov 2005 17:28:34 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] New York mayoral election Message-ID: <436AB942.8080500@sbcglobal.net> Here is a link to a lengthy article by Juan Gonzales that discusses the issues in the New York mayoral election. The article discusses the local issues as well as the long term issues for progressives, e.g., the effects of dismissing local school boards or the class divide within the progressive movement. http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=05/11/03/1749256 From alexcathy at aol.com Thu Nov 3 21:31:59 2005 From: alexcathy at aol.com (alexcathy at aol.com) Date: Fri, 04 Nov 2005 00:31:59 -0500 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] New York mayoral election In-Reply-To: <436AB942.8080500@sbcglobal.net> References: <436AB942.8080500@sbcglobal.net> Message-ID: <8C7AF18365540AE-8BC-88DD@mblk-d46.sysops.aol.com> Damn, Jim! That's a hard-hitting article! One of the hardest-hitting I've ever read. Alex From drpesto at hotmail.com Thu Nov 3 22:29:42 2005 From: drpesto at hotmail.com (Michael Fischetti) Date: Thu, 03 Nov 2005 22:29:42 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] gulf of tonkin and WMD"S Message-ID: dejavu all over again -- what we all knew -- the gulf of tonkin episode was fabricated just like WMD's -- truth will out mike fischetti >http://www.commondreams.org/views05/1103-27.htm From TNHarter at aol.com Fri Nov 4 13:10:44 2005 From: TNHarter at aol.com (TNHarter at aol.com) Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2005 16:10:44 EST Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Fwd: You Are Invited to Acterra & GreenCitizen's High Tech Harvest Party 11-11-05 Message-ID: <60.61b8c782.309d2854@aol.com> -- Tian Most recent change to my website: Added pictures from the 2000th casualty in Iraq mark march. http://tian.greens.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- An embedded message was scrubbed... From: Acterra Events Subject: You Are Invited to Acterra & GreenCitizen's High Tech Harvest Party 11-11-05 Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2005 12:36:27 -0800 Size: 5866 URL: From jims at greens.org Sat Nov 5 19:24:55 2005 From: jims at greens.org (Jim Stauffer) Date: Sat, 05 Nov 2005 19:24:55 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Fwd: Notes from last evenings GPSClC Meeting References: <20051103.130608.25709.104@webmail39.lax.untd.com> Message-ID: <436D7787.F3B93C27@greens.org> Here's my take on the meeting notes. -- Jim GPSCC Meeting November 1, 2005 Tabling at Foothill College with Mtn View Voices for Peace and Veterans for Peace 12:00-1:00 Wednesday Nov. 2nd. A chance to know the Green Party GREEN PARTY STATE MEETING The state General Assembly is Decentralized Democracy Collective Decisions at all County Chapters -- Meeting will be Dec 10 -11 at UC Davis Santa Clara has 5 Delegate spots - volunteers needed -- Agenda packet: Due to be released sometime next week at http://cagreens.org/plenary/ -- Nov. 16th Discussion of Agenda Packet: Snata Clara delegates, and anyone interested, will meet to discuss proposals in agenda packet. Will report back to county meeting on Dec. 6th for final decisions on how to vote. 14th CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT Carol Brioulet-- Discuss if she is the candidate for this office. 14th Congessional District, Anna Eshoo's Seat. District covers Redwood City to Sunnyvale and Santa Cruz Mtns. Deceit Dollars-- Bush Jim Shannon/Pat Gray-- Running for Congress includes San Mateo County Need to set up meeting with candidate. Possible joint meeting with San Mateo Greens. Mid December. TABLING EVENT Annual Peace Fair-- 1st Sat: December 11:00 A.M. - 4 p.m. From wrolley at charter.net Sun Nov 6 11:11:18 2005 From: wrolley at charter.net (Wes Rolley) Date: Sun, 06 Nov 2005 11:11:18 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Membership and Retention Message-ID: <436E5556.40206@charter.net> Last spring, there was a Membership and Retention Committee. I have not heard anything about it for a long time. Is it still active? Who is working on it? What happened to Mike Horton who as working as part of this committee? Did anyone ever address his idea of updating the GPCA Owners Guide? As part of the effort to expand our membership recruitment / tabling materials, Fred Hosea has provided GROW with an updated version of the 10 KV trifold handout. The new version has better appearance and a much improved Spanish Tranlsation. It is available at http://www.cagreens.org/gros/flyers.htm in both text and printable PDF formats. -- "I find I have a great lot to learn ? or unlearn. I seem to know far too much and this knowledge obscures the really significant facts, but I am getting on." -- Charles Rennie Mackintosh Wesley C. Rolley 17211 Quail Court Morgan Hill, CA 95037 (408)778-3024 http://www.refpub.com/ From Mjsmith55 at aol.com Sun Nov 6 11:55:13 2005 From: Mjsmith55 at aol.com (Mjsmith55 at aol.com) Date: Sun, 6 Nov 2005 14:55:13 EST Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] GPSMC Green Talk for November Message-ID: The Nov 9th Green Talk will be an opportunity to join in a recap of our Nov 8th election and plan for "Green Giving" this holiday season. We are fortunate to have a great speaker from RecycleWorks - Dianne Anderson. Please join us. Wednesday, November 9th Peter's Cafe, Millbrae Millbrae Ave and El Camino at the Bart/CalTrain station or automobile parking next to the Cafe 6 pm - no host dinner 7 pm - welcome and election recap - hopefully celebrating the election of all four of our Green Party candidates and the end to Arnold's current attempt to destroy the middle class. 8 pm - Dianne Anderson, Green Building Coordinator, San Mateo County's RecycleWorks. Holiday Waste Reduction or "Green Giving" -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From alexcathy at aol.com Mon Nov 7 14:15:20 2005 From: alexcathy at aol.com (alexcathy at aol.com) Date: Mon, 07 Nov 2005 17:15:20 -0500 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Excuse Me for Talking Like a Cynical Politician But ... Message-ID: <8C7B1FFE007DE88-133C-B2BB@mblk-d35.sysops.aol.com> Dear Green Friends, I saw an opinion poll saying that more than 60% of Californians believe there should be campaign reform, but less than 50% agree with what Schwarzennegger is doing. Excuse Me for Talking Like a Cynical Politician But ... IF Arnold's Initiatives Win ... THEN we should day it's a partisan power grab by Republicans and the clueless Democrats were unable or unwilling to stop it! IF Arnold's Initiatives Loss ... THEN we should say it's a partisan power grab by Democrats and the clueless Republicans were unable or unwilling to stop it! I know that makes me sound cynical, but what's REALLY cynical is the behavior of the Democrats and the Republicans. Arnold's "reformers" say they are against public employee unions wielding too much power. But have you noticed they never rail against the public employee unions they like, e.g., those damned prison guards? I recall a few times the unions were on the same side with the "Bad Guys" on some environmental issues, but of course, the rightwingers are never gonna bring that up. Arnold's "reformers" say they are against "politicians picking their voters" in gerrymandered legislative districts. But have you noticed the only "for examples" they bring up involve bad behavior by Democrats. We've heard the story about Democrat Howard Berman's 28th district being gerrymandered to reduce the Latino vote, but not a single "reformer" has mentioned the gerrymandering of Assembly districts around here to reduce the Asian-American vote. We've heard the story about Democrat Lois Capps skinny 23rd District, but not a single "reformer" has mentioned Republican Richard Pombo's 11th district wandering all over West Hell in search of enough "Angry White Male" votes to elect a Republican. From a strictly selfish. partisan point-of-view, we should hope that Prop 77 passes. Imagine the chaos if those two sets of gangsters really tried to do redistricting in time for the 2006 elections. My 20th Assembly District Representative, ALBERTO TORRICO, is just finishing a very unimpressive first term. If his district boundaries got joggled even a little bit he'd be in trouble. If by some miracle, my Milpitas was moved into Joe Coto's 23rd District... well... there would be fireworks! California voters have gone to the polls in 2002, 2003, 2004, and now 2005. That's not counting primary elections, local referenda on bonds and taxes, and contentious local election fights in San Francisco, San Jose, and Oakland. I am winning to bet that a lot of Californians are just sick and tired of Democrats and Republicans shouting at each other. Even though, as you all well know, I like to do a little shouting myself, with a little practice I could be reeducated to be as mellow as Warner Bloomberg or Tian Harter. On second thought, I'll never be as mellow as Tian Harter. Alex Walker From thinkgreen at threeparty.org Tue Nov 8 07:45:27 2005 From: thinkgreen at threeparty.org (Roy) Date: Tue, 08 Nov 2005 07:45:27 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Green Party Voting Positions? In-Reply-To: <1d5.46b92a6b.30813e75@aol.com> References: <1d5.46b92a6b.30813e75@aol.com> Message-ID: <4370C817.2040308@threeparty.org> Hi All I just went to the website hoping to see positions on these propositions coming up and found nothing. Other than Eric's email on his take on the propositions I wasn't able to find anything on this mail list after 15 minutes of browsing. It is today yes? Even the CA Green Party website is silent on this. I had to go to the merky news just to make sure it was today. Any help directing me to information that I KNOW must be out there would be appreciated. Peace Roy From wrolley at charter.net Tue Nov 8 07:56:48 2005 From: wrolley at charter.net (Wes Rolley) Date: Tue, 08 Nov 2005 07:56:48 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Green Party Voting Positions? In-Reply-To: <4370C817.2040308@threeparty.org> References: <1d5.46b92a6b.30813e75@aol.com> <4370C817.2040308@threeparty.org> Message-ID: <4370CAC0.8010402@charter.net> > Hi All > > I just went to the website hoping to see positions on these propositions > coming up and found nothing. > > Other than Eric's email on his take on the propositions I wasn't able to > find anything on this mail list after 15 minutes of browsing. It is > today yes? Even the CA Green Party website is silent on this. > > I had to go to the merky news just to make sure it was today. > > Any help directing me to information that I KNOW must be out there would > be appreciated. http://www.cagreens.org/ccwg/05props.htm I am not sure where you looked, but it is right on the Home Page at CAGREENS.ORG and there have been multiple press releases posted to the site on individual issues. One problem the GP has is that the process to get Press Releases onto the site does not happen quickly. When the State Press Secretary sends out the release, it generally takes 2-3 days before it shows up on the site. That is mainly due to the fact that the small group of people who mantain this material are overworked volunteers. We need another solution that takes the "work" out of the process and makes it automatic. The release gets sent and is included onto the web site by an automated process. Not there yet. -- "I find I have a great lot to learn ? or unlearn. I seem to know far too much and this knowledge obscures the really significant facts, but I am getting on." -- Charles Rennie Mackintosh Wesley C. Rolley 17211 Quail Court Morgan Hill, CA 95037 (408)778-3024 http://www.refpub.com/ From TNHarter at aol.com Tue Nov 8 12:35:09 2005 From: TNHarter at aol.com (TNHarter at aol.com) Date: Tue, 8 Nov 2005 15:35:09 EST Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Green Party Voting Positions? Message-ID: <1de.47ec40b7.30a265fd@aol.com> What it boils down to is no on everything except 79 and maybe 80. http://www.cagreens.org/ccwg/05props.htm I put a button that links to that site on my website front page weeks ago. -- Tian Most recent change to my website: Added pictures from the 2000th casualty in Iraq mark march. http://tian.greens.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From andid at cagreens.org Tue Nov 8 12:53:20 2005 From: andid at cagreens.org (Andrea Dorey) Date: Tue, 8 Nov 2005 12:53:20 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Green Party Voting & KPFA suggestions In-Reply-To: <4370CAC0.8010402@charter.net> References: <1d5.46b92a6b.30813e75@aol.com> <4370C817.2040308@threeparty.org> <4370CAC0.8010402@charter.net> Message-ID: <15bf795460f4651f868d35a0d07f304d@cagreens.org> KPFA's quick take on this is: NO on everything but 79 & 80. That's easy to remember!!! Andrea On Nov 8, 2005, at 7:56 AM, Wes Rolley wrote: > >> Hi All >> >> I just went to the website hoping to see positions on these >> propositions >> coming up and found nothing. >> >> Other than Eric's email on his take on the propositions I wasn't able >> to >> find anything on this mail list after 15 minutes of browsing. It is >> today yes? Even the CA Green Party website is silent on this. >> >> I had to go to the merky news just to make sure it was today. >> >> Any help directing me to information that I KNOW must be out there >> would >> be appreciated. > > http://www.cagreens.org/ccwg/05props.htm > > I am not sure where you looked, but it is right on the Home Page at > CAGREENS.ORG > and there have been multiple press releases posted to the site on > individual > issues. > > One problem the GP has is that the process to get Press Releases onto > the site > does not happen quickly. When the State Press Secretary sends out the > release, > it generally takes 2-3 days before it shows up on the site. That is > mainly due > to the fact that the small group of people who mantain this material > are > overworked volunteers. We need another solution that takes the "work" > out of > the process and makes it automatic. The release gets sent and is > included onto > the web site by an automated process. Not there yet. > > > -- > "I find I have a great lot to learn ? or unlearn. I seem to know far > too much > and this knowledge obscures the really significant facts, but I am > getting on." > -- Charles Rennie Mackintosh > > Wesley C. Rolley > 17211 Quail Court > Morgan Hill, CA 95037 > (408)778-3024 > http://www.refpub.com/ > _______________________________________________ > sosfbay-discuss mailing list > sosfbay-discuss at marla.cagreens.org > http://marla.cagreens.org/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss > > Andrea Dorey Santa Clara County Green Party Chinese Proverbs: "Serving the powerful is like sleeping with a tiger." "It is difficult to get off a tiger's back." From cls at truffula.sj.ca.us Tue Nov 8 13:09:13 2005 From: cls at truffula.sj.ca.us (Cameron L. Spitzer) Date: Tue, 08 Nov 2005 13:09:13 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Green Party Voting Positions? Message-ID: No by default. Yes on 79. It's a consumer/progressive advance. Abstain on 77. It's a joke. Makes no difference. Sorry, Andrea, no on 80. "Direct access" is only for huge industrial users. The PUC is corrupt, no better than the legislature, so giving them more power is not an improvement. "Green energy" sounds good, but in power marketing it was a no-effect branding gimmic. Green Mountain Energy was an Enron brand and buying your power from Enron instead of PG&E didn't erect a single windmill. Cameron From alexcathy at aol.com Tue Nov 8 13:45:33 2005 From: alexcathy at aol.com (alexcathy at aol.com) Date: Tue, 08 Nov 2005 16:45:33 -0500 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Green Party Voting Positions? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <8C7B2C4E17F12DB-17B4-799D@FWM-R38.sysops.aol.com> No! That's real easy. Alex Walker -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From TNHarter at aol.com Tue Nov 8 16:49:43 2005 From: TNHarter at aol.com (TNHarter at aol.com) Date: Tue, 8 Nov 2005 19:49:43 EST Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Green Party Voting Positions? Message-ID: In a message dated 11/8/05 1:09:51 PM, cls at truffula.sj.ca.us writes: > Sorry, Andrea, no on 80.? "Direct access" is only for huge > industrial users.? The PUC is corrupt, no better than the > legislature, so giving them more power is not an improvement. > "Green energy" sounds good, but in power marketing it was > a no-effect branding gimmic.? > The very fact that it sounded good made it perfect for me. I didn't have to carry additional stuff to believe in it. I could point out that companies selling sugar water in disposable packaging with green on the lable were getting more from selling green power than I was. Now people have to buy solar cells to get green power. You can still get green stickers from me, and they still say the same thing, but you have to use your imagination to connect my cause to the electic grid. > Green Mountain Energy was an Enron brand > and buying your power from Enron instead > of PG&E didn't erect a single windmill. > > Yeah, but there were other brands that really were green power. One of them even gave the first TASC talk of the new millenium: http://tian.greens.org/TASC/TASCleenNGreen.html Assuming of course you consider the miliinium to have started on 1/1/2000. For the rest of us it was about the 25th to last talk of the previous millinium. In either case, it was four days after the "millenium bug rollover" for computer software. Nice juxtaposition. :-) -- Tian Most recent change to my website: Added pictures from the 2000th casualty in Iraq mark march. http://tian.greens.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From thinkgreen at threeparty.org Tue Nov 8 16:58:43 2005 From: thinkgreen at threeparty.org (Roy) Date: Tue, 08 Nov 2005 16:58:43 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Green Party Voting Positions? In-Reply-To: <8C7B2C4E17F12DB-17B4-799D@FWM-R38.sysops.aol.com> References: <8C7B2C4E17F12DB-17B4-799D@FWM-R38.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: <437149C3.9030604@threeparty.org> Thanks All who replied on line and off. My laptop, which is what I was on before shows nothing on www.cagreens.org except the text in the upper left hand. My work station that I'm on now is bursting with the kind of information I expect to see. I just checked the laptop and still nada. I've got to check this out since there's no mention of any pop up blocker or the like on my laptop. Thanks for the courtesy in replying to what must have seemed like the dumbest RTFM question of the month. Peace Roy alexcathy at aol.com wrote: > > *No! * > > > That's real easy. > > > Alex Walker > >------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >_______________________________________________ >sosfbay-discuss mailing list >sosfbay-discuss at marla.cagreens.org >http://marla.cagreens.org/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss > > From alexcathy at aol.com Wed Nov 9 09:54:04 2005 From: alexcathy at aol.com (alexcathy at aol.com) Date: Wed, 09 Nov 2005 12:54:04 -0500 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] NO TO SCHWARZENEGGER -- NOW, WILL GREENS GET A HEARING? Message-ID: <8C7B36DB5621FA6-398-31E6@mblk-d44.sysops.aol.com> Dear Green Friends, Just two years after the crazy recall election of 2003, the screaming headline on this morning's edition of the San Francisco Chronicle says it all: CALIFORNIANS SAY NO TO SCHWARZENEGGER Every single one of Arnold's bullshit "reforms" went down to defeat! A couple of them were not even close. For example, Proposition 76, which would have given this madman almost disctatorial powers over the state budget was voted down by 60%. Proposiition 77 on the redistricting of state legislative and congressional districts and advertised as a "reform" of the undeniable gerrymandering whereby not a single congressional or state legislative seat changed parties in the 2004 elections, was voted down by 57%. Personally, the frustrating thing for me, is that could make a case for reform in all of these areas, just as you could make a case for recalling Democratic Governor Fyar Davis in 2003, but voters, properly in my opinion, saw this as an expensive, gratuitous power grab by Schwarzenegger and that good-for-nothing, crazy, rightwing Republican Party. One of the arguments which I made against these propositions in a couple of letters-to-the-editor, (which the So-Called-Liberal-Media, of course, refused to print), was that anyone could tell the "reformers" were phony by the arguments they could have made but DID NOT MAKE for reform. The only thing the "reformers" gave us was the rightwing Republican "party line." PUBLIC EMPLOYEE UNIONS If public employee unions have too much power, then why not use the example of the POLICEMEN'S UNION right here in Milpitas? Since the policemen's union helped muscle in a 3-to-2 council majority last year, the puppet regime has purged boards and commissions of all who might disagree and even abolished the ethics board. And why not use the example of the California PRISON GUARDS UNION that successfully bought and paid for both Democrat Gray Davis and Republican Arnold Schwarzenegger? Alas, the "party line" for rightwing bully boys is always badmouth "liberal" teachers and nurses; never badmouth "tough guys" in the Pentagon, F.B.I., C.I.A., police, and prisons. GERRYMANDERED LEGISLATIVE DISTRICTS If gerrymandered districts are bad why not use the example of San Jose's Asian-American community "where redistricting wiped out a potentially Asian seat" in the state assembly, according to the December 12, 2004 San Jose Mercury News? I would have bet real money that there was no way we'd ever get through a very long, expensive, and brusing campaign on Prop 77 without the disgraceful and possibly illegal manipulation of the "white" vote and the "minority group" vote even coming up, but by God, these phony "reformers" somehow managed to do it! Alas, the "party line" says dirty tricks for the sake of maintaining White Supremacy is okay. BIPARTISANSHIP Finally, if reform has bipartisan support why not use the example of independents and real Democrats? Alas, the "party line" says the only "good Democrat" is a DINO ("Democrat In Name Only"). Thus, the "reformers" trot out San Jose's ex-mayor Tom McEnery, a cranky, crazy guy who, among other things, is a well-known Mexican-hater. Proposition 77 was actually endorsed by Chellie Pingree, president of Common Cause, an independent progressive group. Amazingly, the phony "reformers" never once actually quoted this person! In fact, throughout this long, expensve, and bruising campaign we hardly ever heard from anybody who wasn't already a suck-up to the Bush-Schwarzenegger Republicans. NOW, WILL GREENS GET A HEARING? This was the fourth damned statewide election in California in four years (2002, 2003, 2004, and 2005). Folks around here are sick and tired of Democratic and Republican PARTY hacks shouting at each other. Now that they've said NO to Arnold, what are California voters to do? Give the Gray Davis Democrats another chance to fuck up? Boy, if I were younger, richer, and better-looking I'd run for office in 2006 myself! Think about it. In California we've had: 8 Years of Republican Pete Wilson 8 Years of Democrat William Jefferson Clinton 5 Years of Republican George W. Bush 5 Years of Democrat Gray Davis, and now 2 Years of Republican Arnold Schwarzenegger Oh! And did I mention a Republican Congress in Washington and a Democratic legislature in Sacramento? In 2003 PETER CAMEJO said it very well on national television: "The two-party system is dysfunctiona.l" As Peter painstakingly explained, unless something is done, among other things, the California State Budget will be *STRUCTURALLY* fucked-up ... well ... forever! So, here we are two years later and for all his heat, noise, and smoke, Arnold Schwarzenegger has accomplished nothing. These facts would fit easily on a campaign button or palm card along with the Green Party logo and two words: HAD ENOUGH? Alex Walker From wrolley at charter.net Wed Nov 9 10:23:45 2005 From: wrolley at charter.net (Wes Rolley) Date: Wed, 09 Nov 2005 10:23:45 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] NO TO SCHWARZENEGGER -- NOW, WILL GREENS GET A HEARING? In-Reply-To: <8C7B36DB5621FA6-398-31E6@mblk-d44.sysops.aol.com> References: <8C7B36DB5621FA6-398-31E6@mblk-d44.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: <43723EB1.1010308@charter.net> > Boy, if I were younger, richer, and better-looking I'd run for office > in 2006 myself! And if you were in my area, I would vote for you. Note, folks. There were 5 Greens running for various offices in California yesterday. 4 of them won. The only thing that I find wrong with Alex's post is the fact that there are an increasing number of Republicans who have come to the conclusion that it is time to reform that party or to leave it. They are choosing to reform it, piece by piece. They are all one-tiime office holders or workers in a Republican administration. So, they have formed a 501-c-4 non-profit called "Revolt of the Elders". Two are major names: Pete McCloskey in California and Bob Michel of Illinois, one time House Minority Leader. The times they are a changin. It is a time for action, not contemplation. It is time to sweep the plate clean. More later today on how we are working to do this. When things start to move like I see them doing now all I can say is "Damn, this is fun." -- "I find I have a great lot to learn ? or unlearn. I seem to know far too much and this knowledge obscures the really significant facts, but I am getting on." -- Charles Rennie Mackintosh Wesley C. Rolley 17211 Quail Court Morgan Hill, CA 95037 (408)778-3024 http://www.refpub.com/ From gerrygras at earthlink.net Wed Nov 9 11:55:07 2005 From: gerrygras at earthlink.net (Gerry Gras) Date: Wed, 09 Nov 2005 11:55:07 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] [Fwd: [GPCA-CC] Proposition Trivia Questions] Message-ID: <4372541B.30606@earthlink.net> FYI, Gerry -------- Original Message -------- Subject: [GPCA-CC] Proposition Trivia Questions Date: Wed, 09 Nov 2005 03:11:54 -0800 From: Gerry Gras Reply-To: GPCA Coordinating Committee To: GPCA Coordinating Committee CC: Mike Feinstein (Based on SoS results as of 1:14 AM) NOTE: I did this by viewing the maps for all the propositions, and the tables for the counties, not by using any special software, so there might be human errors. Results available at: http://vote2005.ss.ca.gov/Returns/prop/00.htm 1) Which counties voted the opposite of all other counties on at least one proposition? - San Francisco was the only county to vote Yes on 80, (re Energy). - Imperial was the only county to vote Yes on 78 (Drug companies prescription discount proposal). 2) Which counties voted the opposite of the state the most, (which is the same as asking which counties voted Yes the most, because the state said No to everything)? These 4 counties voted Yes to 5 propositions, namely 73-77: - Sutter - Placer - El Dorado - Orange 3) Which counties voted the same as the state the most, (which is the same as asking which counties voted No the most)? These counties voted No on all 8 propositions: - Del Norte - Humboldt - Trinity - Mendocino - Lake - Sonoma - Napa - Yolo - Sacramento - Solano - Marin - Contra Costa - Alameda - San Mateo - Santa Clara - Santa Cruz - San Benito - Monterey - Los Angeles 4) Which counties voted most consistently with the GPCA, (i.e. No on 73, 74, 75, 76, and 78, and Yes on 79)? (GPCA took no position on 77 and 80) - Alpine and San Francisco get perfect scores - all the counties listed in #3 miss out on only 1 proposition, # 79 5) Which counties voted most consistently the opposite of the GPCA, (i.e Yes on 73, 74, 75, 76, and 78, and No on 79)? These counties get 5 differences, namely 73-76, and 79: - Colusa - Sutter - Placer - El Dorado - Orange These counties get 4 differences, namely 73-75, and 79: - Amador - Calaveras - Fresno - Glenn - Inyo - Kern - Madera - Mariposa - Modoc - Plumas - Riverside - San Diego - Shasta - Sierra - Siskiyou - Tehama - Tulare - Tuolomne - Ventura - Yuba 6) Which counties are in between the counties listed in Q4 and Q5? - Butte - 3 differences, (73, 75, 79) - Imperial - 2 differences, (73, 78) - Kings - 3 differences, (73, 75, 79) - Lassen - 2 differences, (73, 79) - Merced - 2 differences, (73, 79) - Mono - 2 differences (75, 79) - Nevada - 3 differences (74, 75, 79) - San Bernardino - 3 differences (73, 75, 79) - San Joaquin - 2 differences (73, 79) - San Luis Obispo - 3 differences (74, 75, 79) - Santa Barbara - 2 differences (75, 79) - Stanislaus - 3 differences, (73, 75, 79) To summarise the counts: # diffs, # counties 0 2 1 19 2 6 3 6 4 20 5 5 6 0 On average, if you consider all counties equal, the state agrees with the GPCA a little bit more than it disagrees, but not much. On the other hand, if you count all individuals equal, then the state agrees with GPCA on 5 propositions, disagrees on 1. Gerry _______________________________________________ gpca-cc mailing list gpca-cc at marla.cagreens.org http://marla.cagreens.org/mailman/listinfo/gpca-cc From alexcathy at aol.com Wed Nov 9 11:57:05 2005 From: alexcathy at aol.com (alexcathy at aol.com) Date: Wed, 09 Nov 2005 14:57:05 -0500 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] BREAKING NEWS - Gutsy French Green Party Leader Message-ID: <8C7B37EE4878CA0-878-191E@FWM-R30.sysops.aol.com> Dear Green Friends, Here's another story to file away for future reference whenever somebody plays that "Green is a white peoples thing" card. See pasted below excerpts from a breaking news story just posted. the boldfaced type is my emphasis. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Posted on the Web Site of the San Jose Mercury News, www.mercurynews.com, Wednesday, November 17, 2005. STATE OF EMERGENCY IN FRANCE AS VIOLENCE ABATES ON 13TH DAY By Sebastian Rotella Los Angeles Times PARIS - The French government declared a state of emergency Tuesday, enabling police to impose curfews and other extraordinary measures to combat the worst riots in recent history. President Jacques Chirac's Cabinet decided at a special meeting to invoke an emergency-powers law that has been used only once since first wielded during the Algerian war of independence against France 50 years ago. . . . Passed in 1955 during the war ending in Algeria's independence from France, the law implemented Tuesday was applied first in Algeria, then in France in 1958 to suppress conflict connected to the fighting in the colony. Since then, the government has declared emergency powers only once: in the French-run territory of New Caledonia in 1985. Nonetheless, leaders of the center-right government said Tuesday the time had come for an extraordinary response. "It is necessary to accelerate the return to calm,'' Chirac said. The Socialist Party, the largest opposition force, expressed support for the move during debate in the National Assembly on Tuesday, as did far-right parties. On the far left, the smaller Green and communist parties condemned the state of emergency as a "provocation.'' Their leaders said it raises bad memories of the struggle in Algeria because many rioters are of North African descent. "`This state of emergency . . . treats these children and grandchildren of immigrants as the indigents of the republic,'' said Green Party leader No?l Mam?re, saying he would refuse to enact emergency powers in the town where he is mayor. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Now, let me hasten to say, I am not remotely qualified to judge whether or not these measures by the Chirac regime are good or bad. All I am saying is that for Green Party leader No?l Mam?re to make this statement at a time like this is worthy of a chapter in "Profiles in Courage." Please note, he's not just an activist mouthing off, but mayor of a town with the actual responsibility of governing. Also note the contrast with the dipshit French Socialist Party, the French equivalent to our do-nothing Democrats. That's guts! Anybody remember the 1992 Rodney King riots? I recall a couple of Democrats named Bill Clinton and Jerry Brown were running for president and used the L.A. tragedy as an opportunity to show what "New Democrats" they were by playing the "Tough Guy." Greens have guts! Alex Walker -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fredd at freeshell.org Wed Nov 9 12:34:52 2005 From: fredd at freeshell.org (Fred Duperrault) Date: Wed, 09 Nov 2005 12:34:52 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] A Green Candidate? Message-ID: <43725D6C.4080801@freeshell.org> Is there any Green Party member ready to announce as a candidate for Governor? Or is it too late? Both the Dems. and Repugs. have much dirty laundry to hide. And who better than a Green will there be to hang it all out. Fred From alexcathy at aol.com Wed Nov 9 12:37:35 2005 From: alexcathy at aol.com (alexcathy at aol.com) Date: Wed, 09 Nov 2005 15:37:35 -0500 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Proposition Trivia Questions In-Reply-To: <4372541B.30606@earthlink.net> References: <4372541B.30606@earthlink.net> Message-ID: <8C7B3848CE9D014-10F4-49E3@mblk-d40.sysops.aol.com> Dear Gerry, There is a lot of useful data in there. I saved your note on my hard drive. Is there any one place when I can obtain the raw figures for registered Greens by county? I am specifically interested in the number of actual registered Greens in Santa Clara, Alameda, and San Mateo. I am trying to figure out... REALISTICALLY... how much money we can raise to run serious candidates in serious elections. I know I am "preaching to the choir" but I really do think this is a historic moment. If we don't kick some Democrat-Republican butt next year, then we might as well bend over and kiss our ass goodbye. There I go again! What I meant to say was: If we do not engage in a constructive dialogue with intelligent, well-informed Democrats, Republicans, and independents next year, then we should voluntariily undergo a period of fasting, meditation, and prayerful reflection. Alex Walker From wrolley at charter.net Wed Nov 9 13:17:18 2005 From: wrolley at charter.net (Wes Rolley) Date: Wed, 09 Nov 2005 13:17:18 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] A Green Candidate? In-Reply-To: <43725D6C.4080801@freeshell.org> References: <43725D6C.4080801@freeshell.org> Message-ID: <4372675E.6070100@charter.net> > Is there any Green Party member ready to announce as a candidate for > Governor? Or is it too late? A number of lists say that Camejo is going to run again. If so, it could be good or it could be devisive WITHIN the party. It is all about how different people decide to play it. I have not heard of any other with that level of name recognition. I have also seen speculation that Matt Gonzalez will run against Nancy Pelosi in San Francisco. No confirmation on that. -- "I find I have a great lot to learn ? or unlearn. I seem to know far too much and this knowledge obscures the really significant facts, but I am getting on." -- Charles Rennie Mackintosh Wesley C. Rolley 17211 Quail Court Morgan Hill, CA 95037 (408)778-3024 http://www.refpub.com/ From MARKETPOIN at aol.com Wed Nov 9 13:34:46 2005 From: MARKETPOIN at aol.com (MARKETPOIN at aol.com) Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2005 16:34:46 EST Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Eucalyptus Tree Destruction Message-ID: <1de.48074c4d.30a3c576@aol.com> This may or may not be of interest to some of you but I thought I would let you know about it. The Mid Peninsula Regional Open Space District is going to be voting tonight on the fate of six unusually large and beautiful Eucalyptus Trees in Pulgas Ridge Open Space Preserve located off of Edgewood Road bordering San Carlos and Redwood City. They have cut down over fifty Eucalyptus Trees over the past five years in the Preserve. The trees that are left are the largest and most majestic ones. We gathered 250 signatures a few years ago in the park that indicated that the public that uses the park do not want these trees to be destroyed. But the MROSD has ignored the public pleas and continue to follow a unilateral strategy to transform the preserve to what they call "native" habitat. If this issue interest you, please call this afternoon or attend the meeting tonight. (See information below) Tonight the Board of Directors will meet at 7:30pm at their offices at 330 Distel Circle in Los Altos to decide the fate of six more of these trees. Public comment can be made at the meeting or by phone at 650 691-1200 or by e-mail at info at openspace.org. Their website is www.openspace.org. Judy -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From gerrygras at earthlink.net Thu Nov 10 09:36:34 2005 From: gerrygras at earthlink.net (Gerry Gras) Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2005 09:36:34 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] A Green Candidate? References: <43725D6C.4080801@freeshell.org> Message-ID: <43738522.4070201@earthlink.net> Fred Duperrault wrote: > Is there any Green Party member ready to announce as a candidate for > Governor? Or is it too late? I could be wrong, but I think Peter will be running. Gerry > > Both the Dems. and Repugs. have much dirty laundry to hide. And who > better than a Green will there be to hang it all out. > From wrolley at charter.net Thu Nov 10 09:41:05 2005 From: wrolley at charter.net (Wes Rolley) Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2005 09:41:05 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] It is all on the Internet Message-ID: <43738631.2040802@charter.net> When someone asked about the 2006 election, I find nothing confirmed on official GPCA web sites yet. Even the information on 2005 results in incomplete and I do not mean only from the ones who ran and won/lost this week However, Washington DC Green Ken Sain runs a BLOG that is read by Greens all over the country and he has compiled a list of Greens running for office in 2006 that included California. His list includes: Governor: Peter Camejo Senator: Kent Mesplay House: California 21: David Adalian California 22: Billy Olson California 28: Bryon de Lear California 53: Lawrence Rockwood I have no way of knowing if this is accurate or how Ken gets his info. If it is accurate, I don't know why a Washington DC Green can provide information not yet available to us in California. Maybe it is only because these candidates have only said that they are running but are not truly that far along in the process. -- "I find I have a great lot to learn ? or unlearn. I seem to know far too much and this knowledge obscures the really significant facts, but I am getting on." -- Charles Rennie Mackintosh Wesley C. Rolley 17211 Quail Court Morgan Hill, CA 95037 (408)778-3024 http://www.refpub.com/ From gerrygras at earthlink.net Thu Nov 10 09:54:55 2005 From: gerrygras at earthlink.net (Gerry Gras) Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2005 09:54:55 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Proposition Trivia Questions References: <4372541B.30606@earthlink.net> <8C7B3848CE9D014-10F4-49E3@mblk-d40.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: <4373896F.8010706@earthlink.net> alexcathy at aol.com wrote: > Dear Gerry, > > There is a lot of useful data in there. I saved your note on my hard > drive. > > Is there any one place when I can obtain the raw figures for registered > Greens by county? The Liaison to the Secretary of State gets those numbers before each plenary to determine the delegate allocations. Jim Stauffer used to do that, Larry Cafiero does that now. The numbers for the active counties are listed at: http://cagreens.org/liaison/delegates.html Active counties are those with active GP organizations, which I think means those with GP County Councils. > > I am specifically interested in the number of actual registered Greens > in Santa Clara, Alameda, > and San Mateo. I am trying to figure out... REALISTICALLY... how much > money we can raise to > run serious candidates in serious elections. I have not been involved in fundraising. I hope that a member of the fundraising committee will respond. > > I know I am "preaching to the choir" but I really do think this is a > historic moment. I agree. > > > If we don't kick some Democrat-Republican butt next year, then we might > as well bend over and kiss our ass goodbye. > > > There I go again! What I meant to say was: > > > If we do not engage in a constructive dialogue with intelligent, > well-informed Democrats, Republicans, and independents next year, then > we should voluntariily undergo a period of fasting, meditation, and > prayerful reflection. Both ways of saying it are ok with me. Gerry From gerrygras at earthlink.net Thu Nov 10 10:34:15 2005 From: gerrygras at earthlink.net (Gerry Gras) Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2005 10:34:15 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] An unusually good city Message-ID: <437392A7.2020503@earthlink.net> A description of a more livable city, Curitiba, Brazil: http://www.commondreams.org/views05/1108-33.htm Gerry From gerrygras at earthlink.net Thu Nov 10 11:02:02 2005 From: gerrygras at earthlink.net (Gerry Gras) Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2005 11:02:02 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] It is all on the Internet References: <43738631.2040802@charter.net> Message-ID: <4373992A.2090501@earthlink.net> Wes Rolley wrote: > When someone asked about the 2006 election, I find nothing confirmed on official > GPCA web sites yet. Even the information on 2005 results in incomplete and I do > not mean only from the ones who ran and won/lost this week > However, Washington DC Green Ken Sain runs a BLOG that is read by Greens all > over the country and he has compiled a list of Greens running for office in 2006 > that included California. His list includes: > Governor: Peter Camejo > Senator: Kent Mesplay > House: > California 21: David Adalian > California 22: Billy Olson > California 28: Bryon de Lear > California 53: Lawrence Rockwood > I have no way of knowing if this is accurate or how Ken gets his info. If it is > accurate, I don't know why a Washington DC Green can provide information not yet > available to us in California. Maybe it is only because these candidates have > only said that they are running but are not truly that far along in the process. > I don't know what to say. Although I am on the GPCA CC, I have not been provided with any official information, (unless I missed the relevant email, which I think is unlikely). From what I have heard, I believe Peter is running. I heard a rumor about Kent, but I consider it just a rumor now. The other 4 I have never heard of. Gerry From wrolley at charter.net Thu Nov 10 10:43:22 2005 From: wrolley at charter.net (Wes Rolley) Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2005 10:43:22 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Proposition Trivia Questions In-Reply-To: <4373896F.8010706@earthlink.net> References: <4372541B.30606@earthlink.net> <8C7B3848CE9D014-10F4-49E3@mblk-d40.sysops.aol.com> <4373896F.8010706@earthlink.net> Message-ID: <437394CA.6090305@charter.net> I want to add something to this disucssion. On another forum today, Mike Feinstein posted a listing of the number of Green registrations by County. His point is that the numbers are shrinking, not growing. I have my own ideas about the reason for this, but do not want to enter that disc -- "I find I have a great lot to learn ? or unlearn. I seem to know far too much and this knowledge obscures the really significant facts, but I am getting on." -- Charles Rennie Mackintosh Wesley C. Rolley 17211 Quail Court Morgan Hill, CA 95037 (408)778-3024 http://www.refpub.com/ From gerrygras at earthlink.net Thu Nov 10 11:41:57 2005 From: gerrygras at earthlink.net (Gerry Gras) Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2005 11:41:57 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Proposition Trivia Questions References: <4372541B.30606@earthlink.net> <8C7B3848CE9D014-10F4-49E3@mblk-d40.sysops.aol.com> <4373896F.8010706@earthlink.net> <437394CA.6090305@charter.net> Message-ID: <4373A285.5070208@earthlink.net> Wes Rolley wrote: > I want to add something to this disucssion. On another forum today, Mike > Feinstein posted a listing of the number of Green registrations by > County. His point is that the numbers are shrinking, not growing. I > have my own ideas about the reason for this, but do not want to enter > that disc I have not seen Mike Feinstein's numbers, and I would like to see them. But the website I provided at Alex's request: http://cagreens.org/liaison/delegates.html does show the change from Feb. 2005 to Sep. 2005. The GPCA decrease was 6%. The GPSCC decrease was 15%. And clearly this can not be explained by people switching to vote for Dean or Kucinich. I would certainly like to hear a discussion of why this is happening. Gerry From wrolley at charter.net Thu Nov 10 11:45:56 2005 From: wrolley at charter.net (Wes Rolley) Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2005 11:45:56 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] GPCA Voter Registration falls yet again Message-ID: <4373A374.6040100@charter.net> The data at the end of this was posted today to the grns-cal-forum by Mike Feinstein. I have not responded there, but I want to put in my .02 here about the reasons why this happens. I believe that one primary reason for declining numbers is the fact that Green Activists continue to focus on the major national issues and are often disconnected with local politics and local issue. Every single Green that I know of who has been elected or who has made a major difference in their district has done it by being responsive to local needs and finding Green Solutions to those needs. - The local ramification is that we need to take on some of the local, in the pockets of the developers, politicians if we want to keep the public aware of the party. My prime candidates for 2006 might be Assemblyman Coto or County Supervisor Don Gage. I would have put Ron Gonzalez in the list of "in the pockets of the developers" targets if he were not going to be term limited out. - The best recent example is that of Gloria Mattera, running for Brooklyn Borough President. Basing her campaign on the local issue of neighborhood busting development, funded by public giveaways and back door payments to politicians, she made a major impact, garnered support from other candidates and while Gloria did not win against the Democratic Party machine, every one of those other candidates was elected to City Council offices by large majorities. The second reason we are falling is the lack of a well known, always good for a sound bite, public spokesperson. In the past, Camejo and Medea Benjamin have been those people. You see how the major media flock to celebrity. However dedicated they are, however hard they work, however much good they do, Beth Moore Haines and Sara Amir can not compete with Rob Reiner and William Beaty or even Republican Duff Sundheim as spokespersons for this party. The third reason we are failing is that the effort to become the political voice of all progressives will doom us to failure. The proper strategy is not to out-progressive the Democrats but rather the strictly adhere to the 10 key values of this party and let the chips fall wherever they may. That may mean siding with Republicans, as Medea did with Tom Campbell. I read yesterday of a Republican calling for the return of his party to their original (I almost said traditional) values, those values were: - fiscal responsibility with the goal of balanced budgets, - progressive taxation, - environmental protection, - freedom of individual choices, - limited powers of the federal government, - paper-verification of voting results, - judicial independence, - prohibition of torture of prisoners and - separation of church and state. They sound mildly Green. If the Republican Party had stayed with those values that I remember from my youth, I would probably still be a Republican. They did not and I am not. -- The October 24th voter registation totals are out http://ss.ca.gov/elections/ror_10242005.htm and we fell another tenth of a percent, down to 0.92%. For more information on long-term Green voter registration trends, see http://greens.org/stats County Green Alameda 13,956 Percent 1.98% Alpine 15 Percent 1.85% Amador 153 Percent 0.75% Butte 2,198 Percent 1.92% Calaveras 316 Percent 1.19% Colusa 22 Percent 0.28% Contra Costa 4,386 Percent 0.89% Del Norte 122 Percent 0.95% El Dorado 1,187 Percent 1.13% Fresno 1,592 Percent 0.49% Glenn 43 Percent 0.36% Humboldt 4,392 Percent 5.37% Imperial 123 Percent 0.23% Inyo 113 Percent 1.06% Kern 810 Percent 0.27% Kings 120 Percent 0.25% Lake 464 Percent 1.39% Lassen 63 Percent 0.44% Los Angeles 25,507 Percent 0.66% Madera 222 Percent 0.45% Marin 3,522 Percent 2.41% Mariposa 164 Percent 1.44% Mendocino 2,390 Percent 4.89% Merced 297 Percent 0.33% Modoc 30 Percent 0.54% Mono 131 Percent 1.91% Monterey 1,429 Percent 0.90% Napa 959 Percent 1.41% Nevada 1,642 Percent 2.56% Orange 8,243 Percent 0.55% Placer 1,279 Percent 0.72% Plumas 128 Percent 0.91% Riverside 2,931 Percent 0.38% Sacramento 5,950 Percent 0.94% San Benito 154 Percent 0.62% San Bernardino 3,036 Percent 0.40% San Diego 9,810 Percent 0.71% San Francisco 13,146 Percent 3.07% San Joaquin 934 Percent 0.34% San Luis Obispo 2,173 Percent 1.40% San Mateo 3,800 Percent 1.08% Santa Barbara 2,469 Percent 1.33% Santa Clara 6,211 Percent 0.81% Santa Cruz 4,742 Percent 3.32% Shasta 550 Percent 0.60% Sierra 21 Percent 0.95% Siskiyou 261 Percent 1.00% Solano 921 Percent 0.55% Sonoma 6,656 Percent 2.76% Stanislaus 879 Percent 0.40% Sutter 142 Percent 0.34% Tehama 132 Percent 0.44% Trinity 138 Percent 1.83% Tulare 522 Percent 0.39% Tuolumne 316 Percent 0.96% Ventura 3,044 Percent 0.80% Yolo 1,719 Percent 1.89% Yuba 190 Percent 0.67% State Total 146,865 Percent 0.92% _______________________________________________ cal-forum mailing list cal-forum at marla.cagreens.org http://marla.cagreens.org/mailman/listinfo/cal-forum -- "I find I have a great lot to learn ? or unlearn. I seem to know far too much and this knowledge obscures the really significant facts, but I am getting on." -- Charles Rennie Mackintosh Wesley C. Rolley 17211 Quail Court Morgan Hill, CA 95037 (408)778-3024 http://www.refpub.com/ From TNHarter at aol.com Thu Nov 10 13:54:59 2005 From: TNHarter at aol.com (TNHarter at aol.com) Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2005 16:54:59 EST Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] It is all on the Internet Message-ID: In addition to those I know Todd Cretien (or something like that) is running for Senate, at least enough that he has talked once up in San Mateo County. I think Forrest Hill is running for Lt. Governor or something like that. I'm thinking of running for something, but it's not clear what. What's clear is that my slogan will be "DON'T BE FUELISH!". At the Congressional level Carol Brioulet is also thinking of running in the 14th CD, and Medea Benjamin is thinking of running against Nancy Pelosi. Matt Gonzalez will probably do something, but I'm not in the know on that. -- Tian Most recent change to my website: Added pictures of the Breasts not Bombs 1st Amendment case: http://tian.greens.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From TNHarter at aol.com Thu Nov 10 16:10:19 2005 From: TNHarter at aol.com (TNHarter at aol.com) Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2005 19:10:19 EST Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Proposition Trivia Questions Message-ID: <1c2.3592f457.30a53b6b@aol.com> In a message dated 11/10/05 9:55:44 AM, gerrygras at earthlink.net writes: > > > > I am specifically interested in the number of actual registered Greens > > in Santa Clara, Alameda, > > and San Mateo.? I am trying to figure out... REALISTICALLY... how much > > money we can raise to > > run serious candidates in serious elections. > > > I have not been involved in fundraising.? I hope that a member of the > fundraising committee will respond. > > Last year Stephanie was able to raise the limit allowed by Mountain View law ($15,000). She got maybe a quarter of it from her own pocket and family and friends, and maybe another quarter from Greens, and most of the rest from Mountain View residents. I don't know what you mean by "serious money" or "serious elections", but I count that as the latter in the above. Medea raised a couple of hundred thousand when she ran for Senator. I think that's still the record. -- Tian Most recent change to my website: Added pictures of the Breasts not Bombs 1st Amendment case: http://tian.greens.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From alexcathy at aol.com Thu Nov 10 16:36:07 2005 From: alexcathy at aol.com (alexcathy at aol.com) Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2005 19:36:07 -0500 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Fox News Bill O'Reilly - Bomb San Francisco! Message-ID: <8C7B46F0A2F745E-1C10-1DD6@FWM-D16.sysops.aol.com> Dear Friends, Remember the big "controversy" about an obscure professor in Colorado named WARD CHURCHILL and his infamous statement about the attack on the World Trade Center? Check out the statement by that crazy "conservative" BILL O'REILLY on Fox News: = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Posted on Media Matters for America, mediamatters.org, Thursday, November 10, 2005. O'Reilly to San Francisco: "[I]f Al Qaeda comes in here and blows you up, we're not going to do anything about it. ... You want to blow up the Coit Tower? Go ahead" Criticizing a ballot measure passed by 60 percent of San Francisco voters urging public high schools and colleges to prohibit on-campus military recruiting, Fox News host Bill O'Reilly declared on the November 8 broadcast of his nationally syndicated radio show, "[I]f Al Qaeda comes in here and blows you up, we're not going to do anything about it. We're going to say, look, every other place in America is off-limits to you, except San Francisco." From the November 8 broadcast of Fox News' The Radio Factor with Bill O'Reilly: O'REILLY: Hey, you know, if you want to ban military recruiting, fine, but I'm not going to give you another nickel of federal money. You know, if I'm the president of the United States, I walk right into Union Square, I set up my little presidential podium, and I say, "Listen, citizens of San Francisco, if you vote against military recruiting, you're not going to get another nickel in federal funds. Fine. You want to be your own country? Go right ahead." And if Al Qaeda comes in here and blows you up, we're not going to do anything about it. We're going to say, look, every other place in America is off limits to you, except San Francisco. You want to blow up the Coit Tower? Go ahead. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = If you got to mediamatters.org, you can even download an mp3 file of him saying this on-the-air. Like that scum Bill Bennett, O'Reilly (whom Al Franken calls "O'Lielly") will probably say he was "misquoted." Alex From WB4D23 at aol.com Thu Nov 10 16:42:11 2005 From: WB4D23 at aol.com (WB4D23 at aol.com) Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2005 19:42:11 EST Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] It is all on the Internet Message-ID: <1c6.358be3ac.30a542e3@aol.com> In a message dated 11/10/05 11:03:00 AM Pacific Standard Time, gerrygras at earthlink.net writes: Although I am on the GPCA CC, I have not been provided with any official information For many reasons, candidates/campaigns have to keep "arms-length" away from other organizations, including political parties. In California, the official start of candidacy is the filing of the FPPC Form 510, which is required before one can legally begin collecting or spending any money on the campaign. An alternative is to form a pre-campaign or exploratory committee; but there are FPPC (and, for federal offices, FEC) forms that are supposed to be filed for those, also. BTW, petition signatures can start to be gathered December 30th. Deadline is February 23rd. Warner -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From alexcathy at aol.com Thu Nov 10 16:56:55 2005 From: alexcathy at aol.com (alexcathy at aol.com) Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2005 19:56:55 -0500 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] My Letter to the Milpitas Post Message-ID: <8C7B471F25BFB36-1B78-10E4@FWM-M32.sysops.aol.com> Dear Green Friends, It's a week late and a dollar short, but my local, weekly Milpitas Post printed my letter-to-the-editor about the propositions. And since we won, I don't care if they printed it now. It will be viewed as kind of a commentary after-the-fact. It's posted on the Milpitas Post Web Site at: http://www.themilpitaspost.com/Stories/0,1413,93~3411~3125281,00.html Here is the text: = = = = = = = REFORM UNLIKELY Dear Editor, I am not a Democrat. I am a registered Green Party voter in Milpitas and an active, proud member of the Santa Clara Greens. I don't like the sleazy, manipulative way Democrats maintain one-party rule here. However, I am also a progressive, who, like most voters, think Republican President Bush is a disaster. Furthermore, I think Republican Gov. Schwarzenegger is an embarrassing buffoon obviously in over his head. We know Arnold's "reformers" are phony because they always give us the right-wing Republican "party line." Especially in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina and other disasters and buffoonery from the right, when somebody gives me that "party line" it does not convince me, but enrages me. If public employee unions are bad, why not use the example of the Milpitas police union? Since muscling in a 3-2 majority, the puppet Milpitas City Council has purged boards and commissions of all who might disagree. They even abolished the ethics board. Alas, the GOP bully-boy line says beat up on teachers and nurses, but never cops. If gerrymandered districts are bad why not use the example of racial gerrymandering wiping out the possibility of our large Asian-American community electing an Assembly person? Alas, the GOP "Angry White Man" line says dirty tricks to keep "those people in their place" is OK. Finally, if "bipartisan" reforms solve "bipartisan" ills, where are the "reform" Democrats? Alas, the GOP says the only "good Democrat" is a DINO ("Democrat In Name Only"). Trot out San Jose's cranky, crazy, old Tom McEnery! Reform? Not from this gang. Alex Walker Kizer Street = = = = = = I am particularly pleased that they DID NOT censor my opening line about being "a registered Green Party voter in Milpitas and an active, proud member of the Santa Clara Greens." From TNHarter at aol.com Thu Nov 10 17:14:32 2005 From: TNHarter at aol.com (TNHarter at aol.com) Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2005 20:14:32 EST Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] It is all on the Internet Message-ID: In a message dated 11/10/05 1:55:46 PM, TNHarter at aol.com writes: > > I think Forrest Hill is running for Lt. Governor or something like that. > > I got a private email that said he was running for Secretary of State. -- Tian Most recent change to my website: Added pictures of the Breasts not Bombs 1st Amendment case: http://tian.greens.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From j.m.doyle at sbcglobal.net Thu Nov 10 22:36:00 2005 From: j.m.doyle at sbcglobal.net (Jim Doyle) Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2005 22:36:00 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] GP registration numbers Message-ID: <43743BD0.7070503@sbcglobal.net> My first reaction to the decline in Green Party registration is to ask myself how to reverse the trend. A strong candidate with visibility brings in followers. Camejo fits the bill for that. At our local level - Santa Clara County - I would propose shifting the emphasis of our outreach to less well to do neighborhoods and in areas that are predominantly of one ethnic community or another. Also among the younger generations such as at the community colleges. Nice ideas, but they require a work force to do those things. So first a work force needs to be recruited. If you would like to work on such a project, please contact me. From j.m.doyle at sbcglobal.net Thu Nov 10 22:45:12 2005 From: j.m.doyle at sbcglobal.net (Jim Doyle) Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2005 22:45:12 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] tabling Saturday November 19-th Message-ID: <43743DF8.90901@sbcglobal.net> There is a tabling opportunity on Satfurday November 19-th. It is at the Santa Clara Marriott at the state convention of the Junior Satate of America, the group of high school students who debate issues in a mock political or parlimentary format. The tabling hours are probably from 10 am to 1 pm. I say probably because that is what I remember from the last time and I am waiting for the official notice. Please contact me if you wish to table at this event. From j.m.doyle at sbcglobal.net Thu Nov 10 22:50:46 2005 From: j.m.doyle at sbcglobal.net (Jim Doyle) Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2005 22:50:46 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] buttons Message-ID: <43743F46.3030101@sbcglobal.net> Since Tian will be away on vacation to visit family for three weeks he has turned the button making machine over to me for that period of time. If you have suggestions for button designs that would fit the themes at the Holiday Peace Fair (December 3-rd tabling) or at the convention of The Northern California Junior State of America (November 19-th tabling) we could make a few such buttons for those events. From gerrygras at earthlink.net Fri Nov 11 00:18:48 2005 From: gerrygras at earthlink.net (Gerry Gras) Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2005 00:18:48 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] "The Nation" supports antiwar candidates Message-ID: <437453E8.4090302@earthlink.net> The Nation magazine will ONLY support antiwar candidates. Re Democratic Party leaders: "Can such politicians, who cannot even follow a majority--in the Democratic Party, a large majority--really be considered leaders?" And their attitude towards endorsements: "The Nation therefore takes the following stand: We will not support any candidate for national office who does not make a speedy end to the war in Iraq a major issue of his or her campaign. We urge all voters to join us in adopting this position. Many worry that the aftermath of withdrawal will be ugly, but we can now see that the consequences of staying will be uglier still. Fear of facing the consequences of Bush's disaster should not be permitted to excuse the creation of a worse disaster by continuing the occupation." http://www.commondreams.org/views05/1110-36.htm Gerry From cls at truffula.sj.ca.us Fri Nov 11 12:56:59 2005 From: cls at truffula.sj.ca.us (Cameron L. Spitzer) Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2005 12:56:59 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Proposition Trivia Questions Message-ID: >Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2005 11:41:57 -0800 >From: Gerry Gras >To: wrolley at charter.net, Green Discuss >Subject: Re: [Sosfbay-discuss] Proposition Trivia Questions >I have not seen Mike Feinstein's numbers, and I would like to see them. >But the website I provided at Alex's request: > http://cagreens.org/liaison/delegates.html >does show the change from Feb. 2005 to Sep. 2005. >The GPCA decrease was 6%. The GPSCC decrease was 15%. >And clearly this can not be explained by people switching >to vote for Dean or Kucinich. >I would certainly like to hear a discussion of why this is happening. It was obvious to me in Sylmar and Oakland. There was only perfunctory attention to green issues, candidates, outreach, and growth. The big buzz topic was which side are you on, who do you trust, how can we beat the enemy camp. Our party is letting the weeks and years spin by, while our leaders waste their time and energy infighting. Our decline in registration is a consequence of faction fighting. Cameron From wrolley at charter.net Fri Nov 11 13:31:14 2005 From: wrolley at charter.net (Wes Rolley) Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2005 13:31:14 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Proposition Trivia Questions In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <43750DA2.7040701@charter.net> > It was obvious to me in Sylmar and Oakland. There was only > perfunctory attention to green issues, candidates, outreach, > and growth. The big buzz topic was which side are you on, > who do you trust, how can we beat the enemy camp. Our party is > letting the weeks and years spin by, while our leaders waste > their time and energy infighting. Our decline in > registration is a consequence of faction fighting. Hear, hear! I will agree 100%. That is the major issue. There are others, but this is the elephant in the room that no one wants to talk about. There is a time on the agenda in Yolo for presentation and discussion of a position re: Restorative Justice. They should sit the leaders of these factions down and have them go through that process. If there can be reconciliation in S. Africa, why not in the Green Party of California? -- "I find I have a great lot to learn ? or unlearn. I seem to know far too much and this knowledge obscures the really significant facts, but I am getting on." -- Charles Rennie Mackintosh Wesley C. Rolley 17211 Quail Court Morgan Hill, CA 95037 (408)778-3024 http://www.refpub.com/ From alexcathy at aol.com Fri Nov 11 15:30:59 2005 From: alexcathy at aol.com (alexcathy at aol.com) Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2005 18:30:59 -0500 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Proposition Trivia Questions In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <8C7B52F1B556815-1C18-52F4@FWM-R38.sysops.aol.com> >does show the change from Feb. 2005 to Sep. 2005. >The GPCA decrease was 6%. The GPSCC decrease was 15%. >And clearly this can not be explained by people switching >to vote for Dean or Kucinich. >I would certainly like to hear a discussion of why this is happening. I think it is one of those classic cases of "What came first? The chicken or the egg?" What comes first? Green board members, coucil members, mayors, and legisaltors; or strong Green Party organization? Look at the registration figures by county. In Humboldt County it's 5%. In Mendocino County it's close to 5%. There are also several prominent elected Greens there, including the Mayor of Arcadia in Humboldt County. Elect people to office and activists think "Wow! These guys are serious! If I wanna be part of the action I need to register Green!" The way things are around here if you really wanna be part of the action most people think they have to register Democratic. Even now after Arnold's crashing defeat in Tuesday's Special Election all the the goddamn pundits and bloggers, even the "Lefty" ones, are all buzzing over the question "What will THE DEMOCRATS do now?" Even progressives who say it was great that Prop 77 was defeated, but that we really do need real reform are saying "Well, now the Democrats and the Republicans need to go back to the drawing board." I actually read an article that QUOTED Peter Camejo's analysis of California's fiscal problems without ever suggesting that Mr. Camejo just might be a good governor. On some of the Black-oriented web sites i still see "nationalist" fantasies about the "solution" to inner-city problems will be in reach as soon as we reach the Nirvana of "Black Unity" and everybody is all excited about old Ron Dellums running for mayor of Oakland. None dare say that it is pathetic that the Black Democrats in Oakland are so bad off they gotta turn to a 70-year old guy to step out of retirement. I saw one blogger who proposed that the "Dream Team" for taking out Schwarzenegger next year would be Phil Angelides and Warren Beatty! Please! I, for one, do not want to go from "The Terminator" to "Bulworth". Besides, Democrats and Republicans are just never going to fix our problem. The very process of organizing in accordance with Green principles is part of the solution to the problems created by organizing politics in accordance with the cynical and corrupt "principles" of Republicans and Democrats. By the way, I saw a press release issued by the California Green Party claiming that as of Tuesday, we have 66 elected Greens in California. Doggone it! Something is happening! California is ready for a Green Revolution, but we need good local candidates and the Campaigns & Candidates Working Group needs to figure out more ways to help those candidates raise a little money and run campaigns to win. It's a little embarassing that we don't have any elected Greens in Santa Clara County. My God there are just soooooo many issues. Alex Walker From fredd at freeshell.org Fri Nov 11 18:12:11 2005 From: fredd at freeshell.org (Fred Duperrault) Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2005 18:12:11 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Proposition Trivia Questions In-Reply-To: <8C7B52F1B556815-1C18-52F4@FWM-R38.sysops.aol.com> References: <8C7B52F1B556815-1C18-52F4@FWM-R38.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: <43754F7B.1020200@freeshell.org> Friends, Regarding the discussion on why there is a drop in Green Party membership, has anybody checked to see how much the Democratic, Republican and other smaller parties have fared. I think there has a been a general reduction of interest in joining, or maintaining membership in, all parties. Nevertheless,one would think that at many of all of those nurses, firemen, teachers and others who got active in opposing Arnold's proposition, would want to line up in a friendly political party. I'm hoping that the Greens were visible enough in supporting them that we would get our proportional share of new members. Other factors, I think, that have been detrimental are: 1) Although local weekly newspapers and some more progressive papers like the Guardian and Metro my give more coverage to the Greens, the major dailies and the major TV outlets act if they never heard of the Green Party, unless a Green is one of the leading candidate for a high office. Also, most reporters, columnists and editors are loyal to the two major parties and think that the status quo of a two party system is the way it should be. I also think that the media staffs are too lazy to extend their minds to learn about 3rd parties and the about election reforms, etc. We're the odd ball nerds on the block that they have no time for. Many prospective members feel the same, also. 3) Because of the above it is harder to raise advertising money, so important in a competitive election. Also we haven't enough money to hire a national and state staff that should include full time organizers, media specialists, etc., etc. 4) Although the Greens have a much larger proportion of active members per total membership than other parties, we don't have enough to do the nitty gritty work year in and year out. Also, when new Green potential activists attend our meetings, for the first time, I think they are often bewildered and feel like outsiders. I also think that they feel that there will be more talking about issues, and much less business. 5) People are busy. To be an effective Green leader like Warner, Danna, Jim Stauffer, Tian, Gerry, Mike, Jim Doyle, Ed, Cameron, Amy, you can't have too many other extracurricular things going on unless you have no job or have super energy. To those guys and gals, the Green Party is either a first or second religion. 1) Lets have some fun events and general rap sessions more often; and 2) One Saturday every ten weeks during no-election years we conduct a door to door get acquainted with constituents walk. 3) We do some brain storming on coming up with some out of the box ideas to get more and favorable visibility. Gotta go. Fred alexcathy at aol.com wrote: > > >>does show the change from Feb. 2005 to Sep. 2005. >>The GPCA decrease was 6%. The GPSCC decrease was 15%. >>And clearly this can not be explained by people switching >>to vote for Dean or Kucinich. >>I would certainly like to hear a discussion of why this is happening. >> >> > > >I think it is one of those classic cases of "What came first? The >chicken or the egg?" > >What comes first? Green board members, coucil members, mayors, and >legisaltors; or strong Green Party organization? > >Look at the registration figures by county. In Humboldt County it's >5%. In Mendocino County it's close to 5%. There are also several >prominent elected Greens there, including the Mayor of Arcadia in >Humboldt County. Elect people to office and activists think "Wow! >These guys are serious! If I wanna be part of the action I need to >register Green!" The way things are around here if you really wanna be >part of the action most people think they have to register Democratic. >Even now after Arnold's crashing defeat in Tuesday's Special Election >all the the goddamn pundits and bloggers, even the "Lefty" ones, are >all buzzing over the question "What will THE DEMOCRATS do now?" Even >progressives who say it was great that Prop 77 was defeated, but that >we really do need real reform are saying "Well, now the Democrats and >the Republicans need to go back to the drawing board." I actually read >an article that QUOTED Peter Camejo's analysis of California's fiscal >problems without ever suggesting that Mr. Camejo just might be a good >governor. On some of the Black-oriented web sites i still see >"nationalist" fantasies about the "solution" to inner-city problems >will be in reach as soon as we reach the Nirvana of "Black Unity" and >everybody is all excited about old Ron Dellums running for mayor of >Oakland. None dare say that it is pathetic that the Black Democrats in >Oakland are so bad off they gotta turn to a 70-year old guy to step out >of retirement. > >I saw one blogger who proposed that the "Dream Team" for taking out >Schwarzenegger next year would be Phil Angelides and Warren Beatty! > >Please! > >I, for one, do not want to go from "The Terminator" to "Bulworth". >Besides, Democrats and Republicans are just never going to fix our >problem. The very process of organizing in accordance with Green >principles is part of the solution to the problems created by >organizing politics in accordance with the cynical and corrupt >"principles" of Republicans and Democrats. > >By the way, I saw a press release issued by the California Green Party >claiming that as of Tuesday, we have 66 elected Greens in California. > >Doggone it! Something is happening! California is ready for a Green >Revolution, but we need good local candidates and the Campaigns & >Candidates Working Group needs to figure out more ways to help those >candidates raise a little money and run campaigns to win. It's a >little embarassing that we don't have any elected Greens in Santa Clara >County. My God there are just soooooo many issues. > > >Alex Walker > >_______________________________________________ >sosfbay-discuss mailing list >sosfbay-discuss at marla.cagreens.org >http://marla.cagreens.org/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss > > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From wrolley at charter.net Fri Nov 11 19:38:19 2005 From: wrolley at charter.net (Wes Rolley) Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2005 19:38:19 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Local issue elections Message-ID: <437563AB.6040403@charter.net> The following was posted today about the Borough President's race in Brooklyn last Tuesday. It show what CAN happen with good candidates grabbing on the local issues. Brooklyn has been a center of machine politics since before San Francisco was a City. The Democratic Machine runs the place, from Flatbush to Ocean Parkway.Yes, Mattera brought in Cindy Sheehan but that did not win her votes. Standing up the Democratic machine did. Markowitz is the kind of politician that Ron Gonzalez wants to be. After all, he had $4 million to campaign with and no term limigs. Mattera had less than $300,000 and $200,000 of that came from public matching funds. ____ Victory over Marty Markowitz at key Brooklyn polling sites reflects strong opposition to Bruce Ratner's Atlantic Yards Project Mattera beat Ratner supporter Markowitz in several electoral districts close to the developer's Atlantic Yards proposal footprint, resulting in the largest percentage of votes for a Green Party candidate in a borough-wide race. "Our totals in the 52nd and 57th Assembly Districts clearly show that there is a lot of community opposition to the Forest City Ratner Corporation," said Mattera. "People who have never voted Green before did so in big numbers. They see us working side by side with the community in its fight against tax-subsidized private development and eminent domain." Pointing to the fact that she beat Markowitz in several electoral districts close the Atlantic Yards, Mattera said "This should serve as a wake-up call for elected officials-that they can no longer take voters for granted and will be held accountable for actions that undermine our communities." -- "I find I have a great lot to learn ? or unlearn. I seem to know far too much and this knowledge obscures the really significant facts, but I am getting on." -- Charles Rennie Mackintosh Wesley C. Rolley 17211 Quail Court Morgan Hill, CA 95037 (408)778-3024 http://www.refpub.com/ From gerrygras at earthlink.net Fri Nov 11 19:14:19 2005 From: gerrygras at earthlink.net (Gerry Gras) Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2005 19:14:19 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Proposition Trivia Questions References: Message-ID: <43755E0B.1040306@earthlink.net> Cameron L. Spitzer wrote: >>Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2005 11:41:57 -0800 >>From: Gerry Gras >>To: wrolley at charter.net, Green Discuss >>Subject: Re: [Sosfbay-discuss] Proposition Trivia Questions >> > > > > >>I have not seen Mike Feinstein's numbers, and I would like to see them. >>But the website I provided at Alex's request: >> > >> http://cagreens.org/liaison/delegates.html >> > >>does show the change from Feb. 2005 to Sep. 2005. >> > >>The GPCA decrease was 6%. The GPSCC decrease was 15%. >> > >>And clearly this can not be explained by people switching >>to vote for Dean or Kucinich. >> > >>I would certainly like to hear a discussion of why this is happening. >> > > > It was obvious to me in Sylmar and Oakland. There was only > perfunctory attention to green issues, candidates, outreach, > and growth. The big buzz topic was which side are you on, > who do you trust, how can we beat the enemy camp. Our party is > letting the weeks and years spin by, while our leaders waste > their time and energy infighting. Our decline in > registration is a consequence of faction fighting. > I don't know about infighting outside of the CC, but there has been a fair amount of infighting in the CC. And many CC members deplore the infighting. But (as far as I know) no CC member sees his own role in the infighting. So what do you do about that? Gerry From baalavi at yahoo.com Sat Nov 12 08:18:57 2005 From: baalavi at yahoo.com (Bob Alavi) Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2005 08:18:57 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Proposition Trivia Questions In-Reply-To: <43755E0B.1040306@earthlink.net> Message-ID: <20051112161857.31504.qmail@web52104.mail.yahoo.com> Just give them time and wait it out. It's an unfortunate (but normal) phase. After that settles things will excel. ba > > > It was obvious to me in Sylmar and Oakland. There was only > perfunctory attention to green issues, candidates, outreach, > and growth. The big buzz topic was which side are you on, > who do you trust, how can we beat the enemy camp. Our party is > letting the weeks and years spin by, while our leaders waste > their time and energy infighting. Our decline in > registration is a consequence of faction fighting. > I don't know about infighting outside of the CC, but there has been a fair amount of infighting in the CC. And many CC members deplore the infighting. But (as far as I know) no CC member sees his own role in the infighting. So what do you do about that? --------------------------------- Yahoo! FareChase - Search multiple travel sites in one click. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From baalavi at yahoo.com Sat Nov 12 08:49:42 2005 From: baalavi at yahoo.com (Bob Alavi) Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2005 08:49:42 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Green Party Senate Candidate Message-ID: <20051112164943.48017.qmail@web52114.mail.yahoo.com> http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/hatch_challenger;_ylt=Aiarixzn1KMswTDAFr6HpMADW7oF;_ylu=X3oDMTBiMW04NW9mBHNlYwMlJVRPUCUl --------------------------------- Yahoo! FareChase - Search multiple travel sites in one click. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From baalavi at yahoo.com Sat Nov 12 08:55:36 2005 From: baalavi at yahoo.com (Bob Alavi) Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2005 08:55:36 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Deepak Chopra on "Conservatism, Corruption, Anger ..." Message-ID: <20051112165536.46679.qmail@web52101.mail.yahoo.com> http://news.yahoo.com/s/huffpost/010491;_ylt=AnMeJLRMqdgwvFa8fChMiIQDW7oF;_ylu=X3oDMTBiMW04NW9mBHNlYwMlJVRPUCUl __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From TNHarter at aol.com Sat Nov 12 16:28:23 2005 From: TNHarter at aol.com (TNHarter at aol.com) Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2005 19:28:23 EST Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] One view of last weekends Green Festival in SF Message-ID: <227.1185ae5.30a7e2a7@aol.com> Don't forget to click the pictures! http://tian.greens.org/SanFrancisco/GreenFestival05/index.html There was so much more than I was able to see, but this gives you an idea what was available in the sustainable retail section of the event. Next year I'm going to try and focus on another part of it. Tian -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From wrolley at charter.net Sat Nov 12 18:59:57 2005 From: wrolley at charter.net (Wes Rolley) Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2005 18:59:57 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Common Ground Collective. The Roadtrip to New Orleans Message-ID: <4376AC2D.2000603@charter.net> I am jumping the gun a bit on this Santa Clara County list. The following is a Press Release that will go out Monday AM in San Francisco and it being reworked into a State Wide Release. ___ FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Monday, November 14, 2005 San Francisco Green Party http://www.sfgreenparty.org Press Contact: Susan King, 415-823-5524 Greens answer call for help, Caravan to New Orleans takes off this week San Francisco -- Longtime activist and New Orleans resident Malik Rahim is asking for help to rescue his community, and Green Party members in the Bay Area and across the country are answering the call. Working in collaboration with the Common Ground Collective, Green Party members will be taking part in the "Roadtrip for Relief" caravan of volunteers and supplies that will converge in New Orleans for Thanksgiving week. Upon arrival, the volunteers will be assisting with the restoration and rebuilding of the 9th Ward in New Orleans. The project, which includes a block-by-block clean up of the area, seeks to give hope to the displaced residents of this primarily African-American community. Green Party members, such as San Francisco Green Party County Council member Susan King, have been instrumental in the organizing efforts. Many Greens, including former Green Party candidate for US Senate Medea Benjamin, Green Party of California co-founder Hank Chapot, and local Green Party activist Vickie Liedner will be a part of the caravan. Malik Rahim, Common Ground Collective co-founder, prominent Green Party leader, former Black Panther and well-known civil rights advocate is scheduled to arrive in San Francisco this week to gather support for Common Ground's caravan to New Orleans. Various events are scheduled over the next few days to help raise funds and promote the "Roadtrip for Relief". These events include: Tuesday, November 15 Hurricane Katrina Teach-In "Rebuilding on a New Foundation of Justice" San Francisco State University, Jack Adams Hall in the SFSU Student Union 12 Noon until 10 PM Keynote Malik Rahim and Curtis Mohammed at 7 PM Free For more information about this event call 415-338-1413, or email hed at sfsu.edu. Katrina Teach-in schedule at www.sfsu.edu/~urbininst/katrina Wednesday, November 16 Send-off Party for Bay to Gulf People's Pipeline to help rebuild New Orleans! Studio Z Gallery, located at 314 11th Street 6 to 9 PM Suggested donation: $10-100 sliding scale, no one turned away This event is a celebration for the volunteers from the Bay Area who will be leaving the following day for New Orleans. Malik and other guests will be speaking, and dancers, spoken word artists and local musicians will provide entertainment. Volunteers interested in joining the caravan may call 415-424-0977 or email sfcaravan at mutualaid.org. Donations are being accepted on an ongoing basis to assist the Common Ground Collective. Donation checks may be sent to: Community Futures Collective/Common Ground Relief 221 Idora Avenue Vallejo, CA 94591 -- "I find I have a great lot to learn ? or unlearn. I seem to know far too much and this knowledge obscures the really significant facts, but I am getting on." -- Charles Rennie Mackintosh Wesley C. Rolley 17211 Quail Court Morgan Hill, CA 95037 (408)778-3024 http://www.refpub.com/ From gerrygras at earthlink.net Sun Nov 13 18:31:53 2005 From: gerrygras at earthlink.net (Gerry Gras) Date: Sun, 13 Nov 2005 18:31:53 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] [GPCA Official Notice] Yolo Plenary Proposals Message-ID: <4377F719.1070908@earthlink.net> -------- Original Message -------- Subject: [Sclara-cc] [GPCA Official Notice] Yolo Plenary Proposals Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2005 22:03:02 -0800 This is an announcement from the GPCA Contact List. For more information, or questions related to the topic of the posting, please do not hit reply. Follow the contact directions listed at the end of the email. Hello, California Greens ... The Proposal Packet for the upcoming Plenary at UC Davis (December 10-11, 2005) is still being finalized. We realize that Counties need time to review Plenary decision items. In the interim, texts for the Proposals can be found here: http://santacruzgreenparty.org/gpca.props.2005.12/ [PLEASE NOTE: Texts on this site should be final. However, Proposals that appear on the site may be pulled from this Plenary's schedule. Please visit http://www.cagreens.org/plenary for updates.) We thank you for your patience. GPCA Coordinating Committee Agenda Group From wrolley at charter.net Sun Nov 13 19:51:34 2005 From: wrolley at charter.net (Wes Rolley) Date: Sun, 13 Nov 2005 19:51:34 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Proposals for Yolo Plenary Message-ID: <437809C6.4010708@charter.net> I have started working through the list of proposals for decisions at the Yolo Plenary. What is the process Santa Clara County will use to take positions on these? Some I like, some I have problems with. Wes -- "I find I have a great lot to learn ? or unlearn. I seem to know far too much and this knowledge obscures the really significant facts, but I am getting on." -- Charles Rennie Mackintosh Wesley C. Rolley 17211 Quail Court Morgan Hill, CA 95037 (408)778-3024 http://www.refpub.com/ From gerrygras at earthlink.net Sun Nov 13 23:02:38 2005 From: gerrygras at earthlink.net (Gerry Gras) Date: Sun, 13 Nov 2005 23:02:38 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Proposals for Yolo Plenary References: <437809C6.4010708@charter.net> Message-ID: <4378368E.5030507@earthlink.net> Wes Rolley wrote: > I have started working through the list of proposals for decisions at the Yolo > Plenary. What is the process Santa Clara County will use to take positions on > these? Some I like, some I have problems with. > Wes > I believe that there will be a meeting soon for all interested GPSCC members for the sole purpose of discussing the proposals and determing the county response to them. Also, we might have a proposed agenda come out of the CC tomorrow (Monday) night. Gerry From wrolley at charter.net Mon Nov 14 12:34:21 2005 From: wrolley at charter.net (Wes Rolley) Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2005 12:34:21 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] [Fwd: [G-C-F] Roadtrip for Relief: People's Pipeline to the Gulf Coast/New Orleans] Message-ID: <4378F4CD.2080800@charter.net> -- "I find I have a great lot to learn ? or unlearn. I seem to know far too much and this knowledge obscures the really significant facts, but I am getting on." -- Charles Rennie Mackintosh Wesley C. Rolley 17211 Quail Court Morgan Hill, CA 95037 (408)778-3024 http://www.refpub.com/ -------------- next part -------------- An embedded message was scrubbed... From: Susan King Subject: [G-C-F] Roadtrip for Relief: People's Pipeline to the Gulf Coast/New Orleans Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2005 12:12:15 -0800 Size: 17396 URL: From WB4D23 at aol.com Mon Nov 14 18:27:34 2005 From: WB4D23 at aol.com (WB4D23 at aol.com) Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2005 21:27:34 EST Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Meeting To Review Proposals for Yolo Plenary--Wednesday Evening November 16th Message-ID: <24c.129f7ce.30aaa196@aol.com> What: Review Plenary Agenda Items for December 10-11 Yolo County GPCA Meeting To Present Summaries At The December 6th GPSCC Meeting When: Wednesday November 16th 7 pm -- ??? Where: 867 North Fifth Street (just south of Hedding Street), San Jose Who Should Attend: Any GPSCC member; but particularly anyone planning to be a GPSCC Delegate Please RSVP to: Warner Bloomberg (408/295-9353) Food: I will order 3 large single topping pizzas from Pizza My Heart Jim Stauffer has posted the plenary packet items (as currently known) at: http://cagreens.org/~jims/yoloprops.html Comments: At the November 1st GPSCC meeting we discussed getting together at Ed's Wednesday November 16th to review the plenary packet materials. Ed later discovered he has a schedule conflict that evening. Since no one else has responded to email suggestions for an alternate location, the meeting will be held at my house -- 867 North Fifth Street, San Jose. Warner Directions: Lightrail to Civic Center (First Street); walk or bike east on Mission Street to Fifth Street; then north to 867 N 5th. Alternate Directions: Take Route 66 or 36 bus to 5th and Hedding Street (east/northbound) or 4th and Hedding Street (west/southbound); Take Route 62 to Taylor and 4th Street (Taylor Street is one block south of Mission Street). -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From gerrygras at earthlink.net Mon Nov 14 19:16:16 2005 From: gerrygras at earthlink.net (Gerry Gras) Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2005 19:16:16 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] French Riots a Necessity? Message-ID: <43795300.5020208@earthlink.net> This article argues that the French riots were a necessity to make progress on some social justice issues: http://www.commondreams.org/views05/1114-31.htm Gerry From alexcathy at aol.com Mon Nov 14 20:14:29 2005 From: alexcathy at aol.com (alexcathy at aol.com) Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2005 23:14:29 -0500 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Speaking of Voter Registrations . . . Message-ID: <8C7B7B23535E1E4-189C-CC87@MBLK-R03.sysops.aol.com> Dear Green Friends, Most of the election commentary in the Sunday mainstream medium was the usual "Run-To-The-Center" mush. There was, however, one interesting piece in the San Francisco Chronicle by David Lesher, California program director for New America Foundation, a non-partisan public policy institute. Among several gems in this article was Lesher's observation that, while we Greens may be losing voter registrations, Republicans and Democrats are losing 'em even faster! According to Lesher, Democratic Party registration is at its lowest point in 75 years. Furthermore, for voters under age 23, a whopping 40 percent are registering outside of the two major parties. By the way, this squares with my experience from the voter registration my wife and I did last year as part of a non-partisan registration drive for 9to5 the National Organization of Working Women. Cathy and I noticed huge numbers of independent and also Green Party registrations for young voters. We thought then that this was just Bay Area eccentricity, but evidently, the pattern holds statewide. You can find the whole article posted at www.sfgate.com, but here are some highlights: = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Published by the San Francisco Chronicle, www.sfgate.com, Sunday, November 13, 2005. WHERE STATE'S ANGRY VOTERS WILL TURN NEXT by David Lesher Now what? The special election was a referendum on Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and all eyes are focused on how he responds to a complete rejection by voters. But an even more important question is, what will voters do next? They started this venture into uncharted territory with the unprecedented recall of an incumbent governor and the election of a political neophyte who promised to sweep out the status quo. Now, the rejection of the special election suggests the recall was a failed solution. Voters are still as angry as they were two years ago. Roughly 3 out of 5 agree today with all of the following statements: California is on the "wrong track," bad times are ahead, there is "a lot" of waste in state government, Schwarzenegger and the Legislature are failing at their jobs, the government can rarely be trusted, political contributions have too much influence and "major change" is needed in the state budget. . . . For example, a poll last month by the nonpartisan Public Policy Institute of California found a dramatic jump in support for public financing of elections. Last year, voters rejected the idea by more than 22 points. But last month, the issue was dead even. . . . Democratic registration today is at 42 percent, its lowest point in 75 years. There are actually about 400,000 fewer Democrats in California today than there were in 1994, even though the state has added more than 1 million registered voters since then. Republican registration is also down from nearly 40 percent in 1990 to less than 35 percent today. Registration outside of the two major parties has more than doubled since 1990 to nearly 23 percent today. San Francisco, the state's second-most Democratic county, also has the highest independent registration in California at 28 percent. The response by adult voters is also just a glimpse of the trend since many are unhappy but haven't made the effort to change their party registration. The bleak future of the two major parties is most clear in the response from young voters. Among those under age 23, more than 40 percent are registering outside of the two major parties. So is California ready for a third party? Last year, voters split nearly 50-50 when the Public Policy Institute asked whether Republicans and Democrats are doing "such a poor job that a third major party is needed." But it may not stay that way very long since independent voters endorsed the statement by nearly 2 to 1. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = From gerrygras at earthlink.net Mon Nov 14 22:06:43 2005 From: gerrygras at earthlink.net (Gerry Gras) Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2005 22:06:43 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Speaking of Voter Registrations . . . References: <8C7B7B23535E1E4-189C-CC87@MBLK-R03.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: <43797AF3.7030801@earthlink.net> Alex, thank you for the tip. I liked this article and sent an email to the GPCA CC about it. Gerry alexcathy at aol.com wrote: > Dear Green Friends, > > Most of the election commentary in the Sunday mainstream medium was > the usual "Run-To-The-Center" mush. There was, however, one interesting > piece in the San Francisco Chronicle by David Lesher, California > program director for New America Foundation, a non-partisan public > policy institute. Among several gems in this article was Lesher's > observation that, while we Greens may be losing voter registrations, > Republicans and Democrats are losing 'em even faster! According to > Lesher, Democratic Party registration is at its lowest point in 75 > years. Furthermore, for voters under age 23, a whopping 40 percent are > registering outside of the two major parties. By the way, this squares > with my experience from the voter registration my wife and I did last > year as part of a non-partisan registration drive for 9to5 the National > Organization of Working Women. Cathy and I noticed huge numbers of > independent and also Green Party registrations for young voters. We > thought then that this was just Bay Area eccentricity, but evidently, > the pattern holds statewide. > > You can find the whole article posted at www.sfgate.com, but here are > some highlights: > > > = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = > Published by the San Francisco Chronicle, www.sfgate.com, Sunday, > November 13, 2005. > WHERE STATE'S ANGRY VOTERS WILL TURN NEXT > by David Lesher > > Now what? The special election was a referendum on Gov. Arnold > Schwarzenegger and all eyes are focused on how he responds to a > complete rejection by voters. But an even more important question is, > what will voters do next? > > They started this venture into uncharted territory with the > unprecedented recall of an incumbent governor and the election of a > political neophyte who promised to sweep out the status quo. Now, the > rejection of the special election suggests the recall was a failed > solution. > > Voters are still as angry as they were two years ago. Roughly 3 out of > 5 agree today with all of the following statements: California is on > the "wrong track," bad times are ahead, there is "a lot" of waste in > state government, Schwarzenegger and the Legislature are failing at > their jobs, the government can rarely be trusted, political > contributions have too much influence and "major change" is needed in > the state budget. > > . . . > > For example, a poll last month by the nonpartisan Public Policy > Institute of California found a dramatic jump in support for public > financing of elections. Last year, voters rejected the idea by more > than 22 points. But last month, the issue was dead even. > > . . . > > Democratic registration today is at 42 percent, its lowest point in 75 > years. There are actually about 400,000 fewer Democrats in California > today than there were in 1994, even though the state has added more > than 1 million registered voters since then. Republican registration is > also down from nearly 40 percent in 1990 to less than 35 percent today. > > Registration outside of the two major parties has more than doubled > since 1990 to nearly 23 percent today. San Francisco, the state's > second-most Democratic county, also has the highest independent > registration in California at 28 percent. > > The response by adult voters is also just a glimpse of the trend since > many are unhappy but haven't made the effort to change their party > registration. The bleak future of the two major parties is most clear > in the response from young voters. Among those under age 23, more than > 40 percent are registering outside of the two major parties. > > So is California ready for a third party? Last year, voters split > nearly 50-50 when the Public Policy Institute asked whether Republicans > and Democrats are doing "such a poor job that a third major party is > needed." But it may not stay that way very long since independent > voters endorsed the statement by nearly 2 to 1. > > > = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = > = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = > _______________________________________________ > sosfbay-discuss mailing list > sosfbay-discuss at marla.cagreens.org > http://marla.cagreens.org/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss > > From WB4D23 at aol.com Tue Nov 15 09:47:48 2005 From: WB4D23 at aol.com (WB4D23 at aol.com) Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2005 12:47:48 EST Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Meeting To Review Proposals for Yolo Plenary--Wednesday Evening Nov 16th Message-ID: <24f.114ebee.30ab7944@aol.com> What: Review Plenary Agenda Items for December 10-11 Yolo County GPCA Meeting To Present Summaries At The December 6th GPSCC Meeting When: Wednesday November 16th 7 pm -- ??? Where: 867 North Fifth Street (just south of Hedding Street), San Jose Who Should Attend: Any GPSCC member; but particularly anyone planning to be a GPSCC Delegate Please RSVP to: Warner Bloomberg (408/295-9353) Food: I will order 3 large single topping pizzas from Pizza My Heart Jim Stauffer has posted the plenary packet items (as currently known) at: http://cagreens.org/~jims/yoloprops.html Comments: At the November 1st GPSCC meeting we discussed getting together at Ed's Wednesday November 16th to review the plenary packet materials. Ed later discovered he has a schedule conflict that evening. Since no one else has responded to email suggestions for an alternate location, the meeting will be held at my house -- 867 North Fifth Street, San Jose. Warner Directions: Lightrail to Civic Center (First Street); walk or bike east on Mission Street to Fifth Street; then north to 867 N 5th. Alternate Directions: Take Route 66 or 36 bus to 5th and Hedding Street (east/northbound) or 4th and Hedding Street (west/southbound); Take Route 62 to Taylor and 4th Street (Taylor Street is one block south of Mission Street). -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jims at greens.org Tue Nov 15 15:56:28 2005 From: jims at greens.org (Jim Stauffer) Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2005 15:56:28 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Meeting To Review Proposals for YoloPlenary--Wednesday Evening Nov 16th References: <24f.114ebee.30ab7944@aol.com> Message-ID: <437A75AC.BA000985@greens.org> Those who volunteered to be delegates to the plenary should download the preliminary proposals and attend this meeting. Anyone else who's interested in participating in the decision process is welcome to attend. -- Jim > WB4D23 at aol.com wrote: > > What: Review Plenary Agenda Items for December 10-11 Yolo County GPCA > Meeting > To Present Summaries At The December 6th GPSCC Meeting > When: Wednesday November 16th 7 pm -- ??? > Where: 867 North Fifth Street (just south of Hedding Street), San Jose > Who Should Attend: Any GPSCC member; but particularly anyone planning to > be a GPSCC Delegate > Please RSVP to: Warner Bloomberg (408/295-9353) > Food: I will order 3 large single topping pizzas from Pizza My Heart > > Jim Stauffer has posted the plenary packet items (as currently known) at: > > http://cagreens.org/~jims/yoloprops.html > > Comments: At the November 1st GPSCC meeting we discussed getting together > at Ed's Wednesday November 16th to review the plenary packet materials. > Ed later discovered he has a schedule conflict that evening. Since no one > else has responded to email suggestions for an alternate location, the > meeting will be held at my house -- 867 North Fifth Street, San Jose. > Warner > > Directions: Lightrail to Civic Center (First Street); walk or bike east > on Mission Street to Fifth Street; then north to 867 N 5th. Alternate > Directions: Take Route 66 or 36 bus to 5th and Hedding Street > (east/northbound) or 4th and Hedding Street (west/southbound); Take Route > 62 to Taylor and 4th Street (Taylor Street is one block south of Mission > Street). > > ------------------------------------------------------------------- > _______________________________________________ > sosfbay-discuss mailing list > sosfbay-discuss at marla.cagreens.org > http://marla.cagreens.org/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss From cls at truffula.sj.ca.us Wed Nov 16 10:43:12 2005 From: cls at truffula.sj.ca.us (Cameron L. Spitzer) Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2005 10:43:12 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] propaganda CD update Message-ID: I've been handing out a "tools" CD at tabling events. There's an event this weekend and the Holiday Peace Fair is coming, so it's update time. "Tools" is mostly filled with open source software tools for MS-Windoze and Mac OS. Openoffice, Mozilla, Abiword. But we also have some Green Party Propaganda. The GP of Cal and GP-US platforms, the ACLU "bust card" and related stuff. The candidate stuff is obsolete. Need new suggestions. Cameron From gerrygras at earthlink.net Wed Nov 16 13:11:00 2005 From: gerrygras at earthlink.net (Gerry Gras) Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2005 13:11:00 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Letter to "the Nation" Message-ID: <437BA064.6010200@earthlink.net> Here is a copy of a letter to the editor I just sent to "the Nation". =================================================================== Thank you for your article, "Democrats and the War": http://www.thenation.com/doc/20051128/editors . In particular, thank you for the pledge not to support candidates who are not antiwar. I would like to point out that the Green Party has taken that same stand since before the Iraq War began. Gerald Gras From gerrygras at earthlink.net Thu Nov 17 13:35:57 2005 From: gerrygras at earthlink.net (Gerry Gras) Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 13:35:57 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Citizen Assemby reforms Message-ID: <437CF7BD.4020004@earthlink.net> A group of citizens randomly chosen make reform proposal: proportional representation. Gerry -------- Original Message -------- In Canada, regular folks are put to work on reforms By Steven Hill San Jose Mercury News Wed, Nov. 16, 2005 http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/opinion/13180228.htm Despite voters rejecting Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's attempts to end-run the Legislature, that does not mean voters don't want change. California's political leaders must try to pick up the pieces of what is left of state politics. The challenges are daunting, particularly because both the governor and Legislature have lost so much credibility. The question is: How do we move forward? One of the solutions may lie across the border in Canada. It's called a Citizens' Assembly, and it was on display last year in the province of British Columbia. The government there turned over to the people the task of basic political reform, and by doing so took the partisanship out of the process, something California badly needs. Here's how it worked: The government randomly selected 160 average citizens to participate in the Citizens' Assembly, like selecting a jury pool. The Assembly had 80 women and 80 men from all of the province's 79 electoral districts. It was an independent, non-partisan body charged with a particular focus: to examine British Columbia's electoral system, and how their winner-take-all system was performing in determining who got elected to the Legislature. This effort was unique. Often such task forces are dominated by the usual political insiders or good-government activists. Nowhere in the world had randomly selected citizens with no history of interest in electoral reform been so empowered to shape major proposals. Yet the work of the Assembly was unanimously endorsed by the political parties in the Legislature and community leaders. The Assembly's tenure was divided into three phases: Learning about reform, January-March 2004; public hearings, May-June; and deliberations, September-November. They met on weekends, their expenses and a small per diem paid for by the government. They were visited by top experts from all political perspectives who gave them the benefit of their knowledge and analysis. The Assembly delivered a final report in December 2004. It voted 146-7 to toss out its longtime winner-take-all, single-seat district electoral system and replace it with a proportional representation system. ``This really is power to the people,'' enthused Jack Blaney, the chair of the Citizens' Assembly. The Assembly's proposal was submitted by the legislature directly to the voters in a referendum last May. Because the Citizens' Assembly was composed of average citizens, their recommendation had tremendous legitimacy with the public. A robust 58 percent of voters supported the measure. The Citizens' Assembly in British Columbia focused on the electoral system, but the focus just as well could have been on other aspects of the political system. In California, a Citizens Assembly could focus on redistricting reform or campaign finance reform; or reforming our broken primary system and the electoral system. The Citizens' Assembly solves a real dilemma: How do we enact meaningful political reform, which California so badly needs, when both the governor and the Legislature have conflicts of interest that induce them to manipulate the rules in their favor? Citizens' Assemblies could be important vehicles for modernizing our political system because trust is placed in average citizens who have more credibility than the political class. If you truly believe in democracy, that's where trust belongs. In the mid-1990s, a California Constitutional Revision Commission deliberated on some of these fundamental issues, but it was too timid and politically weak to enact change. The Citizens' Assembly points the direction that Schwarzenegger and Democrats in the Legislature should lead. The governor opened the debate with redistricting reform, but now is the time to inject fairness and non-partisanship into state politics. What better way than by establishing a Citizens' Assembly that empowers average citizens to decide what political reform is best for California? ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- STEVEN HILL is an Irvine senior fellow with the New America Foundation and author of ``Fixing Elections: The Failure of America's Winner Take All Politics'' (www.fixingelections.com). To find out more about British Columbia's Citizens' Assembly, visit www.citizensassembly.bc.ca From gerrygras at earthlink.net Fri Nov 18 15:09:25 2005 From: gerrygras at earthlink.net (Gerry Gras) Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2005 15:09:25 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] GPUS Affiliation debate Message-ID: <437E5F25.3060107@earthlink.net> The current tentative agenda for the Yolo plenary includes a proposal about the affiliation with the GPUS: http://santacruzgreenparty.org/gpca.props.2005.12/gpus.affiliation/proposal_affil_approval.rtf At the same time, the GPUS is debating a proposal that attempts to prevent the states from not placing on their ballots the candidate chosen at the national convention. I am not sure where all this is headed, but I think I should forward to you the three emails on the subject that have come to the CC. Those three emails will be coming soon. Gerry From gerrygras at earthlink.net Fri Nov 18 15:10:21 2005 From: gerrygras at earthlink.net (Gerry Gras) Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2005 15:10:21 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] [Fwd: [GPCA-CC] Fwd: [G-C-F] Discussion Has Begun on GP-US Proposal: ID 191 - BylawsAmendment to Clarify Affiliation Agreement] Message-ID: <437E5F5D.60504@earthlink.net> -------- Original Message -------- Subject: [GPCA-CC] Fwd: [G-C-F] Discussion Has Begun on GP-US Proposal: ID 191 - BylawsAmendment to Clarify Affiliation Agreement Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2005 17:38:51 -0800 (PST) From: John Morton Reply-To: GPCA Coordinating Committee To: Coordinating Committee - GPCA This may have an effect on the plenary discussion of the affiliation proposal. Should we ask the proposal presenters to consider this? John --- "Michael S. Wyman" wrote: > From: "Michael S. Wyman" > To: "Cal Forum" > Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2005 12:19:21 -0800 > Subject: [G-C-F] Discussion Has Begun on GP-US > Proposal: ID 191 - > BylawsAmendment to Clarify Affiliation Agreement > > Dear Cal Forumistas, > > I don't normally post proposals from the national > party to this forum, but > this proposal seems sufficiently portentious to > merit discussion on our > list. > > If you would like any of your comments posted to the > list serve of the > National Committee, please notify me, or the > delegate of your choice. > > Please keep such comments polite and constructive, > thank you. > > Yours, > > Mike Wyman > GPUS-DEL > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: > To: > Sent: Monday, November 14, 2005 9:01 PM > Subject: [usgp-coo] Discussion Has Begun on GP-US > Proposal: ID 191 - > BylawsAmendment to Clarify Affiliation Agreement > > > > Discussion has begun for the following proposal: > > > > Proposal ID: 191 > > Proposal: Bylaws Amendment to Clarify Affiliation > Agreement > > Floor Manager: Jody Grage Haug, > jodyhaug at hotmail.com > > Discussion Dates: 11/15/2005 - 11/27/2005 > > Voting Dates: 11/28/2005 - 12/04/2005 > > > > Voting ends at Midnight Pacific Time > > > > The GP-US strives for consensus, which involves > several steps, > > taken in order.. > > > > Clarifying questions and responses from the group > making the proposal. > > Airing of concerns and discussion about how to > improve the proposal > > by taking into consideration those concersn > > Call for consensus on the final proposal. > > > > Background: In consideration that: > > > > Support for the Green Party National Nominating > Convention will result > > in the strongest national campaign possible in > 2008, and; > > > > The strongest candidates for President will be > most motivated to seek > > the Green nomination if Green state parties > support the decision of the > > Nominating Convention, and would be less motivated > to seek our > > nomination if they believed they would need to > campaign to individual > > state Green parties directly after the Convention, > and; > > > > The Nominating Convention will receive the > strongest support and > > participation if Greens and potential Presidential > candidates both know > > that the nomination decision will be respected, > and; > > > > In implementation of the affiliation agreement > between the Green Party > > of the United States and its affiliated state > parties; > > > > Proposal: Be it resolved that the following rule > is adopted by the > National > > Committee of the Green Party of the United States > and added to the > > Rules and Procedures of the Green Party of the > United States as new > > Number 3 of Section 1.V of Article 2: > > > > "Any state political party affiliated with the > Green Party of the > > United States that places on their state's general > election ballot any > > Presidential candidate other than the candidate > nominated at the Green > > Party National Nominating Convention, as confirmed > by the Secretary, or > > any state party that leaves an existing and > available ballot line blank > > for the office of President, will be in violation > of their affiliation > > agreement with the Green Party of the United > States and will be subject > > to disaffiliation upon the offering of such a > proposal by two or more > > state parties and by a subsequent vote of at least > two-thirds of those > > National Committee delegates voting for or > against, using the normal > > rules of quorum as applied for any other type of > accreditation > > decision. This clause does not apply to any state > party whose ballot > > line does not include the nominated candidate due > to a lack of > > petitioning success." > > > > And that Article II, Section 2 of the Official > Bylaws of the Green > > Party of the United States be modified as follows > : > > > > "The National Committee of the Green Party of the > United States shall > > consist of the representatives of the accredited > state parties and > > accredited caucuses of underrepresented groups as > long as they are in > > compliance with their affiliation agreement, as > determined by the > > National Committee." > > > > Resources: D.C. Contact: Michael Piacsek, > piacsek at mindspring.com, > 202.302.7604 > > Wisc. Contact: Jeff Peterson, > peterson at lakeland.ws, 715.472.2728 > > > > References: Proposal 180: > http://green.gpus.org/cgi-bin/vote/propdetail?pid=180 > > Official Rules: > http://green.gpus.org/documents/rules.shtml > > Official Bylaws: > http://green.gpus.org/documents/bylaws.shtml > > > > Full details are available at: > > > > http://gp.org/cgi-bin/vote/propdetail?pid=191 > > > > Please send your comments to > natlcomvotes at green.gpus.org. > > > > Thank you and have a wonderful day! > > --The GP-US Voting Admin > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 > > > > For other information about the Coordinating > Committee, see: > > http://gp.org/committees/nc/ > > _______________________________________________ > cal-forum mailing list > cal-forum at marla.cagreens.org > http://marla.cagreens.org/mailman/listinfo/cal-forum > ************** "We have lingered in the chambers of the sea By sea-girls wreathed with seaweed red and brown Til human voices wake us, and we drown." -- T.S. Elliot _______________________________________________ gpca-cc mailing list gpca-cc at marla.cagreens.org http://marla.cagreens.org/mailman/listinfo/gpca-cc From gerrygras at earthlink.net Fri Nov 18 15:11:32 2005 From: gerrygras at earthlink.net (Gerry Gras) Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2005 15:11:32 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] [Fwd: Re: [GPCA-CC] Fwd: [G-C-F] Discussion Has Begun on GP-US Proposal: ID191 - BylawsAmendment to Clarify Affiliation Agreement] Message-ID: <437E5FA4.3030102@earthlink.net> -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: [GPCA-CC] Fwd: [G-C-F] Discussion Has Begun on GP-US Proposal: ID191 - BylawsAmendment to Clarify Affiliation Agreement Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2005 12:59:28 -0800 From: Cat Woods Reply-To: GPCA Coordinating Committee To: GPCA Coordinating Committee References: <20051117013851.61492.qmail at web51808.mail.yahoo.com> John Morton wrote: > > This may have an effect on the plenary discussion of > the affiliation proposal. Should we ask the proposal > presenters to consider this? Proposal presenters have considered this. After 2 exploded discussions of the proposal at county council meetings (SF and Sonoma), I'm convinced that we have to keep this proposal as sharply focused on its point as possible: the GA was promised the chance to revisit the *TERMS* of its affiliation and approve them; here is its chance. In the SF meeting, most of the people believed we were legitimately affiliated, there is no question, and I was suspect for even following through on the promise to bring it to the GA. In the Sonoma meeting, most of the people believed we should disaffiliate and therefore wanted to reject the proposal to express this. I would like to point out that failing to approve the affiliation agreement is not synonymous with disaffiliating. If people want to disaffiliate, either because of the lack of proportionate representation or because of this recent proposal or any other reason, then the thing to do would be to amend the proposal to say that the GPCA "rejects the affiliation agreement and disaffiliates." Note that this, too, would require 80% to pass, and I don't think it would pass that way. John, you and Michael Rubin proposed to amend to the proposal to require a state nominating convention for national ballot lines. So far, that is the only proposed amendment I have received. I will make any and all proposed amendments available on the floor of the plenary, to see what option can possibly get 80% approval. I want 80% for one reason: I want clarity rather than further ambiguity. Failing to pass anything will result in a lot more dissension and ambiguity, and I neither want that nor to be held responsible for that. Please send suggested amendments to me to have available for the GA. I repeat: people who want to affiliate need to propose an amendment that says that; people who don't want a state nominating convention to even be allowed need to propose an amendment that says that. The proposal as written was the most neutral interpretation of our bylaw (which is very explicit) that I could come up with. I can't determine in advance what has a chance of 80% agreement at the GA. If people want it amended in a specific way, it would be best to say so now. -Cat. _______________________________________________ gpca-cc mailing list gpca-cc at marla.cagreens.org http://marla.cagreens.org/mailman/listinfo/gpca-cc From gerrygras at earthlink.net Fri Nov 18 15:12:26 2005 From: gerrygras at earthlink.net (Gerry Gras) Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2005 15:12:26 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] [Fwd: Re: [GPCA-CC] Fwd: [G-C-F] Discussion Has Begun on GP-US Proposal: ID191 - BylawsAmendment to Clarify Affiliation Agreement] Message-ID: <437E5FDA.1030600@earthlink.net> -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: [GPCA-CC] Fwd: [G-C-F] Discussion Has Begun on GP-US Proposal: ID191 - BylawsAmendment to Clarify Affiliation Agreement Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2005 13:44:37 -0800 (PST) From: Christina Olague Reply-To: GPCA Coordinating Committee To: GPCA Coordinating Committee I think we should remove the proposal from the plenary ..at least this is the sentiment I heard expressed at the GM in SF on Wednesday. Cat Woods wrote: John Morton wrote: > > This may have an effect on the plenary discussion of > the affiliation proposal. Should we ask the proposal > presenters to consider this? Proposal presenters have considered this. After 2 exploded discussions of the proposal at county council meetings (SF and Sonoma), I'm convinced that we have to keep this proposal as sharply focused on its point as possible: the GA was promised the chance to revisit the *TERMS* of its affiliation and approve them; here is its chance. In the SF meeting, most of the people believed we were legitimately affiliated, ther! e is no question, and I was suspect for even following through on the promise to bring it to the GA. In the Sonoma meeting, most of the people believed we should disaffiliate and therefore wanted to reject the proposal to express this. I would like to point out that failing to approve the affiliation agreement is not synonymous with disaffiliating. If people want to disaffiliate, either because of the lack of proportionate representation or because of this recent proposal or any other reason, then the thing to do would be to amend the proposal to say that the GPCA "rejects the affiliation agreement and disaffiliates." Note that this, too, would require 80% to pass, and I don't think it would pass that way. John, you and Michael Rubin proposed to amend to the proposal to require a state nominating convention for national ballot lines. So far, that is the only proposed amendment I have received. I will make any and all proposed amendments available on the floor of the plenary, to see what option can possibly get 80% approval. I want 80% for one reason: I want clarity rather than further ambiguity. Failing to pass anything will result in a lot more dissension and ambiguity, and I neither want that nor to be held responsible for that. Please send suggested amendments to me to have available for the GA. I repeat: people who want to affiliate need to propose an amendment that says that; people who don't want a state nominating convention to even be allowed need to propose an amendment that says that. The proposal as written was the most neutral interpretation of our bylaw (which is very explicit) that I could come up with. I can't determine in advance what has a chance of 80% agreement at the GA. If people want it amended in a specific way, it would be best to say so now. -Cat. _______________________________________________ gp! ca-cc mailing list gpca-cc at marla.cagreens.org http://marla.cagreens.org/mailman/listinfo/gpca-cc ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Yahoo! FareChase - Search multiple travel sites in one click. -------------- next part -------------- An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: nsmail.txt URL: From j.m.doyle at sbcglobal.net Fri Nov 18 22:25:28 2005 From: j.m.doyle at sbcglobal.net (Jim Doyle) Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2005 22:25:28 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] need for a multiparty system Message-ID: <437EC558.3050309@sbcglobal.net> Here is a link to an article that has a scathing denunciation of the democrats and opens its concluding paragraph with the line All of this begs for a multiparty system in this country and the emergence of a true opposition. http://www.commondreams.org/views05/1118-33.htm From j.m.doyle at sbcglobal.net Fri Nov 18 22:31:58 2005 From: j.m.doyle at sbcglobal.net (Jim Doyle) Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2005 22:31:58 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] plenary agenda Message-ID: <437EC6DE.2030309@sbcglobal.net> I have posted the list of agenda items to the GPSCC web site. P.S. I know they are centered and need to be aligned left. From gerrygras at earthlink.net Fri Nov 18 22:53:59 2005 From: gerrygras at earthlink.net (Gerry Gras) Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2005 22:53:59 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] [Fwd: [SVBC] San Jose "Buy Nothing Day" Bike Party - 11/25, 5:30pm] Message-ID: <437ECC07.30801@earthlink.net> FYI, Gerry -------- Original Message -------- Subject: [SVBC] San Jose "Buy Nothing Day" Bike Party - 11/25, 5:30pm Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2005 22:48:42 -0800 From: nick laskowski To: SVBC Hello SVBC members: The details for the next San Jose/Santa Clara Bike Party have been released! Friday, 11/25/2005 - the Day After Thanksgiving - 5:30 PM Location Details: Meet at Plaza de Cesar Chavez park, downtown San Jose: Market St. at Park Ave. Here's a map: http://tinyurl.com/8qpl9 Don't get stuck in the crowds on the busiest shopping day of the year...come join us instead for: the South Bay's Buy Nothing Day Bike Party! Buy Nothing Day is a reaction to "Black Friday," the busiest shopping day of the year in the U.S., the day after Thanksgiving, when millions of people drive away from their homes and families to get stuck in parking lot traffic jams, waiting to spend their hard-earned savings on yet another piece of disposable, prettily-packaged chance for satisfaction and eternal happiness - or at least until the next big sale. It's precisely this sort of attitude that leads us to trap ourselves in giant SUVs, isolated from our communities and our environments, many feet from our own passengers, busily wasting oil for which our young are sent to kill, threatening everything in our path and forgetting everything that matters. Get out of your cars! Get out of the stores! Get onto your bike! Get into the street! Get to the BIKE PARTY! Come meet people and generally have fun in the streets! We'll have a relaxed ride from San Jose's downtown, most likely headed Westward towards some of the busiest shopping/congestion areas in the South Bay. Bring lights, signs, tiki torches, boomboxes, and anything else that will make you visible and safe. All are invited to a free cafe concert afterwards. More information on Buy Nothing Day: http://www.adbusters.org/bnd South Bay Buy Nothing Day Bike Party! Friday, November 25th, 2005 (the Day after Thanksgiving) 5:30pm - Plaza de Cesar Chavez, downtown San Jose Ride your bike against oil wars and consumerist traffic jams! Need more information? Contact wheelrevolt (at) fastmail.fm or 375-0899 in the 4-0-8! In the style of Critical Mass, this event is not organized by any particular individual or organization, but instead by a number of cyclists with a shared goal in improving the livability of our communities and the partyability of our roads. Any attempt to attribute responsibility to a single individual or group would be inaccurate and foolish. -- Save gas money and try a more enjoyable, exciting, and healthier way of getting around: ride your bike! _______________________________________________ bikes at svbcbikes.org mailing list To unsubscribe from the SVBC discussion list or change your options, please visit http://lists.svbc.dreamhost.com/options.cgi/bikes-svbc.dreamhost.com/. You can also unsubscribe via e-mail by sending a message from your subscribed e-mail account to subscribe at svbcbikes.org with the word 'unsubscribe' in the subject or body--don't include the quotation marks. You will be asked to confirm your request to unsubscribe for security reasons. List information: http://lists.svbc.dreamhost.com/listinfo.cgi/bikes-svbc.dreamhost.com From fredd at freeshell.org Tue Nov 22 15:52:49 2005 From: fredd at freeshell.org (Fred Duperrault) Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2005 15:52:49 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] WAR TOYS Protest Message-ID: <4383AF51.2000809@freeshell.org> FYI: The Peninsula Raging Grannies, and others, will hold their annual public demonstration to protest the sale of WAR TOYS at the Sunnyvale Toys 'R Us store on El Camino Real, near Sunnyvale-Saratoga Road, Friday, November 25 at 11:00 AM. More Info: dana@ greens.org or 650-424-0842 Help swell the crowd! Fred D., on behalf of the Raging Grannies. From andid at cagreens.org Tue Nov 22 16:27:34 2005 From: andid at cagreens.org (Andrea Dorey) Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2005 16:27:34 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Eucalyptus Tree Destruction In-Reply-To: <1de.48074c4d.30a3c576@aol.com> References: <1de.48074c4d.30a3c576@aol.com> Message-ID: <251c33e1495132fce2c7695c102db7e4@cagreens.org> Sorry to disagree with this position, but these high resin-containing trees are one of the MOST DANGEROUS trees we have growing in fire-hazard (desert) California. Fire departments hate them. They are living torches waiting to ignite. They were the main cause of the burn-down of the Oakland hills. They can explode and drop huge limbs in the summer (due to resin expansion) and they torch at excessively high temperatures that will spontaneously ignite structures less than 100 feet away. And during the winter, the winds break off large limbs and debris that litter the ground and the streets around them. They are NOT native to this country, having been imported from, I believe, Australia. Their droppings sterilize the ground and prevent any other growth, including native plants, from establishing themselves beneath or nearby these trees. The droppings are highly fire-hazardous as well. Small fire departments in rural areas are trying to rid themselves of this menace. I know they are big and beautiful and they smell nice if you like medicine wafting through your neighborhood year-round, but there are other trees that can grow big and gracefully without creating a year-round hazard. Andrea On Nov 9, 2005, at 1:34 PM, MARKETPOIN at aol.com wrote: > This may or may not be of interest to some of you but I thought I > would let you know about it. > > The Mid Peninsula Regional Open Space District is going to be voting > tonight on the fate of six unusually large and beautiful Eucalyptus > Trees in Pulgas Ridge Open Space Preserve located off of Edgewood Road > bordering San Carlos and Redwood City.? > > They have cut down over fifty Eucalyptus Trees over the past five > years in the Preserve.? The trees that are left are the largest and > most majestic ones.? We gathered 250 signatures a few years ago in the > park that indicated that the public that uses the park do not want > these trees to be destroyed. > > But the MROSD has ignored the public pleas and continue to follow a > unilateral strategy to transform the preserve to what they call > "native" habitat.? If this issue interest you, please call this > afternoon or attend the meeting tonight. (See information below) > > Tonight the Board of Directors will meet at 7:30pm at their offices > at 330 Distel Circle in Los Altos to decide the fate of six more of > these trees.? Public comment can be made at the meeting or by phone at > 650 691-1200 or by e-mail at info at openspace.org.? Their website is > www.openspace.org. > > Judy_______________________________________________ > sosfbay-discuss mailing list > sosfbay-discuss at marla.cagreens.org > http://marla.cagreens.org/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss > Chinese Proverb: "If you do not climb the mountain, you will not see the plain." Andrea Dorey 408-306-1900 (cell phone, short messages please) From andid at cagreens.org Tue Nov 22 16:31:31 2005 From: andid at cagreens.org (Andrea Dorey) Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2005 16:31:31 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Green Party Voting Positions? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: OK, I stand corrected. I'm glad it lost. Too bad 79 went down with the rest due to the public anger over the $50+ million cost of this fiasco. BTW, don't you love hearing about Arnie's travels i China on taxpayer expense? Duplicating Baby Bush's travels... A. On Nov 8, 2005, at 4:49 PM, TNHarter at aol.com wrote: > > In a message dated 11/8/05 1:09:51 PM, cls at truffula.sj.ca.us writes: > > >> Sorry, Andrea, no on 80.? "Direct access" is only for huge >> industrial users.? The PUC is corrupt, no better than the >> legislature, so giving them more power is not an improvement. >> "Green energy" sounds good, but in power marketing it was >> a no-effect branding gimmic.? > > The very fact that it sounded good made it perfect for me. > I didn't have to carry additional stuff to believe in it. I could > point out that companies selling sugar water in disposable > packaging with green on the lable were getting more from > selling green power than I was. Now people have to buy solar > cells to get green power. You can still get green stickers from > me, and they still say the same thing, but you have to use > your imagination to connect my cause to the electic grid. > >> Green Mountain Energy was an Enron brand >> and buying your power from Enron instead >> of PG&E didn't erect a single windmill. >> > > Yeah, but there were other brands that really were green power. > One of them even gave the first TASC talk of the new millenium: > > http://tian.greens.org/TASC/TASCleenNGreen.html > > Assuming of course you consider the miliinium to have started on > 1/1/2000. For the rest of us it was about the 25th to last talk of > the previous millinium. In either case, it was four days after the > "millenium bug rollover" for computer software. Nice juxtaposition. :-) > > -- > Tian > Most recent change to my website: > Added pictures from the 2000th casualty in Iraq mark march. > http://tian.greens.org > _______________________________________________ > sosfbay-discuss mailing list > sosfbay-discuss at marla.cagreens.org > http://marla.cagreens.org/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss > Chinese Proverb: "If you do not climb the mountain, you will not see the plain." Andrea Dorey 408-306-1900 (cell phone, short messages please) From andid at cagreens.org Tue Nov 22 16:36:38 2005 From: andid at cagreens.org (Andrea Dorey) Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2005 16:36:38 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] NO TO SCHWARZENEGGER -- NOW, WILL GREENS GET A HEARING? In-Reply-To: <8C7B36DB5621FA6-398-31E6@mblk-d44.sysops.aol.com> References: <8C7B36DB5621FA6-398-31E6@mblk-d44.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: <6596e35a19849c5d38c7cfd41e005c10@cagreens.org> HAD ENOUGH? You bet! Great idea for a button! A. On Nov 9, 2005, at 9:54 AM, alexcathy at aol.com wrote: > Dear Green Friends, > > Just two years after the crazy recall election of 2003, the screaming > headline on this morning's edition of the San Francisco Chronicle says > it all: > > CALIFORNIANS SAY NO TO SCHWARZENEGGER > > Every single one of Arnold's bullshit "reforms" went down to defeat! > > A couple of them were not even close. For example, Proposition 76, > which would have given this madman almost disctatorial powers over the > state budget was voted down by 60%. Proposiition 77 on the > redistricting of state legislative and congressional districts and > advertised as a "reform" of the undeniable gerrymandering whereby not a > single congressional or state legislative seat changed parties in the > 2004 elections, was voted down by 57%. > > Personally, the frustrating thing for me, is that could make a case for > reform in all of these areas, just as you could make a case for > recalling Democratic Governor Fyar Davis in 2003, but voters, properly > in my opinion, saw this as an expensive, gratuitous power grab by > Schwarzenegger and that good-for-nothing, crazy, rightwing Republican > Party. > > One of the arguments which I made against these propositions in a > couple of letters-to-the-editor, (which the So-Called-Liberal-Media, of > course, refused to print), was that anyone could tell the "reformers" > were phony by the arguments they could have made but DID NOT MAKE for > reform. > > The only thing the "reformers" gave us was the rightwing Republican > "party line." > > > PUBLIC EMPLOYEE UNIONS > > If public employee unions have too much power, then why not use the > example of the POLICEMEN'S UNION right here in Milpitas? Since the > policemen's union helped muscle in a 3-to-2 council majority last year, > the puppet regime has purged boards and commissions of all who might > disagree and even abolished the ethics board. > > And why not use the example of the California PRISON GUARDS UNION that > successfully bought and paid for both Democrat Gray Davis and > Republican Arnold Schwarzenegger? > > Alas, the "party line" for rightwing bully boys is always badmouth > "liberal" teachers and nurses; never badmouth "tough guys" in the > Pentagon, F.B.I., C.I.A., police, and prisons. > > > GERRYMANDERED LEGISLATIVE DISTRICTS > > If gerrymandered districts are bad why not use the example of San > Jose's Asian-American community "where redistricting wiped out a > potentially Asian seat" in the state assembly, according to the > December 12, 2004 San Jose Mercury News? > > I would have bet real money that there was no way we'd ever get through > a very long, expensive, and brusing campaign on Prop 77 without the > disgraceful and possibly illegal manipulation of the "white" vote and > the "minority group" vote even coming up, but by God, these phony > "reformers" somehow managed to do it! > > Alas, the "party line" says dirty tricks for the sake of maintaining > White Supremacy is okay. > > BIPARTISANSHIP > > Finally, if reform has bipartisan support why not use the example of > independents and real Democrats? > > Alas, the "party line" says the only "good Democrat" is a DINO > ("Democrat In Name Only"). Thus, the "reformers" trot out San Jose's > ex-mayor Tom McEnery, a cranky, crazy guy who, among other things, is a > well-known Mexican-hater. Proposition 77 was actually endorsed by > Chellie Pingree, president of Common Cause, an independent progressive > group. Amazingly, the phony "reformers" never once actually quoted this > person! In fact, throughout this long, expensve, and bruising campaign > we hardly ever heard from anybody who wasn't already a suck-up to the > Bush-Schwarzenegger Republicans. > > > NOW, WILL GREENS GET A HEARING? > > This was the fourth damned statewide election in California in four > years (2002, 2003, 2004, and 2005). Folks around here are sick and > tired of Democratic and Republican PARTY hacks shouting at each other. > Now that they've said NO to Arnold, what are California voters to do? > Give the Gray Davis Democrats another chance to fuck up? > > Boy, if I were younger, richer, and better-looking I'd run for office > in 2006 myself! > > Think about it. > > In California we've had: > > 8 Years of Republican Pete Wilson > 8 Years of Democrat William Jefferson Clinton > 5 Years of Republican George W. Bush > 5 Years of Democrat Gray Davis, and now > 2 Years of Republican Arnold Schwarzenegger > > Oh! And did I mention a Republican Congress in Washington and a > Democratic legislature in Sacramento? > > In 2003 PETER CAMEJO said it very well on national television: "The > two-party system is dysfunctiona.l" As Peter painstakingly explained, > unless something is done, among other things, the California State > Budget will be *STRUCTURALLY* fucked-up ... well ... forever! > > So, here we are two years later and for all his heat, noise, and smoke, > Arnold Schwarzenegger has accomplished nothing. > > These facts would fit easily on a campaign button or palm card along > with the Green Party logo and two words: > > HAD ENOUGH? > > > Alex Walker > > _______________________________________________ > sosfbay-discuss mailing list > sosfbay-discuss at marla.cagreens.org > http://marla.cagreens.org/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss > > Chinese Proverb: "If you do not climb the mountain, you will not see the plain." Andrea Dorey 408-306-1900 (cell phone, short messages please) From andid at cagreens.org Tue Nov 22 16:41:32 2005 From: andid at cagreens.org (Andrea Dorey) Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2005 16:41:32 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] A Green Candidate? In-Reply-To: <4372675E.6070100@charter.net> References: <43725D6C.4080801@freeshell.org> <4372675E.6070100@charter.net> Message-ID: <73de07750c3b81c9dfb95a596c92dce0@cagreens.org> If we throw out Camejo, who has earned a name out there in the real world, we GREENS are surely nuts. With thinking like this (get rid of Nader, get rid of Camejo), the major parties don't ever need to worry about us being a real contender anywhere but in the school boards and little commissions. A. On Nov 9, 2005, at 1:17 PM, Wes Rolley wrote: > >> Is there any Green Party member ready to announce as a candidate for >> Governor? Or is it too late? > > A number of lists say that Camejo is going to run again. If so, it > could be > good or it could be devisive WITHIN the party. It is all about how > different > people decide to play it. > > I have not heard of any other with that level of name recognition. I > have also > seen speculation that Matt Gonzalez will run against Nancy Pelosi in > San > Francisco. No confirmation on that. > > -- > "I find I have a great lot to learn ? or unlearn. I seem to know far > too much > and this knowledge obscures the really significant facts, but I am > getting on." > -- Charles Rennie Mackintosh > > Wesley C. Rolley > 17211 Quail Court > Morgan Hill, CA 95037 > (408)778-3024 > http://www.refpub.com/ > _______________________________________________ > sosfbay-discuss mailing list > sosfbay-discuss at marla.cagreens.org > http://marla.cagreens.org/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss > > Chinese Proverb: "If you do not climb the mountain, you will not see the plain." Andrea Dorey 408-306-1900 (cell phone, short messages please) From wrolley at charter.net Tue Nov 22 16:54:18 2005 From: wrolley at charter.net (Wes Rolley) Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2005 16:54:18 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Lessons learned blogging Message-ID: <4383BDBA.1070900@charter.net> As you all know, I have a blog devoted to tracking my favorite congressman, Richard Pombo. You can all access it at http://www.refpub.com/PomboWatch/ The latest takes apart a House Resources Committee partisan publication, digging into where it spins, obfuscates and outright lies. I call it spinning cow pies. The reason that I mention this is that I am beginning to see the signs of what an organized campaign can do, with a little thought. Over the last 3 months, I have been agressive about posting my comments to other blogs and getting LTEs into such disparate papers as the Tracy Press and the Modesto Bee, always with a link to PomboWatch. As a result, the number of viewers is slowly climbing. From aound 20 per day in September, to over 30 per day in Octber to over 40 per day this month. That number represents an average of unique, different internet addresses that visited the site after throwing out all the search engine indexing stuff. That suggest to me that it would be possible to utilize the same techniques, focused on other local elections tied to specific issues. An analysis of the statistics tells me what links brought the most traffic. It shows me when journalists are using the site, and that is a bigger advantage than having my letter published. The really dirtly little secret of journalism is that reporters are so pressed for time, and need that for writing, that whenever I can provide them with an analysis that they can use, it will show up eventually. This is a realtionship that needs to be nurtured with care and understanding what each of us gets out of it. My feeling that this is, in the long run, much more effective than just sending out press releases that may never be read. All of my time goes into research and writing...and building those relationships. Within the last 2 days, I have had 2 columnists write to me about the columns that they were working on, one of them from the Stockton Record, the biggest paper in Pombo's District. Next I think that I will see what I can do about my supervisor, Don Gage, who never saw a development plan he didn't think great. -- "Anytime you have an opportunity to make things better and you don't, then you are wasting your time on this Earth" Roberto Clemente Wes Rolley http://www.refpub.com/ From alexcathy at aol.com Tue Nov 22 17:30:22 2005 From: alexcathy at aol.com (alexcathy at aol.com) Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2005 20:30:22 -0500 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Lessons learned blogging In-Reply-To: <4383BDBA.1070900@charter.net> References: <4383BDBA.1070900@charter.net> Message-ID: <8C7BDE49B656BC6-10F0-34F4@FWM-M15.sysops.aol.com> Wow! That's a heck of a report, Wes. From j.m.doyle at sbcglobal.net Tue Nov 22 21:37:36 2005 From: j.m.doyle at sbcglobal.net (Jim Doyle) Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2005 21:37:36 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] holiday peace fair Message-ID: <43840020.1040703@sbcglobal.net> Volunteers are needed to pitch in at the Holiday Peace Fair on Saturday December 3-rd. 1) Green Party tabling from 11 until 1:30 pm 2) set up of tables and chairs in the large room starting at 8 am 3) preparation of a dessert for the "dessert table" 4) take down and put away of tables and chairs at 4 pm Also, a notice about parrking. Deliver setup materials in the church parking lot, set up, then park across the street behind Walgreens in the larger lot of a medical center. This in order to leave some space in the church parking lot for those who will be visiting the peace fair. Please contact me if you can volunteer for any of these tasks. Jim Doyle From gerrygras at earthlink.net Wed Nov 23 00:21:23 2005 From: gerrygras at earthlink.net (Gerry Gras) Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2005 00:21:23 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] A Green Candidate? References: <43725D6C.4080801@freeshell.org> <4372675E.6070100@charter.net> <73de07750c3b81c9dfb95a596c92dce0@cagreens.org> Message-ID: <43842683.1020101@earthlink.net> Andrea, I am confused by your email. 1) Have you heard about anyone talking about throwing out Camejo? 2) Are you reacting to the statement "it could be devisive WITHIN the party"? And if so, do you think that Camejo running would or would not be divisive? 3) FWIW, Camejo has sometimes not been the most diplomatic on some issues, so I would not be surprised if his campaign was divisive. (No, I am not saying that it WOULD be divisive, just that I would not be surprised if... . Of course, these days it sometimes seems that almost anything is divisive, but enough said about that.) 4) FWIW, I don't know what the overall thinking was of those who opposed Nader running, but the most common reason I heard was that Nader had already run 3 times, and that if the GP kept running Nader, people would take us less seriously. Remember Harold Stassen became a joke after running many times: http://www.who2.com/haroldstassen.html NOTE: I am not saying that Nader should not have run for President in 2004, I am just saying I understand the concern about it. Gerry Andrea Dorey wrote: > If we throw out Camejo, who has earned a name out there in the real > world, we GREENS are surely nuts. With thinking like this (get rid of > Nader, get rid of Camejo), the major parties don't ever need to worry > about us being a real contender anywhere but in the school boards and > little commissions. > A. > > On Nov 9, 2005, at 1:17 PM, Wes Rolley wrote: > > >>>Is there any Green Party member ready to announce as a candidate for >>>Governor? Or is it too late? >>> >>A number of lists say that Camejo is going to run again. If so, it >>could be >>good or it could be devisive WITHIN the party. It is all about how >>different >>people decide to play it. >> >>I have not heard of any other with that level of name recognition. I >>have also >>seen speculation that Matt Gonzalez will run against Nancy Pelosi in >>San >>Francisco. No confirmation on that. >> >>-- >>"I find I have a great lot to learn ? or unlearn. I seem to know far >>too much >>and this knowledge obscures the really significant facts, but I am >>getting on." >>-- Charles Rennie Mackintosh >> >>Wesley C. Rolley >>17211 Quail Court >>Morgan Hill, CA 95037 >>(408)778-3024 >>http://www.refpub.com/ >>_______________________________________________ >>sosfbay-discuss mailing list >>sosfbay-discuss at marla.cagreens.org >>http://marla.cagreens.org/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss >> >> >> > Chinese Proverb: > "If you do not climb the mountain, you will not see the plain." > > Andrea Dorey > 408-306-1900 (cell phone, short messages please) > > > _______________________________________________ > sosfbay-discuss mailing list > sosfbay-discuss at marla.cagreens.org > http://marla.cagreens.org/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss > > From gerrygras at earthlink.net Wed Nov 23 00:25:43 2005 From: gerrygras at earthlink.net (Gerry Gras) Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2005 00:25:43 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Lessons learned blogging References: <4383BDBA.1070900@charter.net> Message-ID: <43842787.3070307@earthlink.net> Very good! May I forward your email to the GPCA CC? (I assume you have already said something like this to the media committee.) Gerry Wes Rolley wrote: > As you all know, I have a blog devoted to tracking my favorite > congressman, Richard Pombo. You can all access it at > http://www.refpub.com/PomboWatch/ The latest takes apart a House > Resources Committee partisan publication, digging into where it spins, > obfuscates and outright lies. I call it spinning cow pies. > > The reason that I mention this is that I am beginning to see the signs > of what an organized campaign can do, with a little thought. > > Over the last 3 months, I have been agressive about posting my comments > to other blogs and getting LTEs into such disparate papers as the Tracy > Press and the Modesto Bee, always with a link to PomboWatch. As a > result, the number of viewers is slowly climbing. From aound 20 per day > in September, to over 30 per day in Octber to over 40 per day this > month. That number represents an average of unique, different internet > addresses that visited the site after throwing out all the search engine > indexing stuff. > > That suggest to me that it would be possible to utilize the same > techniques, focused on other local elections tied to specific issues. An > analysis of the statistics tells me what links brought the most traffic. > It shows me when journalists are using the site, and that is a bigger > advantage than having my letter published. > > The really dirtly little secret of journalism is that reporters are so > pressed for time, and need that for writing, that whenever I can provide > them with an analysis that they can use, it will show up eventually. > This is a realtionship that needs to be nurtured with care and > understanding what each of us gets out of it. My feeling that this is, > in the long run, much more effective than just sending out press > releases that may never be read. All of my time goes into research and > writing...and building those relationships. > > Within the last 2 days, I have had 2 columnists write to me about the > columns that they were working on, one of them from the Stockton Record, > the biggest paper in Pombo's District. Next I think that I will see what > I can do about my supervisor, Don Gage, who never saw a development plan > he didn't think great. > > > From thinkgreen at threeparty.org Wed Nov 23 07:58:09 2005 From: thinkgreen at threeparty.org (Roy) Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2005 07:58:09 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Evolutionary Politics - Event December 7th Message-ID: <43849191.8010802@threeparty.org> Allies, As cracks grow in the conservative infrastructure, it?s time for the movement for deeply progressive, truly evolutionary politics to gather itself again, all the way from the grass roots to the national level. That?s why we are urging Bay Area residents to come to a free event in San Jose on Wed. Dec. 7th entitled ?Evolutionary Politics.? It?s got a dynamite lineup of speakers and entertainment and will offer specific strategies for advancing conscious political work in the Silicon Valley and beyond. On the docket are: * *John Robbins,* author of /Diet for a New //America// / * *Barbara Marx Hubbard*, author of /Conscious Evolution / * *J. Manuel Herrera*, elected official in San Jose and a leading voice for conscious politics * *Swami Beyondananda,* author of /Swami for Precedent / * as well as performing artist *Colette,* songster *Taber Shadburne*, and* *an appearance by *Stephen Dinan*, author and writer.* * During the last presidential election many of us found a new tribe ? those who are equally committed to raising their consciousness *and *creating progressive political change. If you touched the passion, power, and magic of those days, you?ll want to be at this San Jose event as that same energy finds expression again on a regional level, with global implications. The event flyer is attached (with photos and graphics), and the text of the flyer is pasted in below. Space is limited and since this terrific event is *FREE, it will undoubtedly fill early*. So RSVP as soon as possible and let your key allies know as well. We hope to see you there! Evolutionary Politics ? A New Horizon December 7, 2005, 7 pm San Jose Fairmont Hotel Club Regent 170 South Market Street San Jose 95113 *FEATURING * *Barbara Marx Hubbard*, Futurist and Author, /The Evolutionary Journey /*John Robbins*, Author, /Diet for a New America /*J. Manuel Herrera*, Elected Official, San Jose/Silicon Valley *Swami Beyondananda*, Cosmic Comic and Social Commentator *Colette*, Poet and Performance Artist *Taber Shadburne*, Singer Extraordinaire *Stephen Dinan*, Author-Writer *ENVISIONING *The birthing of a new consciousness in the public process that reflects the evolutionary potentials of humanity and which arises from the wholeness of our being -- body, mind, soul, and spirit. */Admission is FREE but seating is limited. Pre-Registration required for entry! /*RSVP with name, phone number and email address to JManuelHerrera at aol.com. Please arrive early to secure parking during the busy holiday season. The Fairmont Hotel is across from Cesar Chavez Plaza & the Christmas In The Park exhibits. *Featured Presenters * As an author, speaker, social innovator and spiritual pioneer, *Barbara Marx Hubbard* has established the new field of conscious evolution. Her evolutionary perspective suggests a way through our global crises toward an immeasurable future. As President of the Foundation for Conscious Evolution, she has developed an on-line evolutionary educational process called Gateway to Conscious Evolution, now reaching people worldwide. www.evolve.org *John Robbins* is one of the most eloquent and powerful spokespersons for a sane, ethical and sustainable future, and widely considered to be one of the world's leading experts on the dietary link with the environment and health. The only son of the founder of the Baskin-Robbins ice cream empire, John chose to "...pursue the dream of a society at peace with its conscience because it respects and lives in harmony with all life forms." www.foodrevolution.org *J. Manuel Herrera* envisions the transformation of the public square in our communities and an emerging 21st Century politics that is whole, generative, and personally transformative. Manuel is Board President for the East Side Union High School District in San Jose, Adjunct Professor with San Jose State University, Board Trustee for the Institute of Transpersonal Psychology, and a program administrator with the Silicon Valley Conference for Community & Justice. See the excerpt below from Manuel?s writings on ?The Reconciliation of Love & Power.? Cosmic Comic *Swami Beyondananda *(alter ego of writer and humorist Steve Bhaerman) has entertained and enlightened audiences worldwide with his comedy disguised as wisdom -- or is it wisdom disguised as comedy? Swami is the author of several books, including When You See a Sacred Cow Milk It for All It's Worth and his latest, Swami for Precedent: A 7-Step Plan to Heal the Body Politic and Cure Electile Dysfunction. Swami can be found online at www.wakeuplaughing.com From wrolley at charter.net Wed Nov 23 08:55:37 2005 From: wrolley at charter.net (Wes Rolley) Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2005 08:55:37 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Lessons learned blogging In-Reply-To: <43842787.3070307@earthlink.net> References: <4383BDBA.1070900@charter.net> <43842787.3070307@earthlink.net> Message-ID: <43849F09.2020102@charter.net> Very good! > > May I forward your email to the GPCA CC? > > (I assume you have already said something like this to the > media committee.) > > Gerry > Gerry, If I post it, it is for public consumption, feel free to do what you want. If I send it to your personal account, it isn't. Yes, I have said something similar to the mdeia committee and to Erika and Larry (CoCos) directly. I believe that Erika will be at Yolo presenting a summary of trends and happenings in media that also includes the facts that: - newspaper readership is declining. Mercury News by 3 % over last year, the Chronicle by 16% - non-English newspapers are consolidating even more quickly. The Mercury News has discontinued its Vietnamese newspaper Viet Mercury and replaced its Spanish language Nuevo Mundo with Fronteras, a tabloid from Mexico with only a one sheet local news includsion in the middle. The last local news included 4 items from the Contra Costa Times. - the discussion has to be one of how we best make use of other media, talk radio, TV, Internet, street theater, whatever... think of an Andrea Dorey produced video entered into film festivals around California. The just completed Poppy Jasper Film Festival in Morgan Hill would have been a good choice and I just did not think of it in time. The plus side of Internet blogging and activist web sites is the fact that the people you reach are more likely to be be activists them selves willing to do something about the issues you bring forward.. The negative is that they do not reach a general audience. It is a myth that "If you build it, they will come." You have to really work at letting people know it is there and making it easy for them to find you. Then more will come. Another example: I have a notification list for my PomboWatch blog. That list has three friendly reporters on it. Whenever I post a major new entry, as I did this last time, I trigger a notification. About the only ones who respond to that email are reporters who say "thanks for the info." The last example is the fact that most blog software makes it easy to syndicate material. The use of RSS or Atom-XML feeds means that my material can show up on other blogs with no work on my part. For example, there is a Portland, OR hosted site called "leftyblogs.org." PomboWatch is syndicated on that site so that my material appears on leftyblogs as well as PomboWatch. I have noticed in the stats that I am getting increased traffic at PomboWatch following links from leftyblogs. Now, here is my offer. If the GPSCC picks out a single race in which they want to make a major effort for 2006, I will set up and direct a media onslaught targeting that one race. I don't care what it is, just that it has full GPSCC support and a major issue associated with it. With the time I spend on fighting Pombo, I will need other writers who can author material. But, we can try to make this work at a very local level with the same intensity that it is working for us in the 11th CD. -- "Anytime you have an opportunity to make things better and you don't, then you are wasting your time on this Earth" Roberto Clemente Wes Rolley http://www.refpub.com/ From gerrygras at earthlink.net Wed Nov 23 10:56:06 2005 From: gerrygras at earthlink.net (Gerry Gras) Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2005 10:56:06 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] [Fwd: [GPCA-CC] CC co-co votes] Message-ID: <4384BB46.4030600@earthlink.net> The GPCA CC now has a new male coco. So now the coco team is: Cocos: Sharon Peterson Jared Laiti Alternates: Michael Borenstein Magali Offerman Gerry -------- Original Message -------- Subject: [GPCA-CC] CC co-co votes Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2005 09:24:44 -0800 From: "Magali O." Reply-To: GPCA Coordinating Committee To: coordinating committee Congratulations, Jared! Magali ------------------------------ Jared NOC Tom B. X Paul F. X Adrianne P. X Michael B. X Marybeth W. X Lizlo C. X Tim S. X (turned in by Tim Morgan) Christina O. X BC M. X Gerry G. X Jared L. X Matt L. X Wilson S. X (provisional vote) Magali O. X Zack B. X Evan B. X Sharon P. X Gabrielle W. X (submitted late) Laura W. X (submitted late) David S. X (submitted late) _______________________________________________ gpca-cc mailing list gpca-cc at marla.cagreens.org http://marla.cagreens.org/mailman/listinfo/gpca-cc From wrolley at charter.net Wed Nov 23 20:25:56 2005 From: wrolley at charter.net (Wes Rolley) Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2005 20:25:56 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] San Jose Redevelopment Message-ID: <438540D4.9040000@charter.net> Am I a minoirty of one that gets queasy whenever the name Ron Gonzales and the word development (or re-development) are used in the same sentence. For those who still read the Murky News (it's readership dropped 3% this year) Scott Herhold's Column from Nov. 6 kind of shows you how it is done these days. Here are two exerpts: ___ For several years now, the question among insiders at San Jose City Hall has been whether we effectively have a one-man government. Not a council-mayor system. Not a city manager -- legislative system. One man: Joe Guerra, the budget and policy chief for Mayor Ron Gonzales. But there's a principle here that's at the core of some of our problems at City Hall. Politicians or their aides are throwing their weight around early in the land-use process, sometimes for less than salutary reasons -- campaign contributions, say. But, If you want to read it all: http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/columnists/scott_herhold/13096570.htm Living in Morgan Hill, we see an arrogant San Jose administration, led by Gonzales, who is hell-bent for leather on building a "new city" in Coyote Valley that day by day starts looking more and more like the worst parts of the one they have. It coudn't be the influence of developers...or could it? -- "Anytime you have an opportunity to make things better and you don't, then you are wasting your time on this Earth" Roberto Clemente Wes Rolley http://www.refpub.com/ From gerrygras at earthlink.net Thu Nov 24 01:13:11 2005 From: gerrygras at earthlink.net (Gerry Gras) Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2005 01:13:11 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] The War Will End Because ... Message-ID: <43858427.3050406@earthlink.net> FYI, Robert Reich, Clinton's Secretary of Labor, says the war will end "relatively soon" because we can't afford it: http://www.commondreams.org/views05/1123-25.htm Gerry From wrolley at charter.net Thu Nov 24 20:17:13 2005 From: wrolley at charter.net (Wes Rolley) Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2005 20:17:13 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Another Land Battle Brewing Message-ID: <43869049.9020404@charter.net> Another Land Battle Brewing: That is the head for The Fly's political comments this week. Metro San Jose compares the fight over a Summerhill Homes development near *Samaritan Drive *with the fight over *BAREC*. This is a little less complicated. There are only two issues. One is the fact that part of the land is City of San Jose and part in un-incorporated and the City Council just does not give a damn about people who can't vote for them. That is, unless you are Summerhill Homes George Marcus, who has contributed to the campaign of every San Jose City Council member except Linda Le Zotte. The monetary connection between developers and City Councils and County Supervisors is the way things run. It might just be the right time to start documenting things. Who gets which project approved and which campaigns did they contribute to. I bet it would tell an interesting story. Wes -- "Anytime you have an opportunity to make things better and you don't, then you are wasting your time on this Earth" Roberto Clemente Wes Rolley http://www.refpub.com/ From WB4D23 at aol.com Sat Nov 26 21:46:25 2005 From: WB4D23 at aol.com (WB4D23 at aol.com) Date: Sun, 27 Nov 2005 00:46:25 EST Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Notes From Plenary Agenda Review Meeting Novenber 16th Message-ID: <15a.5d5bc09d.30baa231@aol.com> GPSCC PLENARY AGENDA REVIEW -- NOVEMBER 16, 2005 Participants: Warner Bloomberg, Jim Doyle, Fred Duperrault, Valerie Face, Gerry Gras, Cameron Spitzer, Jim Stauffer Note taker: Warner Following the Draft Agenda as previously forwarded from the GPCA CC email list decision items were discussed with the following recommendations: ***************************** TITLE: Yolo General Assembly Agenda SATURDAY, DECEMBER 10, 2005 Campaign Finance (Clean Money) - ERWG Proposal: [That the GPCA approve the] Proposed Amendment to AB 583 / The California Clean Money and Fair Elections Act / Prepared by Trent Lange, Vice President of the California Clean Money Campaign in consultation with members of the Green and Peace & Freedom Parties (would provide partial public funding to smaller parties in primary and general elections for partisan office, but less than the public financing provided to candidates in the "big parties" until candidate for a party in a statewide office or district receives 10% of vote; then larger public funding would be provided in the following election cycle if that party has a candidate for the same office). Comments: Proposal is unclear about what it is requesting. Recommendation: All support GPCA approval of the proposed amendments to this legislation. Election Code - ERWG PROPOSAL: The ERWG requests that this proposal be approved as draft text to present to the California legislature for introduction as legislation and that the ERWG, through its Co-Coordinators and other members, are authorized to represent the GPCA in dealings with legislators and their staff. Recommendation: Consensus that the proposal should be approved -- i.e., the draft GPCA Elections Code text with the ERWG to have authority to deal with further changes. Fair Wage Initiative - Green Issues PROPOSAL That the GPCA support one of the three initiatives. All three would be presented because all three have their merits. Funding: The GPCA will raise funds for the initiative of its choice. Comments: Proposal unclear because it does not designate preferred version of a proposed initiative. Also is unclear about how much funding from GPCA is expected. Also is unclear about what happens if version GPCA prefers is different from that preferred by other coalition members. Recommended order of preference 1, 2, 3 in order presented (lowest increase to start #1; highest increase to start #3) GPUS delegation elections [delegate and alts on one ballot] -- GDI Participants: Mary Beth Wurtheimer Cat Woods Jan Arnold Currently GPCA CC Members Mary Beth Wurtheimer Cat Woods David Silva Currently International Protocol Committee Co-Co Fred Hosea Concerns: GDI an ideological faction and additional members not desirable on the GPUS Delegation. GPCA CC members already have a large workload if they are doing their job properly; likewise GPUS Delegates are expected to be involved in GPUS Committees and communications -- issue whether anyone should hold both kinds of offices. Concern that David Silva has issues working with other people. Affirmation that Fred Hosea has been active regarding international issues. Recommendation: GPSCC will vote for Fred Hosea (1st ranking) and No Other Candidate (NOC) as second ranking. Two-year Workplan - Bylaws Proposal: The following GPCA Bylaw language would be approved: 7-1.13 Strategic Plan The CC shall establish a two-year strategic plan annually, using input from a brainstorming plenary session and draft work plans from the standing committees and working groups. The proposed plan shall be presented and affirmed at the subsequent General Assembly. The two-year strategic plan shall be reviewed and refocused by the CC and presented to the General Assembly annually. As part of the strategic plan, the CC shall develop a two-year schedule, including potential agenda items, for the General Assemblies and Gatherings, with input from each standing committee and working group work plan. The two-year schedule shall be revised annually, with General Assembly agenda and scheduling remaining flexible. Recommendation: Agreement that GPCA CC should create a two-year work plan. However... Comments: Warner -- Bad idea to have General Assembly using plenary time in two sessions each year to create a two-year work plan. Jim Stauffer: Make the plenary language a procedure rather than a Bylaw. Coordinator Funding - CCWG PROPOSAL: That the GPCA General Assembly affirms its prior budget authorization for the CCWG Campaign Coordinator position and authorizes advance funding for that position in the 2006-2007 Fiscal Year in the sum of $8,000 for monthly compensation, plus $1,200 for expenses reimbursements. Further, the CCWG and Finance Committee Coordinators are authorized to negotiate a modification of the Campaign Coordinator job description to include fund raising and the GPCA Coordinating Committee is delegated authority to increase the compensation for the position consistent with increased activities and responsibilities submitted by the CCWG and Finance Committee Coordinators. Recommendation: All approve. GPUS Affiliation Agreement - CC PROPOSAL: The GPCA approves its affiliation agreement with the GPUS, with the recognition that the GPCA bylaws stipulate that ?No decision of the GPUS is binding on the GPCA without its consent? (Paragraph 11-1.1). If a GPUS decision or nomination impacting the GPCA is contested by the GPCA membership, the General Assembly shall convene to grant or withhold its consent. Among the issues delegates may wish to consider and assess, during this process, is whether the decision or nomination was arrived at by a fair, proportionate and accountable democratic process. Comments: If the affiliation agreement is not approved, then GPCA has no right to send delegates and participate in GPUS decisions. GPCA consent should be considered as made by its GPUS Delegates. Recommendation: Approve GPUS Affiliation Agreement. [Note: Second Clause not expressly discussed, but comments infer it should be opposed.] Consent Calendar Items: Remove Eco-Net reference and replace with the GPCA website in the GPCA Bylaws as follows -- 5-6.2 f) In a timely manner, a copy of the draft minutes will shall be sent to each region and posted on the GPCA website. 5-8.7 a) The committees shall post proposals in the pre-meeting agenda package on the GPCA website. Recommendation: All agree. Make Liaison to SoS an ex officio member of the ERWG instead of Clearinghouse -- Change GPCA Bylaws as follows -- 7-6.2 Ex Officio Member A Webmaster, appointed by the committee, is an ex officio member of the Clearinghouse Committee. 8-3.2 Ex Officio Member The Liaison to the Secretary of State is an ex officio member of the Electoral Reform Working Group. Recommendation: All agree. Update GPCA Bylaws describing International Protocol Committee mission, etc. Recommendation: All agree. [Write-in Threshold - CCWG] Proposal: The following GPCA Bylaw language would be approved In order to advance to the General Election as the Green Party nominee in an election for partisan office, a Green Party write-in candidate must be a) a registered Green Party member in the District in which they seek to run, at least 25 days before the commencement of the write-in declaration period, b) must receive the most votes in the primary, and c) must received a number of write-in signatures equal to or greater than the number of nomination signatures necessary to qualify for the ballot in the first place (40-60, varies by district) or 1% of the number of registered Greens in that legislative district, at the count of the close of registration for that primary, which ever is greater. Recommendation: (b) and (c) ok; Concerns that (a) should require one-year registration in the Green Party before the write-in candidate deadline filing (which is later than the candidate filing deadline for someone whose name will appear on the primary ballot). SUNDAY, DECEMBER 11, 2005 Voting Threshold - Bylaws Committee PROPOSAL FOR DISCUSSION: Decisions of the Green Party of California shall be made at General Assemblies and governing committees of the Green Party of California using a consensus-seeking process as outlined in the Bylaws section 5-8.1 (a-c), and section 5-8.9 (a - j). When consensus cannot be reached on a business or policy item, the presenters of the item shall have the right to call for a vote. The item will only be only adopted if it is approved by [a 2/3 majority] of the voting delegates. The following changes would be made to the GPCA bylaws to accommodate this proposal: Section 5-8.1 d shall be rewritten as ?Voting will be on business and procedural questions will require the support of [a 2/3 majority] of the General Assembly members to pass.? Section 5-8.9 k (4) shall be rewritten as ?A [2/3 majority] vote is necessary to approve a business or policy item.? Section 5-8.9 k (5 - 6) shall be removed Section 5-8.9 k (7) shall be rewritten as ?Abstentions are not counted in calculating the percentage vote.? The Bylaws Standing Committee is instructed to make these and any other changes to the bylaws to make them consistent with this proposal. Comments: Everyone except Fred felt that the 80% voting threshold for policy issues should be kept (instead of reducing it to 2/3ds). Jim Stauffer also noted that this proposal attempts to do away with abstention voting -- contrary to the following proposal. Since there was not consensus, this item needs discussion at the December 6th GPSCC monthly meeting. Abstention Anomaly - Bylaws Committee PROPOSAL: Existing language: 5-8.9 k) 7. Abstentions are not counted in calculating the percentage vote, however if 20% or more of those voting abstain, the proposal fails. Option A: remove altogether. 5-8.9 k) 7. Abstentions are not counted in calculating the percentage vote. Option B: add minimum affirmative vote requirement 5-8.9 k) 7. Abstentions are not counted in calculating the percentage vote. The minimum number of affirmative votes required to pass a proposal shall be the voting threshold times the decision-making quorum. Comments: Consensus to oppose option A (loss of the abstention option in voting0. No consensus regarding Option B. Some difficulty understanding Option B. Further discussion needed at December 6th GPSCC monthly meeting. Platform plank #1 Health Care Plank. Minor rewrites. General sense, ok; but people should submit their proposals for further editting. Platform plank #2 Rewrite of Unions statements in the Social Justice & Liveable Communities Section of the GPCA Platform. Comments by Jim Stauffer: More concerns about specialized and unclear language in this proposal. Written comments need to be forwarded to the Platform Committee. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rob.means at electric-bikes.com Sat Nov 26 22:59:01 2005 From: rob.means at electric-bikes.com (rob.means) Date: Sat, 26 Nov 2005 22:59:01 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Biomimicry Message-ID: <000301c5f320$15eace60$6401a8c0@OFFICE> Hi Folks, Since Tian missed the Technology and Society Committee (TASC) meeting on November 15, here the few notes I took. ---------------------------------------- Jeremy Eddy is an instructor of Applied Biology at California College of the Arts, and has been working with the Biomimicry Guild (www.biomimicry.net) for several years. Biomimicry (from bios, meaning life, and mimesis, meaning to imitate) is a new science that studies nature's best ideas and then imitates these designs and processes to solve human problems. The Biomimicry Guild helps communities and companies consult nature to create products, processes, and policies that are well-adapted to life on earth over the long haul. These "biologists at the design table" offer research services, workshops, and talks about the genius that surrounds us. Jeremy, one of the few people in this country who teach Biomimicry at the college level, works with students in industrial design, graphic design, and other applied arts, inviting them to explore nature's forms, processes, and relationship strategies, and apply their observations to solving contemporary design challenges. Jeremy will give an overview of the field of biomimicry, give examples of the kinds of problems that can be solved, and explain why it is crucial that we explore biomimicry now. ---------------------------------------- Jeremy Eddy (415-425-5379, jerem at rocketmail.com) presented the concept of Biomimicry with support from Lynne Sopcheck (spelling?). He pointed out the two most prominent designers who used biomimicry guidelines: Leonardo Di Vinci and Buckminster Fuller. After emphasizing that biomimicry uses the wisdom of nature to help solve design problems, Jeremy pointed out the three major levels/areas of current study: forms and shapes, processes, and systems (or relationship strategies). Jeremy presented a long list of human/industrial forms and shapes that have been adapted from nature, starting with the most famous - Velcro - and included new swimsuits with material like sharks' skin and sports shoes that have the rigidity and flexibility of Armadillo shell. The process of photosynthesis is being used in the research phase of a new type of photo-voltaic panel which promises much higher efficiency than the current silicon type. Two good sources for biomimicry concepts and conversations are: www.biomimicry.net http://database.biomimicry.org/ Jeremy finished with the 10 themes or biological rules that govern the interactions of organisms that coexist in a common habitat, a.k.a ecosystem dynamics: ( http://www.biomimicry.net/eco_dynam.html ) 1. Consider waste as a resource. 2. Diversify and cooperate to fully use the habitat. 3. Gather and use energy efficiently. 4. Optimize rather than maximize. 5. Use materials sparingly. 6. Don't foul our nest. 7. Don't draw down resources. 8. Remain in balance with biosphere. 9. Run on information. 10. Shop locally. Rob Means, Electro Ride Bikes and Scooters 408-262-8975 rob.means at electric-bikes.com 1421 Yellowstone Ave., Milpitas, CA 95035-6913 Discover cycling that's Easy, Safe, Fast - and FUN! ------------------------------------------------------------------------ --- From cls at truffula.sj.ca.us Tue Nov 29 11:43:34 2005 From: cls at truffula.sj.ca.us (Cameron L. Spitzer) Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 11:43:34 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Peace fair Saturday Dec 3 Message-ID: http://www.wilpfsanjose.org/peacefair.html Cameron From fredd at freeshell.org Tue Nov 29 17:10:21 2005 From: fredd at freeshell.org (Fred Duperrault) Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 17:10:21 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Notes From Plenary Agenda Review Meeting Novenber 16th Message-ID: <438CFBFD.6050402@freeshell.org> NOTICE to Members of the Green Party of Santa Clara County (GPSCC): Next Tuesday Evening, November 5, 7:30 PM, at the monthly meeting of the GPSCC, _you will_ _have the opportunity_ to participate in the discussions and help to decide on what recommendations will be made to our GPSCC delgation who will represent us at the Green Party of California (GPCA) Quarter Annual General Assembly Plenary in Yolo, California, scheduled for December 16 - 17. A group of GPSCC members met on November 16 to review the Plenary items (below) and to make recommendations that Warner Bloomberg has summarized. The recommendations were made through the consensus process. If you would like to have dinner before the meeting starts it is suggested that you arrive somewhat earlier at the BANJARA INDIA CUISINE Restaurant where the GPSCC will meet. The restaurant is located at 407 Town and Country Village in Sunnyvale, one block north of Washington Ave. Hoping to see you on Tuesday, December 6, Fred Duperrault, Mountain View (650 )691-1215 or Fredd at freeshell.org P.S. The GPSCC monthly meetings usually adjourn by 9:15 PM. GPSCC PLENARY AGENDA REVIEW -- NOVEMBER 16, 2005 Participants: Warner Bloomberg, Jim Doyle, Fred Duperrault, Valerie Face, Gerry Gras, Cameron Spitzer, Jim Stauffer Note taker: Warner Following the Draft Agenda as previously forwarded from the GPCA CC email list decision items were discussed with the following recommendations: ***************************** TITLE: Yolo General Assembly Agenda SATURDAY, DECEMBER 10, 2005 Campaign Finance (Clean Money) - ERWG Proposal: [That the GPCA approve the] Proposed Amendment to AB 583 / The California Clean Money and Fair Elections Act / Prepared by Trent Lange, Vice President of the California Clean Money Campaign in consultation with members of the Green and Peace & Freedom Parties (would provide partial public funding to smaller parties in primary and general elections for partisan office, but less than the public financing provided to candidates in the "big parties" until candidate for a party in a statewide office or district receives 10% of vote; then larger public funding would be provided in the following election cycle if that party has a candidate for the same office). Comments: Proposal is unclear about what it is requesting. Recommendation: All support GPCA approval of the proposed amendments to this legislation. Election Code - ERWG PROPOSAL: The ERWG requests that this proposal be approved as draft text to present to the California legislature for introduction as legislation and that the ERWG, through its Co-Coordinators and other members, are authorized to represent the GPCA in dealings with legislators and their staff. Recommendation: Consensus that the proposal should be approved -- i.e., the draft GPCA Elections Code text with the ERWG to have authority to deal with further changes. Fair Wage Initiative - Green Issues PROPOSAL That the GPCA support one of the three initiatives. All three would be presented because all three have their merits. Funding: The GPCA will raise funds for the initiative of its choice. Comments: Proposal unclear because it does not designate preferred version of a proposed initiative. Also is unclear about how much funding from GPCA is expected. Also is unclear about what happens if version GPCA prefers is different from that preferred by other coalition members. Recommended order of preference 1, 2, 3 in order presented (lowest increase to start #1; highest increase to start #3) GPUS delegation elections [delegate and alts on one ballot] -- GDI Participants: Mary Beth Wurtheimer Cat Woods Jan Arnold Currently GPCA CC Members Mary Beth Wurtheimer Cat Woods David Silva Currently International Protocol Committee Co-Co Fred Hosea Concerns: GDI an ideological faction and additional members not desirable on the GPUS Delegation. GPCA CC members already have a large workload if they are doing their job properly; likewise GPUS Delegates are expected to be involved in GPUS Committees and communications -- issue whether anyone should hold both kinds of offices. Concern that David Silva has issues working with other people. Affirmation that Fred Hosea has been active regarding international issues. Recommendation: GPSCC will vote for Fred Hosea (1st ranking) and No Other Candidate (NOC) as second ranking. Two-year Workplan - Bylaws Proposal: The following GPCA Bylaw language would be approved: 7-1.13 Strategic Plan The CC shall establish a two-year strategic plan annually, using input from a brainstorming plenary session and draft work plans from the standing committees and working groups. The proposed plan shall be presented and affirmed at the subsequent General Assembly. The two-year strategic plan shall be reviewed and refocused by the CC and presented to the General Assembly annually. As part of the strategic plan, the CC shall develop a two-year schedule, including potential agenda items, for the General Assemblies and Gatherings, with input from each standing committee and working group work plan. The two-year schedule shall be revised annually, with General Assembly agenda and scheduling remaining flexible. Recommendation: Agreement that GPCA CC should create a two-year work plan. However... Comments: Warner -- Bad idea to have General Assembly using plenary time in two sessions each year to create a two-year work plan. Jim Stauffer: Make the plenary language a procedure rather than a Bylaw. Coordinator Funding - CCWG PROPOSAL: That the GPCA General Assembly affirms its prior budget authorization for the CCWG Campaign Coordinator position and authorizes advance funding for that position in the 2006-2007 Fiscal Year in the sum of $8,000 for monthly compensation, plus $1,200 for expenses reimbursements. Further, the CCWG and Finance Committee Coordinators are authorized to negotiate a modification of the Campaign Coordinator job description to include fund raising and the GPCA Coordinating Committee is delegated authority to increase the compensation for the position consistent with increased activities and responsibilities submitted by the CCWG and Finance Committee Coordinators. Recommendation: All approve. GPUS Affiliation Agreement - CC PROPOSAL: The GPCA approves its affiliation agreement with the GPUS, with the recognition that the GPCA bylaws stipulate that ?No decision of the GPUS is binding on the GPCA without its consent? (Paragraph 11-1.1). If a GPUS decision or nomination impacting the GPCA is contested by the GPCA membership, the General Assembly shall convene to grant or withhold its consent. Among the issues delegates may wish to consider and assess, during this process, is whether the decision or nomination was arrived at by a fair, proportionate and accountable democratic process. Comments: If the affiliation agreement is not approved, then GPCA has no right to send delegates and participate in GPUS decisions. GPCA consent should be considered as made by its GPUS Delegates. Recommendation: Approve GPUS Affiliation Agreement. [Note: Second Clause not expressly discussed, but comments infer it should be opposed.] Consent Calendar Items: Remove Eco-Net reference and replace with the GPCA website in the GPCA Bylaws as follows -- 5-6.2 f) In a timely manner, a copy of the draft minutes will shall be sent to each region and posted on the GPCA website. 5-8.7 a) The committees shall post proposals in the pre-meeting agenda package on the GPCA website. Recommendation: All agree. Make Liaison to SoS an ex officio member of the ERWG instead of Clearinghouse -- Change GPCA Bylaws as follows -- 7-6.2 Ex Officio Member A Webmaster, appointed by the committee, is an ex officio member of the Clearinghouse Committee. 8-3.2 Ex Officio Member The Liaison to the Secretary of State is an ex officio member of the Electoral Reform Working Group. Recommendation: All agree. Update GPCA Bylaws describing International Protocol Committee mission, etc. Recommendation: All agree. [Write-in Threshold - CCWG] Proposal: The following GPCA Bylaw language would be approved In order to advance to the General Election as the Green Party nominee in an election for partisan office, a Green Party write-in candidate must be a) a registered Green Party member in the District in which they seek to run, at least 25 days before the commencement of the write-in declaration period, b) must receive the most votes in the primary, and c) must received a number of write-in signatures equal to or greater than the number of nomination signatures necessary to qualify for the ballot in the first place (40-60, varies by district) or 1% of the number of registered Greens in that legislative district, at the count of the close of registration for that primary, which ever is greater. Recommendation: (b) and (c) ok; Concerns that (a) should require one-year registration in the Green Party before the write-in candidate deadline filing (which is later than the candidate filing deadline for someone whose name will appear on the primary ballot). SUNDAY, DECEMBER 11, 2005 Voting Threshold - Bylaws Committee PROPOSAL FOR DISCUSSION: Decisions of the Green Party of California shall be made at General Assemblies and governing committees of the Green Party of California using a consensus-seeking process as outlined in the Bylaws section 5-8.1 (a-c), and section 5-8.9 (a - j). When consensus cannot be reached on a business or policy item, the presenters of the item shall have the right to call for a vote. The item will only be only adopted if it is approved by [a 2/3 majority] of the voting delegates. The following changes would be made to the GPCA bylaws to accommodate this proposal: Section 5-8.1 d shall be rewritten as ?Voting will be on business and procedural questions will require the support of [a 2/3 majority] of the General Assembly members to pass.? Section 5-8.9 k (4) shall be rewritten as ?A [2/3 majority] vote is necessary to approve a business or policy item.? Section 5-8.9 k (5 - 6) shall be removed Section 5-8.9 k (7) shall be rewritten as ?Abstentions are not counted in calculating the percentage vote.? The Bylaws Standing Committee is instructed to make these and any other changes to the bylaws to make them consistent with this proposal. Comments: Everyone except Fred felt that the 80% voting threshold for policy issues should be kept (instead of reducing it to 2/3ds). Jim Stauffer also noted that this proposal attempts to do away with abstention voting -- contrary to the following proposal. Since there was not consensus, this item needs discussion at the December 6th GPSCC monthly meeting. Abstention Anomaly - Bylaws Committee PROPOSAL: Existing language: 5-8.9 k) 7. Abstentions are not counted in calculating the percentage vote, however if 20% or more of those voting abstain, the proposal fails. Option A: remove altogether. 5-8.9 k) 7. Abstentions are not counted in calculating the percentage vote. Option B: add minimum affirmative vote requirement 5-8.9 k) 7. Abstentions are not counted in calculating the percentage vote. The minimum number of affirmative votes required to pass a proposal shall be the voting threshold times the decision-making quorum. Comments: Consensus to oppose option A (loss of the abstention option in voting0. No consensus regarding Option B. Some difficulty understanding Option B. Further discussion needed at December 6th GPSCC monthly meeting. Platform plank #1 Health Care Plank. Minor rewrites. General sense, ok; but people should submit their proposals for further editting. Platform plank #2 Rewrite of Unions statements in the Social Justice & Liveable Communities Section of the GPCA Platform. Comments by Jim Stauffer: More concerns about specialized and unclear language in this proposal. Written comments need to be forwarded to the Platform Committee. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: file:///tmp/nsmail.txt URL: From j.m.doyle at sbcglobal.net Tue Nov 29 20:19:01 2005 From: j.m.doyle at sbcglobal.net (Jim Doyle) Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 20:19:01 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] monthly meeting Message-ID: <438D2835.6050905@sbcglobal.net> The correct date for the monthly meeting is Tuesday December 6-th 2005 at 7:30 pm. The correct dates for the Plenary are December 10 and 11 at UC Davis. From smrfpwr at yahoo.com Wed Nov 30 21:44:01 2005 From: smrfpwr at yahoo.com (Amie) Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2005 21:44:01 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] The Environmental Club at SJSU Message-ID: <20051201054401.41915.qmail@web33103.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Hey everyone! The Environmental Club at SJSU has put up the Wall of Cups project! The Wall consists of about 3500 disposable cups strung together. This number represents the amount of cups that the campus uses in one single day. Disposable cups are just a small portion of the total amount of trash created on campus every day. We are trying to bring attention to the amount of trash students create, and encourage people to reduce, reuse, and recycle. Easy alternatives to disposable items include reusable coffee mugs, reusable water bottles, cloth rags instead of paper towels, and cloth grocery bags. Check out our website to see photos of this awesome project!! The Environmental Club at SJSU Tian and anyone that wants to come and see the Wall of Cups- We will be tabling next to the wall tomorrow(Thursday) from 9am - 2:30pm. (I will be there after about 11:00am. The wall is hung on the south side of the Student Union. -Amie Frisch -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: