From JamBoi at Greens.org Thu Nov 1 01:00:37 2007 From: JamBoi at Greens.org (Drew Johnson) Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2007 01:00:37 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] McKinney files papers for presidential campaign Message-ID: <3493.38.99.84.36.1193904037.squirrel@greens.org> According to the FEC's website, Cynthia McKinney has started her presidential campaign committee "Power to the People". http://query.nictusa.com/cgi-bin/fecimg/?P80004930 Presented by the Federal Election Commission TRY A: NEW SEARCH RETURN TO: FEC HOME PAGE MCKINNEY, CYNTHIA ID: P80004930 Office Sought: President Election Year: 2008 State: Presidential Candidate Party: GRE (Green Party) PRINCIPAL CAMPAIGN COMMITTEE: POWER TO THE PEOPLE COMMITTEE - CYNTHIA MCKINNEY FOR PRESIDENT ID: C00440289 Year 2007 Document Filed Amended Filed On Pages Display Image or PDF STATEMENT OF CANDIDACY 10/22/2007 2 27039553468 PDF ______ Committee ID: C00440289 POWER TO THE PEOPLE COMMITTEE - CYNTHIA MCKINNEY FOR PRESIDENT PO BOX 311759 ATLANTA, GA 31131 Treasurer Name: JOAN CHRISTIAN Committee Designation: P (PRINCIPAL CAMPAIGN COMMITTEE OF A CANDIDATE) Committee Type: P (PRESIDENTIAL) Candidate State: 00 (Presidential Candidate) CANDIDATE: MCKINNEY, CYNTHIA ID: P80004930 Web site listed: runcynthiarun.org -- JamBoi http://www.greencommons.org/blog/63 "Peaceable: the ability to interact peacefully. A skill set similar to social or emotional intelligence that is unfortunately rare in today's American culture, but can be developed by all. The Green Parties need to lead the way in Peaceableness." From andid at cagreens.org Thu Nov 1 10:02:34 2007 From: andid at cagreens.org (Andrea Dorey) Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2007 10:02:34 -0700 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] See "What distracts us from impeachment?" in The Humanist DEC/NOV 2007 Message-ID: <41661A96-4CF7-473D-8A35-513C1C2F9272@cagreens.org> A remarkable article by David Swanson, the creator of ImpeachCheney.org, puts forth the following points: In July 2007 the American Research Group conducted the first and only poll asking the American public if they favored impeaching VP Cheney. Fifty-four percent said yes; forty percent said no. A bill proposing three articles of impeachment against Cheney has gained support from only 20 members of Congress, no hearings have been held, and the news media haven't taken notice. Swanson goes on to say that support for impeachment of Bush is slightly less but still over twice what it was for impeaching Clinton, even when that story dominated the news for weeks. The article goes on to name the good reasons for impeachment and the necessity for ending a precedent being set for future administrations. www.thehumanist.org Andrea From JamBoi at Greens.org Thu Nov 1 11:58:00 2007 From: JamBoi at Greens.org (Drew Johnson) Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2007 11:58:00 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Zipcar, Flexcar to merge car sharing businesses Message-ID: <28437.38.99.84.36.1193943480.squirrel@greens.org> I would love it if we could talk Zipcar.com or City Carshare into returning car sharing to the southbay. I think its very possible. Green is Core! Drew Zipcar, Flexcar to merge car sharing businesses Michael Cabanatuan, Chronicle Staff Writer For the past two years, the Bay Area has been the most competitive market in the nascent but booming business of car sharing, with three companies charging residents to drive any of the hundreds of cars scattered around San Francisco and the East Bay. But the competitive landscape is changing. Zipcar and Flexcar, the two largest and only nationwide car sharing companies, announced Tuesday night that they are merging. The new company will operate under the Zipcar brand and use its technology. Car sharing businesses charge membership fees for round-the-clock access to fleets of vehicles spread across metropolitan areas. Members pay hourly, and sometimes per-mile, rates when they drive the cars. Gasoline and insurance are covered in the price. While the effects of the merger are uncertain, company officials, industry experts and members say the move could help expand the practice of car sharing. Scott Griffith, Zipcar's chief executive officer, hailed the merger as good for car sharing. Since the two firms have little overlap in locations, they said, the combined company will give members better access to more vehicles in more cities, and allow additional investments in technology, vehicles and expansion. "This merger is a classical example of the whole being larger than the sum of its parts," he said. San Francisco is one of two cities where both Zipcar and Flexcar operate. Washington is the other. City CarShare, a nonprofit group, brought car sharing to the Bay Area in 2001, and the two for-profit companies followed four years later. City CarShare has 15,000 Bay Area members who share 230 vehicles; Zipcar has 12,000 members using a fleet of 430, according to company officials. Flexcar membership figures were not available, but the company has a fleet of 200 vehicles in the Bay Area. Flexcar and Zipcar members said their concerns over shrinking competition would be outweighed by the increased access to cars - both in the Bay Area and in other cities served by the merged company. "As a member, I think it's great," said Tara Hunt, 33, who owns an Internet marketing consulting business, lives in San Francisco and belongs to Zipcar. "I love competition, and there will still be competition with City CarShare, but this gives me more access to more cars in more neighborhoods." She'll also have access in more cities around the United States, Canada and England. In addition to San Francisco and Washington, Zipcar operates in New York, Boston, Chicago, Vancouver, Toronto and London. Flexcar locations include Seattle, Portland, Ore., Los Angeles, San Diego, Atlanta and Pittsburgh. Both companies also provide car sharing on dozens of college campuses. "It will be nice to have access in more cities," Hunt said. "I travel a lot." Keith Kamisugi, a San Francisco publicist, belongs to both Flexcar and Zipcar, since one has more cars available near his home and the other has more available near his job. "If they keep both companies' locations, it will be great for me," he said. "I'll get the best of both worlds." Rick Hutchinson, chief executive officer of City CarShare, said he's not concerned that the merger will drive the nonprofit out of business. "We've always been very supportive of anything that promotes car sharing in the Bay Area," he said, pointing out that City CarShare's membership and fleet have swelled since the two for-profit firms entered the market. "I wish all car share firms the best of luck. I just hope there's not too much disruption with the merger, trouble for members that would push them away from car sharing." Susan Shaheen, a UC Berkeley researcher who focuses on the car sharing industry, said the merger should help the new company nationally in terms of economies of scale and marketing, as well as the San Francisco challenge of finding and leasing parking spaces in desirable locations. Shaheen said the merger seems to be following the same road that car sharing traveled in Europe, where it's been popular for at least a decade: starting as a grassroots effort, moving into a growth and exploration phase, then attaining profitability. Dave Brook, a car sharing expert who founded a Portland car share firm that merged years ago with Flexcar, agreed. "This is kind of a landmark," he said of the merger. "It's kind of funny to think of car sharing as an industry, but I guess it is now. A lot of people are going to be watching to see where it goes." From wechslertoo at earthlink.net Thu Nov 1 12:16:04 2007 From: wechslertoo at earthlink.net (Curt Wechsler) Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2007 12:16:04 -0700 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] FW: LIONS FOR LAMBS Message-ID: <410-220071141191640@earthlink.net> This new film opens on the 9th. Is anyone aware of any counter-recruitment activities planned in conjunction w/ the release? Seems like a natural venue for leafletting. http://www.lionsforlambsmovie.com/site.htm From tnharter at aceweb.com Thu Nov 1 12:48:06 2007 From: tnharter at aceweb.com (Tian Harter) Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2007 12:48:06 -0700 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Zipcar, Flexcar to merge car sharing businesses In-Reply-To: <28437.38.99.84.36.1193943480.squirrel@greens.org> References: <28437.38.99.84.36.1193943480.squirrel@greens.org> Message-ID: <472A2D76.1000909@aceweb.com> There was a pod in Mountain View, but it didn't get enough business to keep going. Now that I'm car free, I would take advantage of such a service. Every time I see the Zip Car people tabling I tell them "You should put a pod in Mountain View. Please join me in this movement! Tian Of course, once they put it in we'll have to patronize it... Drew Johnson wrote: > I would love it if we could talk Zipcar.com or City Carshare into > returning car sharing to the southbay. I think its very possible. > > > Green is Core! > > Drew > > > Zipcar, Flexcar to merge car sharing businesses > > Michael Cabanatuan, Chronicle Staff Writer > > For the past two years, the Bay Area has been the most competitive market > in the nascent but booming business of car sharing, with three companies > charging residents to drive any of the hundreds of cars scattered around > San Francisco and the East Bay. > > But the competitive landscape is changing. Zipcar and Flexcar, the two > largest and only nationwide car sharing companies, announced Tuesday night > that they are merging. The new company will operate under the Zipcar brand > and use its technology. > > Car sharing businesses charge membership fees for round-the-clock access > to fleets of vehicles spread across metropolitan areas. Members pay > hourly, and sometimes per-mile, rates when they drive the cars. Gasoline > and insurance are covered in the price. > > While the effects of the merger are uncertain, company officials, industry > experts and members say the move could help expand the practice of car > sharing. > > Scott Griffith, Zipcar's chief executive officer, hailed the merger as > good for car sharing. Since the two firms have little overlap in > locations, they said, the combined company will give members better access > to more vehicles in more cities, and allow additional investments in > technology, vehicles and expansion. > > "This merger is a classical example of the whole being larger than the sum > of its parts," he said. > > San Francisco is one of two cities where both Zipcar and Flexcar operate. > Washington is the other. City CarShare, a nonprofit group, brought car > sharing to the Bay Area in 2001, and the two for-profit companies followed > four years later. > > City CarShare has 15,000 Bay Area members who share 230 vehicles; Zipcar > has 12,000 members using a fleet of 430, according to company officials. > Flexcar membership figures were not available, but the company has a fleet > of 200 vehicles in the Bay Area. > > Flexcar and Zipcar members said their concerns over shrinking competition > would be outweighed by the increased access to cars - both in the Bay Area > and in other cities served by the merged company. > > "As a member, I think it's great," said Tara Hunt, 33, who owns an > Internet marketing consulting business, lives in San Francisco and belongs > to Zipcar. "I love competition, and there will still be competition with > City CarShare, but this gives me more access to more cars in more > neighborhoods." > > She'll also have access in more cities around the United States, Canada > and England. In addition to San Francisco and Washington, Zipcar operates > in New York, Boston, Chicago, Vancouver, Toronto and London. Flexcar > locations include Seattle, Portland, Ore., Los Angeles, San Diego, Atlanta > and Pittsburgh. Both companies also provide car sharing on dozens of > college campuses. > > "It will be nice to have access in more cities," Hunt said. "I travel a lot." > > Keith Kamisugi, a San Francisco publicist, belongs to both Flexcar and > Zipcar, since one has more cars available near his home and the other has > more available near his job. > > "If they keep both companies' locations, it will be great for me," he > said. "I'll get the best of both worlds." > > Rick Hutchinson, chief executive officer of City CarShare, said he's not > concerned that the merger will drive the nonprofit out of business. > > "We've always been very supportive of anything that promotes car sharing > in the Bay Area," he said, pointing out that City CarShare's membership > and fleet have swelled since the two for-profit firms entered the market. > "I wish all car share firms the best of luck. I just hope there's not too > much disruption with the merger, trouble for members that would push them > away from car sharing." > > Susan Shaheen, a UC Berkeley researcher who focuses on the car sharing > industry, said the merger should help the new company nationally in terms > of economies of scale and marketing, as well as the San Francisco > challenge of finding and leasing parking spaces in desirable locations. > > Shaheen said the merger seems to be following the same road that car > sharing traveled in Europe, where it's been popular for at least a decade: > starting as a grassroots effort, moving into a growth and exploration > phase, then attaining profitability. Dave Brook, a car sharing expert who > founded a Portland car share firm that merged years ago with Flexcar, > agreed. > > "This is kind of a landmark," he said of the merger. "It's kind of funny > to think of car sharing as an industry, but I guess it is now. A lot of > people are going to be watching to see where it goes." > > > _______________________________________________ > sosfbay-discuss mailing list > sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org > http://lists.cagreens.org/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss > -- Tian http://tian.greens.org Last evening I saw Mayor Macias of Mountain View sign the Mayors Climate Change Protection Agreement in our City Hall. Today's paper said the earthquake that followed was a 5.6. From cls at truffula.sj.ca.us Thu Nov 1 13:06:36 2007 From: cls at truffula.sj.ca.us (cls at truffula.sj.ca.us) Date: 1 Nov 2007 20:06:36 -0000 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] FW: LIONS FOR LAMBS Message-ID: <20071101200636.8937.qmail@truffula.sj.ca.us> I saw Rendition yesterday. If you thought Syriana disappeared out of the theaters fast, watch Rendition vanish. The torture scenes are relatively mild. Straightforward message, the US is kidnapping and torturing people on really flimsy leads, even though we know it doesn't produce reliable intelligence. This is the movie the Jepperson protesters should be leafletting at, if they can figure out where there will be audiences of more than a dozen people. At the weekday matinee at the Berryessa 10-screen, there were three people including me. I wonder if they still run the projector if they don't sell any seats. Cameron From JamBoi at Greens.org Thu Nov 1 14:01:34 2007 From: JamBoi at Greens.org (Drew Johnson) Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2007 14:01:34 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Zipcar, Flexcar to merge car sharing businesses In-Reply-To: <472A2D76.1000909@aceweb.com> References: <28437.38.99.84.36.1193943480.squirrel@greens.org> <472A2D76.1000909@aceweb.com> Message-ID: <2951.38.99.84.36.1193950894.squirrel@greens.org> I would patronize a Mountain View pod. Maybe we could create a list of potential patrons and present it to zipcar and/or city carshare together. And once we get one going its only a matter of time till more are started. Zipcar is starting up in Santa Cruz by the way. Their teaming with the university but non-university people can use it too. Green is Essence! Drew On Thu, November 1, 2007 12:48, Tian Harter wrote: > There was a pod in Mountain View, but it didn't get enough business to > keep going. Now that I'm car free, I would take advantage of such a > service. Every time I see the Zip Car people tabling I tell them "You > should put a pod in Mountain View. Please join me in this movement! > > Tian > Of course, once they put it in we'll have to patronize it... > > Drew Johnson wrote: >> I would love it if we could talk Zipcar.com or City Carshare into >> returning car sharing to the southbay. I think its very possible. >> >> >> Green is Core! >> >> Drew >> >> >> Zipcar, Flexcar to merge car sharing businesses >> >> Michael Cabanatuan, Chronicle Staff Writer >> >> For the past two years, the Bay Area has been the most competitive >> market >> in the nascent but booming business of car sharing, with three companies >> charging residents to drive any of the hundreds of cars scattered around >> San Francisco and the East Bay. >> >> But the competitive landscape is changing. Zipcar and Flexcar, the two >> largest and only nationwide car sharing companies, announced Tuesday >> night >> that they are merging. The new company will operate under the Zipcar >> brand >> and use its technology. >> >> Car sharing businesses charge membership fees for round-the-clock access >> to fleets of vehicles spread across metropolitan areas. Members pay >> hourly, and sometimes per-mile, rates when they drive the cars. Gasoline >> and insurance are covered in the price. >> >> While the effects of the merger are uncertain, company officials, >> industry >> experts and members say the move could help expand the practice of car >> sharing. >> >> Scott Griffith, Zipcar's chief executive officer, hailed the merger as >> good for car sharing. Since the two firms have little overlap in >> locations, they said, the combined company will give members better >> access >> to more vehicles in more cities, and allow additional investments in >> technology, vehicles and expansion. >> >> "This merger is a classical example of the whole being larger than the >> sum >> of its parts," he said. >> >> San Francisco is one of two cities where both Zipcar and Flexcar >> operate. >> Washington is the other. City CarShare, a nonprofit group, brought car >> sharing to the Bay Area in 2001, and the two for-profit companies >> followed >> four years later. >> >> City CarShare has 15,000 Bay Area members who share 230 vehicles; Zipcar >> has 12,000 members using a fleet of 430, according to company officials. >> Flexcar membership figures were not available, but the company has a >> fleet >> of 200 vehicles in the Bay Area. >> >> Flexcar and Zipcar members said their concerns over shrinking >> competition >> would be outweighed by the increased access to cars - both in the Bay >> Area >> and in other cities served by the merged company. >> >> "As a member, I think it's great," said Tara Hunt, 33, who owns an >> Internet marketing consulting business, lives in San Francisco and >> belongs >> to Zipcar. "I love competition, and there will still be competition with >> City CarShare, but this gives me more access to more cars in more >> neighborhoods." >> >> She'll also have access in more cities around the United States, Canada >> and England. In addition to San Francisco and Washington, Zipcar >> operates >> in New York, Boston, Chicago, Vancouver, Toronto and London. Flexcar >> locations include Seattle, Portland, Ore., Los Angeles, San Diego, >> Atlanta >> and Pittsburgh. Both companies also provide car sharing on dozens of >> college campuses. >> >> "It will be nice to have access in more cities," Hunt said. "I travel a >> lot." >> >> Keith Kamisugi, a San Francisco publicist, belongs to both Flexcar and >> Zipcar, since one has more cars available near his home and the other >> has >> more available near his job. >> >> "If they keep both companies' locations, it will be great for me," he >> said. "I'll get the best of both worlds." >> >> Rick Hutchinson, chief executive officer of City CarShare, said he's not >> concerned that the merger will drive the nonprofit out of business. >> >> "We've always been very supportive of anything that promotes car sharing >> in the Bay Area," he said, pointing out that City CarShare's membership >> and fleet have swelled since the two for-profit firms entered the >> market. >> "I wish all car share firms the best of luck. I just hope there's not >> too >> much disruption with the merger, trouble for members that would push >> them >> away from car sharing." >> >> Susan Shaheen, a UC Berkeley researcher who focuses on the car sharing >> industry, said the merger should help the new company nationally in >> terms >> of economies of scale and marketing, as well as the San Francisco >> challenge of finding and leasing parking spaces in desirable locations. >> >> Shaheen said the merger seems to be following the same road that car >> sharing traveled in Europe, where it's been popular for at least a >> decade: >> starting as a grassroots effort, moving into a growth and exploration >> phase, then attaining profitability. Dave Brook, a car sharing expert >> who >> founded a Portland car share firm that merged years ago with Flexcar, >> agreed. >> >> "This is kind of a landmark," he said of the merger. "It's kind of funny >> to think of car sharing as an industry, but I guess it is now. A lot of >> people are going to be watching to see where it goes." >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> sosfbay-discuss mailing list >> sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org >> http://lists.cagreens.org/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss >> > > -- > Tian > http://tian.greens.org > Last evening I saw Mayor Macias of Mountain View sign the > Mayors Climate Change Protection Agreement in our City Hall. > Today's paper said the earthquake that followed was a 5.6. > _______________________________________________ > sosfbay-discuss mailing list > sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org > http://lists.cagreens.org/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss > From WB4D23 at aol.com Thu Nov 1 15:47:39 2007 From: WB4D23 at aol.com (WB4D23 at aol.com) Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2007 18:47:39 EDT Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Fwd: Please forward to Greens in your county ASAP!: Please mail in your KPF... Message-ID: In a message dated 10/29/2007 10:35:01 PM Pacific Daylight Time, gregjan4 at yahoo.com writes: Dear Greens, Thanks for forwarding our previous message about the KPFA Local Station Board (LSB) elections. The elections will soon be ending, and we now want to make sure that all Green Party KPFA members do remember to vote on time, so we'd appreciate it if you could send the follow-up message below to your county Green Party listserves and e-mail lists as soon as possible! As before, please get back to me by email of by phone (510-444-7336) to confirm that you have received this message, or if you have any questions. And thanks again (in advance) for your help with this! Sincerely, Greg Jan County Council member, Green Party of Alameda County [[ Subject line: Please mail in your KPFA (LSB) Ballot -- Very Soon! ]] Dear Greens, The KPFA Local Station Board (LSB) elections will be ending soon -- ballots must be received (not postmarked) by November 15! We therefore urge you to mail in your ballot as soon as possible This Week, in order to be sure that your vote will count! As we explained in our original message (copied below), this is a very important election for Greens, so please be sure to vote -- soon! Below, in addition to our original message, we have also included a message from highly-respected KPFA activist Carol Spooner, which explains some of the issues involved in the election (and whose endorsements differ only slightly from our own). Endorsements from the Green Party of Alameda County: * Rankings #1 through #6 (listed in alphabetical order, please choose your own order): Steve Conley, Chandra Hauptman, Dave Heller, Attila Nagy, Tracy Rosenberg, and Joe Wanzala * Rankings #7 through #12 (listed in alphabetical order, please choose your own order): C C Campbell-Rock, Bob English, Richard Phelps, Mara Rivera, Gerald Sanders, Stan Woods Thank you in advance for voting in the KPFA LSB election!, The Green Party of Alameda County [Our original message, "KPFA LSB Election Recommendations, from the Green Party of Alameda County":] Dear Greens, The Green Party of Alameda County has made endorsements for the month-long KPFA Local Station Board (LSB) elections, which begins on October 15. Because this is an important election for Greens, and because many of you are members of KPFA, we are sending this message to you. The LSB elections are important not only because the board members oversee the operations of KPFA, but also because four of the board members are then selected for the Pacifica National Board that oversees the operation of the entire Pacifica Network. In this time when the corporations have taken over the two major political parties and the media, it is critical for the Greens to help strengthen KPFA, since the Greens and KPFA share several common goals, such as promoting progressive politics and the fact that neither of us takes corporate money. Because KPFA is one of the most important media resources for activists in Northern California, as Greens, we need to have people on the Board who will work with the staff to strengthen and grow the KPFA community and encourage KPFA to give the Green Party (and other third parties) the chance to be heard. We also need to have people on the Board who will help KPFA, as a non-commercial station, set an example of how an election should be conducted without requiring candidates to raise and spend large amounts of money in order to publicize their positions -- that is, KPFA should provide ample airtime as well as public forums for the candidates, so that listeners can make informed decisions about whom to vote for. The Green Party of Alameda County recommends the election of the following six candidates. (Note: Chandra Haupman, Dave Heller and Attila Nagy are Green Party members). The candidates below are listed in alphabetical order. Please rank them in whatever order you prefer, as your top six choices: - Steve Conley, former LSB member, and KPFA staffer - Chandra Hauptman, current LSB member, human activist - Dave Heller, IRV advocate - Attila Nagy, current LSB member - Tracy Rosenberg, Programming Council, and last year's LSB election supervisor - Joe Wanzala- current LSB member, good working contact with national board. In addition to the above six candidates, the Green Party of Alameda County also endorses the following candidates. - C C Campbell-Rock, Hurricane Katrina survivor and Gulf Coast justice activist - Bob English, KPFA Outreach Committee member - Richard Phelps, current LSB member, arbitration lawyer - Mara Rivera, KPFA Outreach Committee member - Gerald Sanders, former LSB member - Stan Woods, current LSB member, Labor activist Thank you for voting in this year's KPFA LSB elections! The Green Party of Alameda County ************************************** See what's new at http://www.aol.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- An embedded message was scrubbed... From: Greg Jan Subject: Please forward to Greens in your county ASAP!: Please mail in your KPFA (LSB) Ballot -- Very Soon! Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2007 22:34:41 -0700 (PDT) Size: 30242 URL: From JamBoi at Greens.org Thu Nov 1 16:10:35 2007 From: JamBoi at Greens.org (Drew Johnson) Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2007 16:10:35 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] [SC-SM] SF Green Festival Nov 9-11 In-Reply-To: <93CEC1E8-DFC8-48A9-80FB-EE9E05BA723E@cagreens.org> References: <3208.38.99.84.36.1193895579.squirrel@greens.org> <93CEC1E8-DFC8-48A9-80FB-EE9E05BA723E@cagreens.org> Message-ID: <38843.38.99.84.36.1193958635.squirrel@greens.org> One reason we'd like to get folks going is there's talk in GP of Santa Clara about partnering with them and getting them to do some kind of mini one next year (or later) down our way. We'd love to get San Mateo folks involved too. This is not the only possiblity, but I'm talking to Merriam Kathaleen about going together on Sunday the 11th. Anybody else want to join in? Green is Core! Drew On Thu, November 1, 2007 10:03, Andrea Dorey wrote: > Drew, > I plan to try to show up depending on the condition of my knee. > Andrea > > On Oct 31, 2007, at 10:39 PM, Drew Johnson wrote: > >> * Green Festival, Nov. 9-11, 10 a.m.-8 p.m. >> San Francisco Concourse Exhibition Center, 635 8th St, at Brannan >> Street >> (between 7th and 8th streets) >> Enjoy more than 200 visionary speakers and 400 green businesses in >> the Bay >> Area, great how-to workshops, green films, yoga and movement classes, >> green-career sessions, organic beer and wine, delicious organic >> cuisine >> and live music. >> + Join SFGP tabling Saturday & Sunday, Nov 10-11. Contact Sue >> Vaughan at >> 415-668-3119, 415-601-9297, info at sfgreenparty.org -- or just show up. >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> SC-SM mailing list >> SC-SM at lists.sonic.net >> http://lists.sonic.net/mailman/listinfo/sc-sm >> > > _______________________________________________ > SC-SM mailing list > SC-SM at lists.sonic.net > http://lists.sonic.net/mailman/listinfo/sc-sm > From JamBoi at Greens.org Thu Nov 1 16:22:23 2007 From: JamBoi at Greens.org (Drew Johnson) Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2007 16:22:23 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] GP RELEASE Greens to watch on Election Day, Nov. 6; Message-ID: <3507.38.99.84.36.1193959343.squirrel@greens.org> From: Scott McLarty Subject: GP RELEASE Greens to watch on Election Day, Nov. 6; ballot access news GREEN PARTY OF THE UNITED STATES http://www.gp.org For Immediate Release: Thursday, November 1, 2007 Contacts: Scott McLarty, Media Coordinator, 202-518-5624, mclarty at greens.org Starlene Rankin, Media Coordinator, 916-995-3805, starlene at gp.org 2007 Green candidates to watch on Election Day, November 6 * Facts, figures, and updates on Green ballot access, officeholders, and campaigns in the off-year election * Green candidate database for 2007 and other campaign information: http://www.gp.org/elections.shtml WASHINGTON, DC -- The Green Party is off and running with candidates for public office in races throughout the US on Election Day, November 6. The total number of Green candidates in 2007 is 130. At least 225 Greens across the nation currently hold elected office. Greens ran 377 races throughout 2006, winning 67 races (18%). Out of 170 municipal and county races in 2007, Greens won 70 (41%). 45 states and the District of Columbia have parties affiliated with the Green Party of the United States . 22 state Green Parties have ballot access for the 2008 national election as of October 2007. Several candidates deserve special attention in the 2007 election: * Chuck Turner is running for reelection to the City Council District 7 seat in Boston, Massachusetts. He is currently the highest ranking African-American Green officeholder in the US. Mr. Turner won his primary election with 75% of the votes cast. * Howie Hawkins, candidate for Councilor At-Large in Syracuse, New York was endorsed by the Syracuse Post-Standard on October 30 . Mr. Hawkins ran for the US Senate in New York against Hillary Clinton in the 2006 election. * Grace Ross, for Councilor-at-large in Worcester, Massachusetts , is one of twelve candidates running for six seats after finishing sixth in the September 11 primary. BALLOT ACCESS UPDATES * NATIONAL On October 30, Ralph Nader, Peter Camejo, and six voters filed a lawsuit against the Democratic National Committee. The 30-page complaint details the national Democratic Party*s extensive support for challenges to Mr. Nader's ballot positions, especially efforts to sabotage ballot petitions and harass petitioners in several states. http://www.ballot-access.org/2007/10/30/nader-sues-democratic-national-committee-for-2004-dirty-tricks/ * ARKANSAS On October 17, the Arkansas Green Party was notified that its petition has been certified. It is the only Arkansas party, other than the Democratic and Republican Parties, that is on the ballot for all offices. http://www.ballot-access.org/2007/10/17/arkansas-says-green-party-is-on-ballot/ http://www.arkgreens.org * NEW JERSEY On October 17, New Jersey Superior Court Judge Neil H. Shuster ordered that the state grant equal treatment to alternative political parties. The ruling eliminates some of the structural advantages long enjoyed by the Democratic and Republican Parties, and concedes that New Jersey election law must treat alternative parties as official "political parties" for the purposes of campaign finance, lobbying, and voter registration. The lawsuit in the case was filed by the Green Party of New Jersey, the New Jersey Constitution Party, and the New Jersey Libertarian Party. http://www.njappleseed.net/entity_pdfs/182.pdf http://www.gpnj.org * PENNSYLVANIA Carl Romanelli, 2006 Green candidate for the US Senate, is awaiting a decision from the State Supreme Court on $80,000-plus in costs he was ordered to pay as a penalty for invalidated signatures on his ballot petitions. In an equally troubling and unprecedented twist, the court also encumbered Mr. Romanelli's attorney, Larry Otter, with fines and costs. Pennsylvania requires over 67,000 valid signatures for third party and independent candidates but only 2,000 signatures for Democrats and Republicans running for US Senator, Governor, or President. Greens have accused the Pennsylvania court system of intimidating third parties and independents and freezing them out of major races by exacting such fines, which are unprecedented in the US. The Green, Libertarian, and Constitution Parties of Pennsylvania have filed a joint law suit in the US Supreme Court against the state's blatantly unfair and antidemocratic ballot access laws. http://video.google.com/videoplay*docid=-4586797401475004986 http://video.google.com/videoplay*docid=-4586797401475004986 http://www.youtube.com/watch*v=MiED0xToa48 http://www.gp.org/press/pr_2006_10_09.shtml http://www.gpofpa.org MORE 2007 GREEN CANDIDATES TO WATCH Arizona * Beryl Baker for Tucson City Council Ward 4 http://ElectBerylBaker.tripod.com * Dave Croteau for Mayor of Tucson http://www.davecroteau4mayor.org California * Janice Brittain, for City Council, Hermosa Beach http://www.janicebrittain.com Connecticut * Jean de Smet, for First Selectman, Windham http://www.VoteJean.com * Ronna Stuller, for Board of Education, New London http://www.nlgreens.org Indiana * Kathleen Petitjean, for Council 1st Distict in South Bend, Indiana http://www.votepetitjean.wordpress.com http://www.southbendtribune.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article*AID=/20071028/NEWS01/710280355 Maine * Ben Meiklejohn for Portland School Committee http://www.benmeiklejohn.com/ * Leslie Minton for Portland School Committee Maryland * Maria Allwine, for President of the Baltimore City Council http://www.takebge.org/main.htm http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/opinion/oped/bal-op.fraser14oct14,0,1317880.column New York * Margaret Human, for New Paltz Town Councilman (At-Large) http://www.humanfornewpaltz.org * David Lussier, for Albany County Legislature, District 7 http://www.lussierforleg.com/ (In a four-way race for an Albany City Council seat in 2005, Mr. Lussier finished second with 30%) Pennsylvania * Jennaro Pullano, for Mayor, Reading http://www.pullanoformayor.org Virginia * Josh Ruebner, Arlington County Board http://www.voteruebner.com (five candidates running for two seats) Washington * Sally Soriano, for reelection to Seattle School Board, North District 1 http://sallysoriano.org * Joe Szwaja, Seattle City Council Position 3 http://joeforcouncil.com MORE INFORMATION Green Party of the United States http://www.gp.org 202-319-7191, 866-41GREEN Fax 202-319-7193 * Green Party News Center http://www.gp.org/newscenter.shtml * Green Party Speakers Bureau http://www.gp.org/speakers * 2007 national Green Party meeting in Reading, Pa.: video footage, blog and media coverage http://www.gp.org/meeting2007/ "Green Party chooses 2007 Green candidates for campaign support" Green Party press release, October 3, 2007 http://www.gp.org/press/pr_2007_10_03.shtml From gerrygras at earthlink.net Thu Nov 1 16:55:45 2007 From: gerrygras at earthlink.net (Gerry Gras) Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2007 15:55:45 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] [Fwd: Take Action - No War with Iran!] Message-ID: <472A6781.4040309@earthlink.net> -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Take Action - No War with Iran! Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2007 21:49:41 -0400 (EDT) From: Green Party of the United States Reply-To: scotty at gp.org To: gerrygras at earthlink.net October 2007 News Headlines Action Alert No War with Iran! Recently the US Congress approved a $30 billion military aid package to Israel which, combined with the approved Lieberman-Kyl amendment to the Congressional military appropriations bill, has moved the US closer to war with Iran. Join the effort to prevent war with Iran. You can send an automated letter to your Congressperson by clicking on the following link: http://www.gp.org/action/index.shtml After failing to find WMD's in Iraq, President Bush seems poised to repeat history and lead us into another illegal war. He has yet to produce hard evidence to the world community to support his claims that Iran is assisting Shiite militias in Iraq and plans to produce nuclear weapons for an attack on western nations. The Green Party remains the only major national party committed to peace at home and abroad. Please join us by sending an automated letter to your Congresspersons here . Ballot Access . ARKANSAS On October 17, the Arkansas Green Party was notified that its petition has been certified. It is the only Arkansas party, other than the Democratic and Republican Parties, that is on the ballot for all offices. http://www.ballot-access.org/2007/10/17/arkansas-says-green-party-is-on-ballot/ http://www.arkgreens.org . NEW JERSEY On October 17, New Jersey Superior Court Judge Neil H. Shuster ordered that the state grant equal treatment to alternative political parties. The ruling eliminates some of the structural advantages long enjoyed by the Democratic and Republican Parties, and concedes that New Jersey election law must treat alternative parties as official "political parties" for the purposes of campaign finance, lobbying, and voter registration. The lawsuit in the case was filed by the Green Party of New Jersey, the New Jersey Constitution Party, and the New Jersey Libertarian Party. http://www.gpnj.org 2007 Green candidates to watch on Election Day The Green Party is getting ready for Election Day next Tuesday and need your help to make it a success. Please consider spending a few hours this weekend or on Election Day to help make calls, distribute yard signs, or canvass on Election Day. To find a campaign near you, click here . The Green Party is running over 120 races in 2007. So far this year, we've won 40% of our campaigns. We are looking forward to more victories on Tuesday! Greens to Watch on Tuesday: In Massachusetts, Chuck Turner is seeking reelection for his seat on the Boston City Council of Boston. Turner is the highest ranking African American Green Officeholder in the US. He easily won his primary election with 75% of votes cast. In Worcester, Grace Ross is running for Worcester Councilor at large. There are 12 candidates running for six seats. Ross finished sixth in the primary. The Coordinated Campaign Committee assisted the campaign, awarding a $400 grant from GPUS. Grace Ross was the Massachusetts Green Rainbow Party's candidate for Governor last year. Luc Schuster is also running for reelection to the Cambridge School Committee. In Syracuse, NY, Howie Hawkins , candidate for Councilor At-Large was endorsed by the Syracuse Post-Standard on October 30. Hawkins ran for US Senate in New York against Hillary Clinton in the 2006 election. In California, Larry Bragman is running for re-election to the Fairfax City Council. Bragman is currently the Mayor of Fairfax, CA. Lew Tremaine is also running for re-election to the Fairfax City Council. Janice Brittain is running for Hermosa Beach City Council. Brittain also received a GPUS campaign grant from the CCC. Green Party of Virginia Candidate Josh Ruebner is seeking a seat on Arlington County Board for a second year in a row, has garnered favorable press coverage for his stance on affordable housing. In Ohio, Justin Jeffre , former member of the band 98 Degrees, is running for City Council in Cincinnati, OH. Since returning to his hometown, Jeffre has become involved in media reform issues, campaign finance reform, light-rail campaigns, and an initiative to allow the public to vote on a proposed jail tax. The Connecticut Green Party will run the most candidates on Tuesday- 14 in all, including Hector Lopez who is up for reelection as Constable in New Caanan. Nader Sues Democratic National Committee for 2004 Dirty Tricks On October 30, Ralph Nader, Peter Camejo, and six voters who wanted to vote for Nader in 2004, filed a lawsuit against the Democratic National Committee. The lawsuit, Nader v Democratic National Committee, was filed in the District of Columbia Superior Court. The complaint is 70 pages long. It details the national Democratic Party's extensive support for challenges to Nader's ballot positions, in states in which elections officials had accepted Nader's petitions and placed him on the ballot. The complaint goes into great detail, including a coordinated effort to sabotage individual petition sheets in Oregon (anti-Nader activists were instructed to sign a petition sheet in the space reserved for the circulator, and then to line it out, which had the effect of ruining all the signatures already on that sheet). The complaint also talks about harassment of Nader circulators in Ohio and Oregon. The complaint also deals with incidents in Pennsylvania, Arizona, Arkansas, Colorado, Florida, Illinois, Iowa, Maine, Michigan, Mississippi, New Hampshire, New Mexico, Washington, West Virginia and Wisconsin. The lawsuit asks for a jury trial, in a claim for monetary damages. From Ballot Access News edited by Richard Winger: http://www.ballot-access.org/2007/10/30/nader-sues-democratic-national-committee-for-2004-dirty-tricks/ Now is the time to order Green Holiday Gifts. Get ready for the holidays. The Merchandise Committee is pleased to offer an array of t-shirts, hats, totebags, buttons, embroidered patches and more. Check out our brand new union made baseball caps and our new Sunflower shirts with the four pillars on the back, en espanol. Get ready for fall campaigns with our brand new campaign kits and tabling kits. Available at Green Online Store . Green Merchandise. Photo by: T.E. Smith, DC Statehood Green Party Register Green. Vote Green. Give Green. The Green Party does not accept corporate donations. We depend entirely on donations from people who are committed to building a powerful and progressive alternative to the two corporate parties. We ask you to challenge corporate influence in politics by supporting the Green Party of the United States! Show your resistance to the status quo by enabling us to continue organizing and mobilizing for real change. Please help us get out our positive, progressive values to new communities, and to deepen our involvement where we're already anchored. Support us today and please consider becoming a sustainer (look for the recurring donation option). Green Party online shopping just got easier! Visit our improved online store . Americans are ready for Change America is ready for the Green Party's message. But we need your help in bringing the message to the American people! Donate now to the Green Party [Donate to GP Fund] Make your friends GREEN with envy. Become a card-carrying Green today! [Buy Your Card Online] Buy Your Green Party Card Online (or download a PDF order form ). The latest, coolest item in the wallets of progressives is the personalized Green Party Card. For $36.00 a year* you can be a card-carrying Green. When you become an active supporter of the Green Party of the United States, you'll receive our spanking-new card, which shows the world that you stand committed to time-honored progressive values like liberty, equality, democracy, social justice, personal responsibility and focus on the future. In addition, you will receive a Green Party button and bumper sticker, a one-year subscription to Green Pages, plus all of the information you need to get involved and active as a Green. Half of your contribution will be shared with your state's Green Party. The Future is Green! Order Your Green Party Card Online Today ------------- Federal law requires political committees to use their best effort to collect and report the name, mailing address, occupation and employer for each individual whose contributions exceed $200 in a calendar year. Contributions form the following individuals and entities are prohibited: corporations, labor organizations, national banks, government contractors, people under 18 years of age, and foreign nationals. *$36.00 is roughly equivalent to the $1.00 paid for a one-year membership in the Populist Party of the 1890s. The Populist Party was a multiracial, progressive, grassroots third party of working people which agitated for many popular progressive reforms. The Green Party of the 21st century continues the Populist's fight for citizen empowerment and progressive reforms at all levels today. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = DO NOT REPLY TO THIS E-MAIL = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = All comments, feedback and content suggestions should be sent to: office at gp.org . You've been reading Green Line, the monthly e-newsletter of the Green Party of the United States. Subscribe for free at gp.org . Click here to unsubscribe. Paid for by the Green Party of the United States From andid at cagreens.org Thu Nov 1 18:45:36 2007 From: andid at cagreens.org (Andrea Dorey) Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2007 18:45:36 -0700 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Fwd: How Greens helped Gore win the 2000 election In-Reply-To: <471D518E.5010408@freeshell.org> References: <471D518E.5010408@freeshell.org> Message-ID: <75DEFEE2-8076-4ED6-B048-5EAC1EC42835@cagreens.org> Wasn't the "spoiler" nonsense also addressed in the film "An Unreasonable Man"? Andrea On Oct 22, 2007, at 6:42 PM, Fred Duperrault wrote: > On what did Nader and Scheer disagree? I agree with most of what they > both say. > > Fred > > I call Gore the former 'President in Exile' since he won the 2000 > election > before he and the Dems allowed the Republicans to steal it away > from him > and more importantly from The People. Here's how we Greens helped > him win. > For the next time you here some smack about Nader 2000 here's some > facts. > > > Green is Core! > > Drew Johnson > GPCA > > ---------------------------- Original Message > ---------------------------- > Subject: [G-C-F] Nader 2000 mobilization effect erased spoiler effect > From: "Chuck Giese" > Date: Mon, October 22, 2007 14:27 > To: "greens cal forum" > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > ---- > > Folks, > > Over the weekend I listened to the recent > debate between Robert Scheer and Ralph Nader > on one of those cruises sponsored by The > Nation magazine. This debate was brought to > G-C-F's attention by Lisa Taylor on Oct. 11. > (Thank you, Lisa.) She provided this link: > > > http://www.truthdig.com/podcast/item/ > 20071009_robert_scheer_debates_ralph_nader/ > > In the debate, Nader refers to a study by > Solon Simmons that investigated the effect > of Nader's presence in the race in mobilizing > voters who otherwise would not have voted. > He concludes that "Nader actually helped Gore > to do better than he would have in some cases > by mobilizing voters who were then captured > by the Gore ticket in the campaign's closing > weeks." > > This means that Nader's net spoiler effect > was probably non-existent, and that Nader > probably generated a net GAIN in votes for > Gore, that Gore would not have received if > Nader had not been a candidate! Simmons' > data suggest that not only would Gore have > lost Florida and New Hampshire by wider > margins without Nader in the race, but that > Gore might even have lost Wisconsin and New > Mexico without Nader in the race! > > ----- > > In the debate with Scheer, Nader mentions > that this study by Solon Simmons can be found > at votenader.org. Unfortunately, that link > is broken, because Simmons has moved to a new > job at a different university. But I found > the study in MS Word format. The Google > search result also had a "convert to HTML" > option, to read it in your browser instead > of as a Word document. (If you read it as > HTML, however, the bar graph gets lost.) > > This document is not just the Simmons article, > but a short political journal with a few > articles. The Solon Simmons article is: > "One in Ten Thousand: Ralph Nader Takes on > the Presidency". > > > URL (MS Word version): > > http://www.uwosh.edu/political_science/word/ > Wisconsin_Political_Scientist_Summer_2004.doc > > > URL (HTML with missing bar graph): > > http://72.14.253.104/search?q=cache:jQIR-IaszaMJ:www.uwosh.edu/ > political_science/word/Wisconsin_Political_Scientist_Summer_2004.doc > +%22Solon+Simmons%22+Green+vote > +Democrats&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=7&gl=us&client=mozilla > > (This last URL may not last long, as the document is in Google's > cache.) > > > Enjoy, > Chuck Giese > > Fremont, Calif. > _______________________________________________ > cal-forum mailing list > cal-forum at cagreens.org > http://lists.cagreens.org/mailman/listinfo/cal-forum > > _______________________________________________ > sosfbay-discuss mailing list > sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org > http://lists.cagreens.org/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss > > > _______________________________________________ > sosfbay-discuss mailing list > sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org > http://lists.cagreens.org/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss > From tnharter at aceweb.com Fri Nov 2 01:31:35 2007 From: tnharter at aceweb.com (Tian Harter) Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2007 01:31:35 -0700 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] FW: LIONS FOR LAMBS In-Reply-To: <410-220071141191640@earthlink.net> References: <410-220071141191640@earthlink.net> Message-ID: <472AE067.4040305@aceweb.com> The local counter recruiting activists can be found at: http://www.one-voice.info Maybe if you talk to them about it... Curt Wechsler wrote: > This new film opens on the 9th. Is anyone aware of any counter-recruitment > activities > planned in conjunction w/ the release? Seems like a natural venue for > leafletting. > > http://www.lionsforlambsmovie.com/site.htm > > > _______________________________________________ > sosfbay-discuss mailing list > sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org > http://lists.cagreens.org/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss > -- Tian http://tian.greens.org Last evening I saw Mayor Macias of Mountain View sign the Mayors Climate Change Protection Agreement in our City Hall. Today's paper said the earthquake that followed was a 5.6. From tnharter at aceweb.com Fri Nov 2 02:02:00 2007 From: tnharter at aceweb.com (Tian Harter) Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2007 02:02:00 -0700 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] [SC-SM] SF Green Festival Nov 9-11 In-Reply-To: <38843.38.99.84.36.1193958635.squirrel@greens.org> References: <3208.38.99.84.36.1193895579.squirrel@greens.org><93CEC1E8-DFC8-48A9-80FB-EE9E05BA723E@cagreens.org> <38843.38.99.84.36.1193958635.squirrel@greens.org> Message-ID: <472AE788.1050102@aceweb.com> I volunteered to word a shif for them on Saturday afternoon. Tian Drew Johnson wrote: > One reason we'd like to get folks going is there's talk in GP of Santa > Clara about partnering with them and getting them to do some kind of mini > one next year (or later) down our way. We'd love to get San Mateo folks > involved too. > > This is not the only possiblity, but I'm talking to Merriam Kathaleen > about going together on Sunday the 11th. Anybody else want to join in? > > > Green is Core! > > Drew > > > On Thu, November 1, 2007 10:03, Andrea Dorey wrote: >> Drew, >> I plan to try to show up depending on the condition of my knee. >> Andrea >> >> On Oct 31, 2007, at 10:39 PM, Drew Johnson wrote: >> >>> * Green Festival, Nov. 9-11, 10 a.m.-8 p.m. >>> San Francisco Concourse Exhibition Center, 635 8th St, at Brannan >>> Street >>> (between 7th and 8th streets) >>> Enjoy more than 200 visionary speakers and 400 green businesses in >>> the Bay >>> Area, great how-to workshops, green films, yoga and movement classes, >>> green-career sessions, organic beer and wine, delicious organic >>> cuisine >>> and live music. >>> + Join SFGP tabling Saturday & Sunday, Nov 10-11. Contact Sue >>> Vaughan at >>> 415-668-3119, 415-601-9297, info at sfgreenparty.org -- or just show up. >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> SC-SM mailing list >>> SC-SM at lists.sonic.net >>> http://lists.sonic.net/mailman/listinfo/sc-sm >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> SC-SM mailing list >> SC-SM at lists.sonic.net >> http://lists.sonic.net/mailman/listinfo/sc-sm >> > > > _______________________________________________ > sosfbay-discuss mailing list > sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org > http://lists.cagreens.org/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss > -- Tian http://tian.greens.org Last evening I saw Mayor Macias of Mountain View sign the Mayors Climate Change Protection Agreement in our City Hall. Today's paper said the earthquake that followed was a 5.6. From JamBoi at Greens.org Fri Nov 2 09:56:49 2007 From: JamBoi at Greens.org (Drew Johnson) Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2007 09:56:49 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Nov 6 Impeach Cheney Vote in House!!! Message-ID: <2889.38.99.84.36.1194022609.squirrel@greens.org> MOBILIZE! Everyone rise from our state of fatigue and 'learned helplessness', and speak out TODAY, THIS WEEKEND, MONDAY, TUESDAY, WEDNESDAY to CALL ON YOUR HOUSE 'REPRESENTATIVE' TO IMPEACH CHENEY. Of course whatever happens on we won't stop the struggle, but THIS IS A CRITICAL JUNCTURE! THIS WILL BE THE FIRST EVER HOUSE VOTE ON IMPEACHING CHENEY!!! Get your entire network of activists and encourage them to also show their nonactivist friends how to call their house members. Seriously, let's stop the talk of WWIII and bombing Iran -- let's Impeach Cheney Now! Please forward this e-mail to all your friends! LEARN MORE ABOUT IMPEACHING CHENEY http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/cheney Text of BILL TO IMPEACH CHENEY, H RES 333 and supporting documents: http://kucinich.house.gov/SpotlightIssues/documents.htm HERE'S WHAT IS ABOUT TO HAPPEN: Congressman Dennis Kucnich, whose bill to impeach Cheney, H Res 333 has 22 sponsors (listed below), will introduce a resolution on the floor of the U.S. House of Representatives on November 6. Another congress member will move to table (kill) the resolution. The vote will come on the 6th, 7th, or 8th. We need you to ask your representative to vote No on tabling, Yes on giving impeachment a chance. Those who vote Yes to table cannot use the excuse that "We don't have the votes," since others will at that same instant with exactly the same exertion be voting No. http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/cheney _______ Kucinich Will Introduce Privileged Resolution To Force Up Or Down Vote On Cheney Impeachment >From the Office of Congressman Dennis Kucinich WASHINGTON, D.C. (November 2, 2007) ? Congressman Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) announced today that he will be offering a privileged resolution on the House floor next week that will bring articles of impeachment against the Vice President, Richard B. Cheney. ?The momentum is building for impeachment,? Kucinich said. ?Millions of citizens across the nation are demanding Congress rein in the Vice President?s abuse of power. ?Despite this groundswell of opposition to the unconstitutional conduct of office, Vice President Cheney continues to violate the U.S. Constitution by insisting the power of the executive branch is supreme. ?Congress must hold the Vice President accountable. The American people need to let Members of Congress know how they feel about this. The Vice President continues to use his office to advocate for a continued occupation of Iraq and prod our nation into a belligerent stance against Iran. If the Vice President is successful, his actions will ensure decades of disastrous consequences.? The privileged resolution has priority status for consideration on the House floor. Once introduced, the resolution has to be brought to the floor within two legislative days, although the House could act on it immediately. Kucinich is expected to bring it to the House floor on Tuesday, November 6. H. Res. 333, Articles of Impeachment against the Vice President, has 21 cosponsors. They are: Rep. Tammy Baldwin (D-WI), Robert Brady (D-PA), Yvette Clarke (D-NY), Rep. William Lacy Clay (D-MO), Rep. Steve Cohen (D-TN), Rep. Keith Ellison (D-MN), Rep. Sam Farr (D-CA), Rep. Bob Filner (D-CA), Rep. Sheila Jackson-Lee (D-TX), Rep. Henry Johnson (D-GA), Rep. Carolyn Kilpatrick (D-MI), Rep. Barbara Lee (D-CA), Rep. Jim McDermott (D-WA), Rep. James Moran (D-VA), Rep. Donald Payne (D-NJ), Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-IL), Rep. Edolphus Towns (D-NY), Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA), Rep. Diane Watson (D-CA), Rep. Lynn Woolsey (D-CA) and Rep. Albert Wynn (D-MD). _____ Frontline's excellent expose of Cheney's drive to build Imperial Presidency (AKA the 'Unitary Executive'), watchable on-line: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/cheney/ Related YouTube videos: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rLz5Ja_pius From wechslertoo at earthlink.net Fri Nov 2 12:27:08 2007 From: wechslertoo at earthlink.net (Curt Wechsler) Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2007 12:27:08 -0700 Subject: H.R. 1955, the “Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007" Message-ID: <410-22007115219278468@earthlink.net> "In effect, any individual possibly thinking of or considering dissent and action could be maligned as a potential 'violent' terrorist." -- Cheryl Abraham, "Thought Crimes in America" http://www.worldcantwait.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=4403& Itemid=223 or http://tinyurl.com/23ecjn From wechslertoo at earthlink.net Fri Nov 2 13:07:02 2007 From: wechslertoo at earthlink.net (Curt Wechsler) Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2007 13:07:02 -0700 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] FW: Join us for an anti-torture action on November 16. Message-ID: <410-2200711522072968@earthlink.net> > Iraq Moratorium #3 > Stop torture - Abolish the Torture Flights > http://tinyurl.com/yvtt87 From tnharter at aceweb.com Fri Nov 2 14:07:54 2007 From: tnharter at aceweb.com (Tian Harter) Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2007 14:07:54 -0700 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Mountain View Steps It Up! Message-ID: <472B91AA.9050302@aceweb.com> Tuesday evening Mountain View's City Council began their meeting with a signing ceremony. They signed onto the Mayor's Climate Protection Agreement. You can see my pictures from the event by visiting: http://tian.greens.org/MountainView/ClimateChange/MayorsAgreement/index.html On the same theme, we are having a Step It Up event on City Hall Plaza this coming Saturday. The press advisory for that follows. Come on down! Tian Rally to Honor Mountain View City Council on Signing the Mayor?s Climate Protection Agreement and to Call for National Action As Part of Step It Up?s Second Historic Event To Support A Plan to Curb Global Warming When: Saturday, November 3, 2007, 11:00 am - 1:00 pm Where: Mountain View?s Civic Center Plaza, 500 Castro Street Who: Speakers include * Mountain View Mayor Laura Macias * Mountain View Council Members Ronit Bryant and Margaret Abe-Koga * Julio Magalhaes and Gary Bailey, Sierra Club * Gail Slocum, PG&E * Carole McClelland, Green Career Central * Sven Thesen, Calcars * Aileen La Bouff, Ecobroker/Realtor * Bruce Karney, SolarCity * Gary Bailey, Cool Cities/Sierra Club Mountain View celebrates the City joining nearly 700 U.S. Mayors in promising to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. This event is one of the nationwide ?Step It Up? rallies that will build on the more than 1,400 Step It Up events on April 14 in 50 states, the largest global warming event in U.S. history. The events across the country?held one year before the 2008 election? will show the contrast between the intense concern of ordinary Americans and the leadership vacuum in Washington. Participants in November 3, 2007 events all across the country will call for real leadership on global warming, including the ?1 Sky? priorities: (1) no new coal plants, (2) 80% reduction in carbon emissions by 2050, and (3) 5 million new green jobs. For more information please visit the Step It Up campaign website: www.stepitup2007.org. Speakers at the Mountain View event will address what the city is doing as well as how individuals can contribute to solutions. Activities and displays will include energy efficient cars; a crafts table for kids with recycled art materials; an opportunity to send a message to national leaders; and Palo Alto's Energy Bicycle, where participants can see how hard they have to pedal to generate enough electricity to light an incandescent bulb compared to a compact fluorescent (CFL) bulb. Attendees are asked to walk, bicycle, or use public transportation to the event. Free Parking is also available in nearby lots. -- Tian http://tian.greens.org I tried to send this out earlier in the week, but it didn't seem to go. From tnharter at aceweb.com Fri Nov 2 14:17:53 2007 From: tnharter at aceweb.com (Tian Harter) Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2007 14:17:53 -0700 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Nov 6 Impeach Cheney Vote in House!!! In-Reply-To: <2889.38.99.84.36.1194022609.squirrel@greens.org> References: <2889.38.99.84.36.1194022609.squirrel@greens.org> Message-ID: <472B9401.5070600@aceweb.com> George Johnson tells me he wants to organize a march on the Congressional offices early next week. Call him at 650 207-6073 if you are interested. Tian Drew Johnson wrote: > MOBILIZE! Everyone rise from our state of fatigue and 'learned > helplessness', and speak out TODAY, THIS WEEKEND, MONDAY, TUESDAY, > WEDNESDAY to CALL ON YOUR HOUSE 'REPRESENTATIVE' TO IMPEACH CHENEY. Of > course whatever happens on we won't stop the struggle, but THIS IS A > CRITICAL JUNCTURE! THIS WILL BE THE FIRST EVER HOUSE VOTE ON IMPEACHING > CHENEY!!! Get your entire network of activists and encourage them to also > show their nonactivist friends how to call their house members. > Seriously, let's stop the talk of WWIII and bombing Iran -- let's Impeach > Cheney Now! Please forward this e-mail to all your friends! > > LEARN MORE ABOUT IMPEACHING CHENEY > http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/cheney > > Text of BILL TO IMPEACH CHENEY, H RES 333 and supporting documents: > http://kucinich.house.gov/SpotlightIssues/documents.htm > > HERE'S WHAT IS ABOUT TO HAPPEN: > Congressman Dennis Kucnich, whose bill to impeach Cheney, H Res 333 > has 22 sponsors (listed below), will introduce a resolution on the floor > of the U.S. House of Representatives on November 6. Another congress > member will move to table (kill) the resolution. The vote will come on the > 6th, 7th, or 8th. We need you to ask your representative to vote No on > tabling, Yes on giving impeachment a chance. Those who vote Yes to table > cannot use the excuse that "We don't have the votes," since others will at > that same instant with exactly the same exertion be voting No. > > > http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/cheney > _______ > > Kucinich Will Introduce Privileged Resolution To Force Up Or Down Vote On > Cheney Impeachment > >>From the Office of Congressman Dennis Kucinich > > WASHINGTON, D.C. (November 2, 2007) --- Congressman Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) > announced today that he will be offering a privileged resolution on the > House floor next week that will bring articles of impeachment against the > Vice President, Richard B. Cheney. > > "The momentum is building for impeachment," Kucinich said. "Millions of > citizens across the nation are demanding Congress rein in the Vice > President's abuse of power. > > "Despite this groundswell of opposition to the unconstitutional conduct of > office, Vice President Cheney continues to violate the U.S. Constitution > by insisting the power of the executive branch is supreme. > > "Congress must hold the Vice President accountable. The American people > need to let Members of Congress know how they feel about this. The Vice > President continues to use his office to advocate for a continued > occupation of Iraq and prod our nation into a belligerent stance against > Iran. If the Vice President is successful, his actions will ensure decades > of disastrous consequences." > > The privileged resolution has priority status for consideration on the > House floor. Once introduced, the resolution has to be brought to the > floor within two legislative days, although the House could act on it > immediately. Kucinich is expected to bring it to the House floor on > Tuesday, November 6. > > H. Res. 333, Articles of Impeachment against the Vice President, has 21 > cosponsors. They are: Rep. Tammy Baldwin (D-WI), Robert Brady (D-PA), > Yvette Clarke (D-NY), Rep. William Lacy Clay (D-MO), Rep. Steve Cohen > (D-TN), Rep. Keith Ellison (D-MN), Rep. Sam Farr (D-CA), Rep. Bob Filner > (D-CA), Rep. Sheila Jackson-Lee (D-TX), Rep. Henry Johnson (D-GA), Rep. > Carolyn Kilpatrick (D-MI), Rep. Barbara Lee (D-CA), Rep. Jim McDermott > (D-WA), Rep. James Moran (D-VA), Rep. Donald Payne (D-NJ), Rep. Jan > Schakowsky (D-IL), Rep. Edolphus Towns (D-NY), Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA), > Rep. Diane Watson (D-CA), Rep. Lynn Woolsey (D-CA) and Rep. Albert Wynn > (D-MD). > > _____ > > Frontline's excellent expose of Cheney's drive to build Imperial Presidency > (AKA the 'Unitary Executive'), watchable on-line: > http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/cheney/ > > Related YouTube videos: > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rLz5Ja_pius > > _______________________________________________ > sosfbay-discuss mailing list > sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org > http://lists.cagreens.org/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss > -- Tian http://tian.greens.org Last evening I saw Mayor Macias of Mountain View sign the Mayors Climate Change Protection Agreement in our City Hall. Today's paper said the earthquake that followed was a 5.6. From JamBoi at Greens.org Fri Nov 2 15:20:52 2007 From: JamBoi at Greens.org (Drew Johnson) Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2007 15:20:52 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] USAF struck Syrian site, w/ Israeli cover: Jerusalem Post Message-ID: <2652.38.99.84.36.1194042052.squirrel@greens.org> http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1192380718519&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull JPost.com ? Middle East ? Article Nov 2, 2007 10:30 | Updated Nov 2, 2007 19:20 'USAF struck Syrian nuclear site' By JPOST.COM STAFF The September 6 raid over Syria was carried out by the US Air Force, the Al-Jazeera Web site reported Friday. The Web site quoted Israeli and Arab sources as saying that two US jets armed with tactical nuclear weapons carried out an attack on a suspected nuclear site under construction. The sources were quoted as saying that Israeli F-15 and F-16 jets provided cover for the US planes. The sources added that each US plane carried one tactical nuclear weapon and that the site was hit by one bomb and was totally destroyed. At the beginning of October, Israel's military censor began to allow the local media to report on the raid without attributing their report to foreign sources. Nevertheless, details of the strike have remained clouded in mystery. On October 28, Prime Minister Ehud Olmert told the cabinet that he had apologized to Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan if Israel violated Turkish airspace during a strike on an alleged nuclear facility in Syria last month. In a carefully worded statement that was given to reporters after the cabinet meeting, Olmert said: "In my conversation with the Turkish prime minister, I told him that if Israeli planes indeed penetrated Turkish airspace, then there was no intention thereby, either in advance or in any case, to - in any way - violate or undermine Turkish sovereignty, which we respect." The New York Times reported on October 13 that Israeli planes struck at what US and Israeli intelligence believed was a partly constructed nuclear reactor in Syria on September 6, citing American and foreign officials who had seen the relevant intelligence reports. According to the report, Israel carried out the report to send a message that it would not tolerate even a nuclear program in its initial stages of construction in any neighboring state. On October 17, Syria denied that one of its representatives to the United Nations told a panel that an Israeli air strike hit a Syrian nuclear facility and added that "such facilities do not exist in Syria." A UN document released by the press office had provided an account of a meeting of the First Committee, Disarmament and International Security, in New York, and paraphrased an unnamed Syrian representative as saying that a nuclear facility was hit by the raid. However, the state-run Syrian Arab News Agency, SANA said media reports, apparently based on a UN press release, misquoted the Syrian diplomat. From JamBoi at Greens.org Fri Nov 2 16:14:36 2007 From: JamBoi at Greens.org (Drew Johnson) Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2007 16:14:36 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Nov 6 Impeach Cheney Vote in House!!! In-Reply-To: <472B9401.5070600@aceweb.com> References: <2889.38.99.84.36.1194022609.squirrel@greens.org> <472B9401.5070600@aceweb.com> Message-ID: <3098.38.99.84.36.1194045276.squirrel@greens.org> I called George and he is wanting to call a rally like the ones that Carol and we have done in the past at Lytton plaza and do an action at Eshoo's office. He said he was thinking of calling Carol to see if she'd be interested in such a thing. I said we are having a meetup tomorrow and we could call to check in. Impeach for Peace! Drew On Fri, November 2, 2007 14:17, Tian Harter wrote: > George Johnson tells me he wants to organize a march on the > Congressional offices early next week. Call him at 650 207-6073 if you > are interested. > > Tian > > Drew Johnson wrote: >> MOBILIZE! Everyone rise from our state of fatigue and 'learned >> helplessness', and speak out TODAY, THIS WEEKEND, MONDAY, TUESDAY, >> WEDNESDAY to CALL ON YOUR HOUSE 'REPRESENTATIVE' TO IMPEACH CHENEY. Of >> course whatever happens on we won't stop the struggle, but THIS IS A >> CRITICAL JUNCTURE! THIS WILL BE THE FIRST EVER HOUSE VOTE ON IMPEACHING >> CHENEY!!! Get your entire network of activists and encourage them to >> also >> show their nonactivist friends how to call their house members. >> Seriously, let's stop the talk of WWIII and bombing Iran -- let's >> Impeach >> Cheney Now! Please forward this e-mail to all your friends! >> >> LEARN MORE ABOUT IMPEACHING CHENEY >> http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/cheney >> >> Text of BILL TO IMPEACH CHENEY, H RES 333 and supporting documents: >> http://kucinich.house.gov/SpotlightIssues/documents.htm >> >> HERE'S WHAT IS ABOUT TO HAPPEN: >> Congressman Dennis Kucnich, whose bill to impeach Cheney, H Res 333 >> has 22 sponsors (listed below), will introduce a resolution on the floor >> of the U.S. House of Representatives on November 6. Another congress >> member will move to table (kill) the resolution. The vote will come on >> the >> 6th, 7th, or 8th. We need you to ask your representative to vote No on >> tabling, Yes on giving impeachment a chance. Those who vote Yes to table >> cannot use the excuse that "We don't have the votes," since others will >> at >> that same instant with exactly the same exertion be voting No. >> >> >> http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/cheney >> _______ >> >> Kucinich Will Introduce Privileged Resolution To Force Up Or Down Vote >> On >> Cheney Impeachment >> >>>From the Office of Congressman Dennis Kucinich >> >> WASHINGTON, D.C. (November 2, 2007) --- Congressman Dennis Kucinich >> (D-OH) >> announced today that he will be offering a privileged resolution on the >> House floor next week that will bring articles of impeachment against >> the >> Vice President, Richard B. Cheney. >> >> "The momentum is building for impeachment," Kucinich said. "Millions of >> citizens across the nation are demanding Congress rein in the Vice >> President's abuse of power. >> >> "Despite this groundswell of opposition to the unconstitutional conduct >> of >> office, Vice President Cheney continues to violate the U.S. Constitution >> by insisting the power of the executive branch is supreme. >> >> "Congress must hold the Vice President accountable. The American people >> need to let Members of Congress know how they feel about this. The Vice >> President continues to use his office to advocate for a continued >> occupation of Iraq and prod our nation into a belligerent stance against >> Iran. If the Vice President is successful, his actions will ensure >> decades >> of disastrous consequences." >> >> The privileged resolution has priority status for consideration on the >> House floor. Once introduced, the resolution has to be brought to the >> floor within two legislative days, although the House could act on it >> immediately. Kucinich is expected to bring it to the House floor on >> Tuesday, November 6. >> >> H. Res. 333, Articles of Impeachment against the Vice President, has 21 >> cosponsors. They are: Rep. Tammy Baldwin (D-WI), Robert Brady (D-PA), >> Yvette Clarke (D-NY), Rep. William Lacy Clay (D-MO), Rep. Steve Cohen >> (D-TN), Rep. Keith Ellison (D-MN), Rep. Sam Farr (D-CA), Rep. Bob Filner >> (D-CA), Rep. Sheila Jackson-Lee (D-TX), Rep. Henry Johnson (D-GA), Rep. >> Carolyn Kilpatrick (D-MI), Rep. Barbara Lee (D-CA), Rep. Jim McDermott >> (D-WA), Rep. James Moran (D-VA), Rep. Donald Payne (D-NJ), Rep. Jan >> Schakowsky (D-IL), Rep. Edolphus Towns (D-NY), Rep. Maxine Waters >> (D-CA), >> Rep. Diane Watson (D-CA), Rep. Lynn Woolsey (D-CA) and Rep. Albert Wynn >> (D-MD). >> >> _____ >> >> Frontline's excellent expose of Cheney's drive to build Imperial >> Presidency >> (AKA the 'Unitary Executive'), watchable on-line: >> http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/cheney/ >> >> Related YouTube videos: >> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rLz5Ja_pius >> >> _______________________________________________ >> sosfbay-discuss mailing list >> sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org >> http://lists.cagreens.org/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss >> > > -- > Tian > http://tian.greens.org > Last evening I saw Mayor Macias of Mountain View sign the > Mayors Climate Change Protection Agreement in our City Hall. > Today's paper said the earthquake that followed was a 5.6. > _______________________________________________ > sosfbay-discuss mailing list > sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org > http://lists.cagreens.org/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss > From andid at cagreens.org Fri Nov 2 18:08:07 2007 From: andid at cagreens.org (Andrea Dorey) Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2007 18:08:07 -0700 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Author-Speaker Discusses Plug-In Hybrids: Getting 1 4 U & More!! THIS SUNDAY!! Message-ID: <4B06BEED-B38A-4E99-96A0-ACB3B03203FA@cagreens.org> Hi, GP Colleagues! Sherry Boschert is the featured speaker at The Humanist Community here locally in Palo Alto. The AHA weekly forums are free! Come meet a group who is as environmentally concerned and intelligent as we are!!! Sherry is talking about Plug-in Hybrids: The Cars that will Recharge America. She will bring her book and explain how plug-ins will save money, reduce pollution, and increase our national security, and answer questions from a very savvy audience. Learn facts versus fiction. Sherry will bring her books and I plan to have Elec Car I & II on DVD available. Please feel free to bring our GP literature on alternative energy transportation for display!!! (Hey, Rob!!) Come for a good time and to rub elbows with our fellow crusader for electric and plug-in cars. When: Sunday, November 4 Where: Mitchell Park Community Center 3800 Middlefield Road (between Meadow and Charleston) Palo Alto Forum: 11:00 AM to Noon (free) Lunch buffet: Noon to 1 PM (donations requested) Join the group for a family-style lunch buffet and more lively discussions of this subject. Mitchell Park Community Center, Palo Alto World / USA / California / Palo Alto, 3 km from center ... Mitchell Park Community Center, Palo Alto. tags: Mitchell Park Community Center, Palo Alto ... wikimapia.org/107652/ - 11k - Cached - Similar pages Mitchell Park Community Center www.city.palo-alto.ca.us 3800 Middlefield Rd Palo Alto, CA 94303 (650) 329-2487 Get directions -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From alexcathy at aol.com Fri Nov 2 18:34:10 2007 From: alexcathy at aol.com (alexcathy at aol.com) Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2007 21:34:10 -0400 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] USAF struck Syrian site, w/ Israeli cover: Jerusalem Post In-Reply-To: <2652.38.99.84.36.1194042052.squirrel@greens.org> References: <2652.38.99.84.36.1194042052.squirrel@greens.org> Message-ID: <8C9EBD0C4C4ED6C-1C74-9FE8@webmail-db08.sysops.aol.com> Dear Green Friends, This report does not sound credible.? A tactical nuclear weapon?? And somehow "they" have managed to keep this quite for more than a month? I don't think so. -----Original Message----- From: Drew Johnson To: usgp-media at gp-us.org; natlcomaffairs at green.gpus.org Cc: sosfbay discussion group ; svic at lists.riseup.net Sent: Fri, 2 Nov 2007 3:20 pm Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] USAF struck Syrian site, w/ Israeli cover: Jerusalem Post .? .? . The Web site quoted Israeli and Arab sources as saying that two US jets armed with tactical nuclear weapons carried out an attack on a suspected nuclear site under construction. . . . The sources added that each US plane carried one tactical nuclear weapon and that the site was hit by one bomb and was totally destroyed. . . . ________________________________________________________________________ Email and AIM finally together. You've gotta check out free AOL Mail! - http://mail.aol.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JamBoi at Greens.org Fri Nov 2 22:04:14 2007 From: JamBoi at Greens.org (Drew Johnson) Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2007 22:04:14 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] USAF struck Syrian site, w/ Israeli cover: Jerusalem Post In-Reply-To: <8C9EBD0C4C4ED6C-1C74-9FE8@webmail-db08.sysops.aol.com> References: <2652.38.99.84.36.1194042052.squirrel@greens.org> <8C9EBD0C4C4ED6C-1C74-9FE8@webmail-db08.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: <1303.38.99.84.36.1194066254.squirrel@greens.org> Please note that the report doesn't assert that the tac nukes were used. The first shocker (quite plausible) is the assertion that the USAF committed an act of war against a nation that we have not declared war on. The second is the assertion that tac nukes were carried at all. There is not an assertion made that the tac nukes were used. This report is well within the realm of possibility IMO, but shocking and scandalous if true, even without and assertion of the tac nukes being used. Green is Core! Drew On Fri, November 2, 2007 18:34, alexcathy at aol.com wrote: > > Dear Green Friends, > > This report does not sound credible.? > > > > A tactical nuclear weapon?? And somehow "they" have managed to keep this > quite for more than a month? > > I don't think so. > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Drew Johnson > To: usgp-media at gp-us.org; natlcomaffairs at green.gpus.org > Cc: sosfbay discussion group ; > svic at lists.riseup.net > Sent: Fri, 2 Nov 2007 3:20 pm > Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] USAF struck Syrian site, w/ Israeli cover: > Jerusalem Post > > .? .? . > > > The Web site quoted Israeli and Arab > sources as saying that two US jets armed with tactical nuclear weapons > carried out an attack on a suspected nuclear site under construction. > . . . > The sources added that each US plane carried one tactical nuclear weapon > and that the site was hit by one bomb and was totally destroyed. > . . . > > > > > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________ > Email and AIM finally together. You've gotta check out free AOL Mail! - > http://mail.aol.com > _______________________________________________ > sosfbay-discuss mailing list > sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org > http://lists.cagreens.org/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss > From andid at cagreens.org Sat Nov 3 04:34:35 2007 From: andid at cagreens.org (Andrea Dorey) Date: Sat, 3 Nov 2007 04:34:35 -0700 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] USAF struck Syrian site, w/ Israeli cover: Jerusalem Post In-Reply-To: <1303.38.99.84.36.1194066254.squirrel@greens.org> References: <2652.38.99.84.36.1194042052.squirrel@greens.org> <8C9EBD0C4C4ED6C-1C74-9FE8@webmail-db08.sysops.aol.com> <1303.38.99.84.36.1194066254.squirrel@greens.org> Message-ID: <80DEF97B-CBFF-43C6-AD4F-66B19C96548B@cagreens.org> I wonder if the American public will even notice. The response to this here in the U.S. should be millions in the street to protest. Bush is jabbing a wasp nest in the middle east with the hope (IMHO) of provoking WWIII. If he succeeds, he will assure the continuation of the Republican fright-right's stranglehold on the executive office. Andrea On Nov 2, 2007, at 10:04 PM, Drew Johnson wrote: > Please note that the report doesn't assert that the tac nukes were > used. > The first shocker (quite plausible) is the assertion that the USAF > committed an act of war against a nation that we have not declared > war on. > The second is the assertion that tac nukes were carried at all. > There is > not an assertion made that the tac nukes were used. This report is > well > within the realm of possibility IMO, but shocking and scandalous if > true, > even without and assertion of the tac nukes being used. > > > Green is Core! > > Drew > > > On Fri, November 2, 2007 18:34, alexcathy at aol.com wrote: >> >> Dear Green Friends, >> >> This report does not sound credible.? >> >> >> >> A tactical nuclear weapon?? And somehow "they" have managed to >> keep this >> quite for more than a month? >> >> I don't think so. >> >> >> >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Drew Johnson >> To: usgp-media at gp-us.org; natlcomaffairs at green.gpus.org >> Cc: sosfbay discussion group ; >> svic at lists.riseup.net >> Sent: Fri, 2 Nov 2007 3:20 pm >> Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] USAF struck Syrian site, w/ Israeli cover: >> Jerusalem Post >> >> .? .? . >> >> >> The Web site quoted Israeli and Arab >> sources as saying that two US jets armed with tactical nuclear >> weapons >> carried out an attack on a suspected nuclear site under construction. >> . . . >> The sources added that each US plane carried one tactical nuclear >> weapon >> and that the site was hit by one bomb and was totally destroyed. >> . . . >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> _____________________________________________________________________ >> ___ >> Email and AIM finally together. You've gotta check out free AOL >> Mail! - >> http://mail.aol.com >> _______________________________________________ >> sosfbay-discuss mailing list >> sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org >> http://lists.cagreens.org/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss >> > > > _______________________________________________ > sosfbay-discuss mailing list > sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org > http://lists.cagreens.org/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss > From wrolley at charter.net Sat Nov 3 08:17:11 2007 From: wrolley at charter.net (Wes Rolley) Date: Sat, 03 Nov 2007 08:17:11 -0700 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Poppy Jasper Film Festival Message-ID: <472C90F7.90906@charter.net> The Poppy Jasper Film Festival will, once again, be held in Morgan Hill, CA on November 9, 10,11. This is a festival of short films (30 min.or less). It is held once a year and proceeds go to student scholarships. Of particular interest this year might be /Grassroots: Contesting Ohio/. Immediately after the Nov. 2, 2004, election, while most Americans and mainstream media ignored the election's outcome, a group of concerned citizens found a way to challenge it. This film screens in the 3:00 and 7:00 PM showings on the 9th and in the 3:00 PM screening on the 10th. More information on this and other short films is at http://www.poppyjasperfilmfest.org/ -- "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 Sat Nov 3 09:07:54 2007 From: alexcathy at aol.com (alexcathy at aol.com) Date: Sat, 03 Nov 2007 12:07:54 -0400 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] California Hack du jour - US Sen. Diane Feinstein Message-ID: <8C9EC4AD3A093D4-904-736E@WEBMAIL-MB16.sysops.aol.com> Dear Green Friends, By now you've probably heard that our dear Sen. Diane Feinstein announced her support for Michael Mukasey as Bush's next attorney general.? Her "explanation" is published as an op-ed in today's Los Angeles Times.? I have posted a blog entry on Green Commons, but there is so much stuff about Feinstein that it's more than one day's work.? Please leave comments with your favorite examples of Feinstein mendacity (her record is s-o-o-o bad it has probably hurt my friend, Mike Feinstein, that he must go through life with the same last name!).? Alex Walker California Hack du jour - US Sen. Diane Feinstein The California Democratic Party Hack Du Jour is U.S. Senator Dianne Feinstein. Sen. Feinstein's record as one of President Bush' chief enablers on all matters foreign and domestic is so bad, one hardly knows where to begin. Documenting this is a big job and I expect to be updating this Blog for a few days to get it all down. The latest outrage is that Sen. Feinstein provided a crucial Democratic vote to confirm Michael B. Mukasey as George W. Bush's latest consigliere at the Justice Department. To add insult to injury, the Los Angeles Times published Feinstein's statement "explaining" her latest cave-in: Published in the Los Angeles Times, Saturday, Novermber 3, 2007 Sen. Feinstein: Judge Mukasey has my vote by Dianne Feinstein During a long career in public service and private practice, Michael B. Mukasey has forged an independent path as a lawyer and federal judge. He has presided over 1,600 cases in almost 19 years on the bench. He has extensive experience on national security cases -- presiding over such critically important cases as U.S. vs. Rahman and Padilla vs. Bush. In the Omar Abdel Rahman case, 10 defendants were given prison sentences ranging from 25 years to life. Judge Mukasey is not Alberto R. Gonzales. In our confirmation hearings (and subsequently, in writing), Judge Mukasey's answers to hundreds of questions were crisp and to the point, and reflected an independent mind. That's why I intend to vote to confirm him to be our next attorney general. I truly believe he will be a strong advocate for the American people. The Justice Department is in desperate need of effective leadership. It is leaderless, and 10 of its top positions are vacant. Morale among U.S. attorneys needs to be restored, priorities reassessed and a new dynamic of independence from the White House established. I believe that Judge Mukasey is the best nominee we are going to get from this administration and that voting him down would only perpetuate acting and recess appointments, allowing the White House to avoid the transparency that confirmation hearings provide and to diminish effective oversight by Congress. ? Read More At: http://www.greencommons.org/node/829 ? ________________________________________________________________________ Email and AIM finally together. You've gotta check out free AOL Mail! - http://mail.aol.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JamBoi at Greens.org Sat Nov 3 09:27:31 2007 From: JamBoi at Greens.org (Drew Johnson) Date: Sat, 3 Nov 2007 09:27:31 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Nat'l Lawyers Guild Passes Impeach Resolution; Launches Campaign Message-ID: <1100.38.99.84.36.1194107251.squirrel@greens.org> http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/?q=node/28354 National Lawyers Guild Passes Impeachment Resolution; Launches National Impeachment Committee & Campaign Resolution on Impeachment of Bush and Cheney Submitted By James Marc Leas The National Lawyers Guild on Friday unanimously and enthusiastically passed a resolution supporting the impeachment of Bush and Cheney. Resolution on Impeachment of Bush and Cheney Whereas George W. Bush and Richard B. Cheney: 1. deliberately misled the nation and doctored intelligence, as described in the Downing Street minutes, http://www.downingstreetmemo.com/memos.html about the threat from Iraq in order to justify a war of aggression and an occupation of Iraq, as further described in House resolution H.Res. 333: http://kucinich.house.gov/UploadedFiles/int3.pdf and as listed in House Resolution H. Res. 635: http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=hr109-635 2. committed crimes against peace by initiating war against Iraq in violation of the UN Charter http://www.worldpress.org/specials/iraq/ ; 3. committed crimes against humanity in their conduct of the occupation of Iraq in which they killed hundreds of thousands of Iraqi civilians and created millions of refugees http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,,1892888,00.html and http://edition.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/10/13/iraq.main/index.html ; 4. killed over 3700 American soldiers and severely wounded nearly 30,000 more in the pursuit of an illegal, immoral, and unjust occupation of Iraq. While Bush and Cheney have stated no truthful noble cause for the war, one of the central purposes appears to be to take control of Iraq's immense oil reserves to financially benefit private corporate interests. See Bush's benchmark listing fact sheet released the same day Bush announced the "surge" that expressly called on the Iraq parliament to "enact hydrocarbons law to promote investment . . . " http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/01/20070110-3.html and http://www.alternet.org/waroniraq/56672/ ; 5. committed further crimes against peace by threatening Iran in violation of the UN Charter, as described in House resolution H. Res. 333 http://thomas.loc.gov/cgibin/query/z?c110:H.RES.333: and http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/6649053.stm ; 6. detained thousands of prisoners without charges and without providing the ability to confront their accusers at a fair trial http://thereport.amnesty.org/eng/Regions/Americas/United-States-of-America ; 7. condoned the torture of prisoners in violation of the Geneva Conventions, the US anti-torture statute of 1994, the US War Crimes Act of 1996, and the oath of office http://hrw.org/english/docs/2004/05/24/usint8614.htm and http://thereport.amnesty.org/eng/Regions/Americas/United-States-of-America and http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2006/03/24/bush_shuns_patriot_act_requirement/ . Bush's refusal to faithfully execute the laws prohibiting torture and his declaration on February 7, 2002 that the Geneva Conventions did not apply to prisoners in Afghanistan and in Guantanamo set the stage for torture there http://hrw.org/reports/2004/usa0604/2.htm . The Rumsfeld approved Guantanamo torture techniques were then imported to Iraq in August 2003, where the International Committee of the Red Cross found "systemic" mistreatment of Iraqi prisoners in several facilities and where the Schlesinger Report confirmed in August 2004 that abuses were "widespread" and "serious both in number and in effect," and that there is both "institutional and personal responsibility at higher levels" ; 8. approved at least two different illegal electronic surveillance programs of American citizens without a warrant in violation of the fourth amendment and in violation of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978, and repeatedly lied to the American people by stating that no surveillance was taking place without a court order. The first program includes intercepting phone and email conversations without warrants and was exposed by the NY Times on December 16, 2005 http://emoglen.law.columbia.edu/CPC/NYT_15cnd-program.html . After that program was exposed Bush said the program was carefully targeted to just include international calls and suspected members of Al Qaeda. Then, the second program was exposed by USA Today on May 11, 2006. It provides a wholesale attack on the fourth amendment by recording call identification information of tens of millions of purely domestic calls as well as international calls http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2006-05-10-nsa_x.htm ; 9. attacked basic human rights protections in the constitution including habeas corpus, fifth amendment freedom from loss of life, liberty and property without due process of law, eighth amendment freedom from cruel and unusual punishment, and fourth amendment freedom from unreasonable search and seizure ; 10. attacked the separation of powers in an effort to consolidate power in the executive; 11. attacked the messenger who revealed that Bush "twisted" intelligence "to exaggerate the Iraqi threat." Just as Nixon retaliated against former Pentagon analyst Daniel Ellsberg http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniel_Ellsberg , according to papers filed in court by special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald in April 2006, there was "concerted action" by "multiple people in the White House" to "discredit, punish or seek revenge against" former Ambassador Joseph Wilson for his July 6, 2003 NY Times op ed piece http://www.nytimes.com/2003/07/06/opinion/06WILS.html?ex=1372824000&en=6c6aeb1ce960 dec0&ei=5007 that ripped the cover off of Bush's false assertions in his 2003 state of the union address that Iraq was trying to buy uranium from Africa for building a nuclear bomb. In retaliation, and to silence other would-be critics, the White House collected information about Wilson and disclosed to reporters that his wife, Valerie Plame, was a covert agent in the CIA counterinsurgency division, putting her life, and the lives of her contacts, at risk in violation of a US law protecting intelligence personnel (The Impeachment of George W. Bush, by Elizabeth Holtzman) ; 12. as the sole person under the Federal Stafford Act with responsibility and authority to issue emergency orders to mobilize the military and any federal resources needed to aid and assist in a disaster (see Failure of Initiative, February 2006 report of the House Select Bipartisan Committee to investigate the Preparations for and the Response to Hurricane Katrina http://katrina.house.gov/ ), Bush failed to take care that the laws be faithfully executed, violated the public trust, and demonstrated reckless and inexcusable indifference to human life before, during and after Hurricane Katrina. Bush knew but did not act until too late, and then he lied about it on national TV. Footage and transcripts from briefings Aug. 25-31 demonstrate that Bush was personally told well in advance of the "unprecedented strength" of the hurricane, the "devastating damage expected," and that "water shortages will make human suffering incredible," according to highly accurate predictions by the National Weather Service. The Associated Press reported that "in dramatic and sometimes agonizing terms, federal disaster officials warned President Bush and his homeland security chief before Hurricane Katrina struck that the storm could breach levees, put lives at risk in New Orleans' Superdome and overwhelm rescuers, according to confidential video footage," http://www.truthout.org/cgibin/artman/exec/view.cgi/47/18079 . Yet Bush failed to muster resources to evacuate residents in advance and failed to assist New Orleans residents after Hurricane Katrina hit. Then three days later Bush told Good Morning America, "I don't think that anybody anticipated a breach of the levees." http://www.washingtonpost.com/wpdyn/content/article/2006/03/02/AR2006030202130.html In years before the storm Bush demonstrated inexcusable criminal negligence and violated the public trust by cutting the budget for hurricane defense, though the high probability of the breaching of the levees and the enormous risk to human life from a major hurricane hitting New Orleans were predicted and well known for years before the hurricane hit http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/09/03/katrina.chertoff/index.html ; 13. failed to take care that the laws be faithfully executed by issuing signing statements that claim the authority to disobey laws based on the president's own interpretation of their constitutionality, and then by taking action in violation of these laws, including the US law making torture a crime, laws regarding Congressional oversight that require providing information to Congress, laws regarding domestic spying, laws regarding civil liberties, and laws strengthening whistle blower protection, thereby expanding the president's own power by stepping into the legislative and judicial functions at the expense of Congress and the courts, upsetting the balance among the three Branches of government, and moving us away from the rule of law toward vastly increased executive power; http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2006/04/30/bush_challenges_hundreds_of_laws/ and http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2006/03/24/bush_shuns_patriot_act_requirement/ ; 14. converted the Justice Department into an arm of the Republican Party by firing meritorious federal prosecutors who refused to base decisions on whom to prosecute on political considerations--to help Republicans win election, an offense James Madison discussed in a speech to the Senate on June 17, 1789, in which Madison said, "The danger then consists merely in this, the president can displace from office a man whose merits require that he should be continued in it. What will be the motives which the president can feel for such abuse of his power, and the restraints that operate to prevent it? In the first place, he will be impeachable by this house, before the senate, for such an act of mal-administration; for I contend that the wanton removal of meritorious officers would subject him to impeachment and removal from his own high trust." http://www.gwu.edu/~ffcp/mep/displaydoc.cfm?docid=fc11904 and http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2007/03/27/113/print/ ; 15. condoned criminal conduct and obstructed justice by commuting the sentence of convicted perjurer Scooter Libby to keep him silent and to demonstrate that Bush and Cheney will not allow high officials in the administration to be held accountable for their criminal acts; 16. obstructed congressional investigations of these and other acts by the administration by defying subpoenas from Senate and House committees seeking documents and testimony under oath by administration officials and former administration officials; and Whereas the constitution requires the president to take the following oath of office: "I do solemnly swear that I will faithfully execute the Office of the President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States;" and Whereas the constitution provides that the president "shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed;" and Whereas the constitution mandates that "the President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors;" and Whereas impeachment was so important to our founding fathers that it is mentioned six times in five different sections of the constitution; and Whereas George Mason, a primary author of the Constitution, said that impeachment was the single most important part of the entire document. "Shall any man be above Justice? Above all shall that man be above it who can commit the most extensive injustice?" http://gunstonhall.org/georgemason/constitution.html July 20, 1787; and Whereas "high Crimes and Misdemeanors" is a term of art that means a serious abuse of power, whether or not it is also a crime, that endangers our constitutional system of government, or an abuse of public trust. (See Constitutional Grounds for Presidential Impeachment: Report of the House Judiciary Committee, 1974, http://www.washingtonpost.com/wpsrv/politics/special/clinton/stories/watergatedoc_3.htm , articles by Elizabeth Holzman who served on the House Judiciary Committee during the impeachment hearings of Richard Nixon in 1974 http://www.thenation.com/doc/20060130/holtzman ; and http://www.thenation.com/docprint.mhtml?i=20070212&s=holtzman , and the book, The Impeachment of George W. Bush, by Elizabeth Holtzman) Whereas each of the above listed acts meets or exceeds that standard; and Whereas impeachment is the only constitutional method to protect Americans from a president intent on abusing power, violating the constitution, violating the laws, and breaching public trust; and Whereas Bush and Cheney threaten further crimes, including launching a war of aggression against Iran, and whereas sufficient time remains in their term of office for them to commit those crimes so allowing either or both of them to remain in office for that remaining time will facilitate these crimes, and whereas pretexts for attacking Iran have been issued, as described by a former CIA Middle East field officer and current Time Magazine columnist http://www.time.com/time/printout/0,8816,1654188,00.html ; and Whereas failing to hold Bush and Cheney accountable not only condones their crimes but facilitates a future president committing similar or greater crimes; and Whereas members of Congress swear an oath to "support and defend the constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic," and no part of this oath permits exception for partisan advantage, the next election, political expediency, whether it is distracting from other issues, or how much time they have left in office; and Whereas failure by Congress to initiate the one remedy--impeachment--provided by our founding fathers to protect the constitution from such serious abuses has put that constitution, the rule of law, civil liberties, our democratic form of government, the separation of powers, the lives of our men and women in uniform, and the lives of countless civilians at severe risk; and Whereas citizen pressure led the Vermont State Senate and 87 cities and towns around the nation to pass impeachment resolutions; and Whereas a poll conducted by http://www.americanresearchgroup.com on July 5, 2007 found that 54% of American adults want the US House of Representatives to begin impeachment proceedings against Vice President Dick Cheney while only 40% oppose, and whereas the poll also found that 45% are in favor of the same thing for President George W. Bush while 46% oppose; and Whereas in view Congress' ongoing complicity with the war, the torture, the lies, the warrantless wiretapping, and the imprisonment without trial, and its failure to protect rights and civil liberties, it is up to the people themselves to defend the constitution and our civil liberties by building larger grassroots movements, including a movement for impeachment; Therefore be it resolved that the National Lawyers Guild calls upon the U.S. House of Representatives to immediately initiate impeachment proceedings, to investigate the charges, and if the investigation supports the charges, to vote to impeach George W. Bush and Richard B. Cheney as provided in the Constitution of the United States of America; and Be it further resolved that the National Lawyers Guild will establish an NLG Impeachment Committee open to all members to coordinate action by the NLG in support of impeachment, to work with national and grassroots impeachment organizations, and to provide legal assistance for those efforts to strengthen the national campaign for impeachment; and Be it further resolved that the NLG Impeachment Committee will help organize and coordinate events at the local, state, and national level to build public participation in the campaign to initiate impeachment investigation, impeachment, and removal of Bush and Cheney from office without further delay; and Be it further resolved that the National Lawyers Guild calls on NLG members to ask their respective member of Congress to support H. Res. 333 to impeach Cheney and to introduce or support other impeachment resolutions; and Be it further resolved that the National Lawyers Guild calls on all other state and national bar associations, state and local government bodies, community organizations, labor unions, and all other citizen associations to adopt similar resolutions and to use all their resources to build the campaign demanding that Congress initiate impeachment investigation, impeach, and remove Bush and Cheney from office without further delay; and Be it further resolved that the National Lawyers Guild will forward a copy of this resolution to the Speaker and the Clerk of the US House of Representatives, to Representative John Conyers, Chair of the House Judiciary Committee, to the various state and federal bar associations, to other peace and justice organizations, and to the news media. Implementation: By the NLG Impeachment Committee established by this resolution, by interested local chapters, and by national officers. Submitted by: James Marc Leas, jolly39 at juno.com The resolution cosponsors are: Audrey Bomse, Marjorie Cohn, Laura Safer Espinoza, John Wheat Gibson, Eileen Hansen, Larry Hildes, Jim Klimaski, Jordan Kushner, Jim Lafferty, James Marc Leas, Kerry McLean, Bill Monning, Dorinda Moreno, Michael Ratner, Susan Scott, Jennifer Van Bergen, Aaron Varhola, Karen Weill From tnharter at aceweb.com Sat Nov 3 09:35:41 2007 From: tnharter at aceweb.com (Tian Harter) Date: Sat, 03 Nov 2007 09:35:41 -0700 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] California Hack du jour - US Sen. Diane Feinstein In-Reply-To: <8C9EC4AD3A093D4-904-736E@WEBMAIL-MB16.sysops.aol.com> References: <8C9EC4AD3A093D4-904-736E@WEBMAIL-MB16.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: <472CA35D.8090901@aceweb.com> I realized some of the implications of the fact that the Greens are a Political Party back in the mid '90s. I was sitting in the back of the room at a Statewide meeting when somebody said "Feinstein said (whatever)" That person was talking about the Feinstein in the Senate. Somebody else said "Feinstein's position is (the opposite)." My friend was talking about the Feinstein who was then already a wheel in Santa Monica politics. Later I found out there is a pianist named Michael Feinstein, also from Santa Monica. I got one of his cassettes, just for the entertainment value of seeing the name of a friend in my music collection. I guess that's a natural consequence of his common name. I just sat there quietly with a giggly feeling. Sometimes when I see an author appearance by Rebecca Solnit I remember Daniel Solnit, the Green activist whose spirituality was a great influence back in the early days of the GPCA. I wonder if they are related. How much does it matter anyhow? Both of them have a green sensibility in their politics for whatever reason. Other times I think of the people I've talked to that got their last name at Ellis Island, part of the "welcome to America" ritual. Some such individuals have much less pride in their names than I was raised with. I'm still convinced there are a lot of lessons about our history in the name game. Tian alexcathy at aol.com wrote: > Dear Green Friends, > > By now you've probably heard that our dear Sen. Diane Feinstein > announced her support for Michael Mukasey as Bush's next attorney > general. Her "explanation" is published as an op-ed in today's Los > Angeles Times. I have posted a blog entry on Green Commons, but there > is so much stuff about Feinstein that it's more than one day's work. > Please leave comments with your favorite examples of Feinstein mendacity > (her record is s-o-o-o bad it has probably hurt my friend, Mike > Feinstein, that he must go through life with the same last name!). > -- Tian http://tian.greens.org Tuesday evening I saw Mayor Macias of Mountain View sign the Mayors Climate Change Protection Agreement in our City Hall. Wednesday's paper said the earthquake that followed was a 5.6. From andid at cagreens.org Sat Nov 3 11:49:26 2007 From: andid at cagreens.org (Andrea Dorey) Date: Sat, 3 Nov 2007 11:49:26 -0700 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Poppy Jasper Film Festival In-Reply-To: <472C90F7.90906@charter.net> References: <472C90F7.90906@charter.net> Message-ID: <13756E61-1C0B-406D-980A-B10D91B8153E@cagreens.org> My fellow BET TV group member, Carl McCann, is one of the people associated with the Morgan Hill public access station who is involved in this annual event. It's worth attending every year as it gains momentum; public access people are progressive proponents of free speech. Worth partnering with. Andrea On Nov 3, 2007, at 8:17 AM, Wes Rolley wrote: > The Poppy Jasper Film Festival will, once again, be held in Morgan > Hill, > CA on November 9, 10,11. This is a festival of short films (30 min.or > less). It is held once a year and proceeds go to student > scholarships. > > Of particular interest this year might be /Grassroots: Contesting > Ohio/. Immediately after the Nov. 2, 2004, election, while most > Americans and mainstream media ignored the election's outcome, a group > of concerned citizens found a way to challenge it. This film > screens in > the 3:00 and 7:00 PM showings on the 9th and in the 3:00 PM > screening on > the 10th. > > More information on this and other short films is at > http://www.poppyjasperfilmfest.org/ > > -- > "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 cagreens.org > http://lists.cagreens.org/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss From JamBoi at Greens.org Sat Nov 3 17:12:04 2007 From: JamBoi at Greens.org (Drew Johnson) Date: Sat, 3 Nov 2007 17:12:04 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Fwd: Tue & Wed: Bay Area Showings of "An Unreasonable Man" (about Ralph Nader) with special guests! Message-ID: <49466.68.183.64.153.1194135124.squirrel@greens.org> ---------------------------- Original Message ---------------------------- Subject: [gpus-del] Tue & Wed: Bay Area Showings of "An Unreasonable Man" (about Ralph Nader) with special guests! From: "Greg Jan" Date: Sat, November 3, 2007 13:51 -------------------------------------------------------------------------- In addition to Laura Nader (who is a UC Berkeley professor, and Ralph's sister), I believe that Peter Camejo and Matt Gonzalez will also be on this coming Tuesday evening's Oakland panel! (There will also be an SF showing Wed. night, but I don't know if there'll be a panel there, or not). Please see below for more details! Greg Jan http://groups.yahoo.com/group/AnnouncementsGPAC/message/453 Oakland Showing of "An Unreasonable Man" with Laura Nader and Panel Dear Greens, Please join us for a free Oakland showing of the film about Ralph Nader, 'An Unreasonable Man," with Laura Nader at the Oakland Museum of California. ************ ********* ********* ITVS Community Cinema, KQED Education Network, The City of Oakland, The Oakland Film Office and the Oakland Museum of California Present: AN UNREASONABLE MAN a film by Henriette Mantel and Steve Skrovan Whoever said "One person can make a difference" must have been talking about Ralph Nader. For over forty years Nader has taken on big business and corporate America all in the name of the people. But lately this consumer advocate's halo has been a bit tarnished. Is he a hero? A villain? A principled man? Or an egomaniac? You decide. Tuesday, November 6 6:30 PM Oakland Museum of California, James Moore Theatre 1000 Oak at 10th Street. One block from Lake Merritt BART Panel discussion featuring Laura Nader, Professor of Anthropology at The University of California Berkeley, and also appears in the film. FREE and open to the public For more info. about ITVS, please see: www.itvs.org For the nationwide schedule of showings of "An Unreasonable Man", please see: http://www.pbs.org/independentlens/unreasonableman/getinvolved.html The film will also show in San Francisco November 7, 6:00 PM San Francisco Public Library, Koret Auditorium 100 Larkin St. ************ ********* ********* __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com _______________________________________________ gpus-del mailing list gpus-del at lists.cagreens.org http://lists.cagreens.org/mailman/listinfo/gpus-del http://cagreens.org/delegates/ Have You Hugged Your Delegate Today? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From WB4D23 at aol.com Sat Nov 3 19:04:52 2007 From: WB4D23 at aol.com (WB4D23 at aol.com) Date: Sat, 3 Nov 2007 22:04:52 EDT Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Planning for Jared Ball SF Bay Appearances December 12-14th Message-ID: At Thursday's GPSCC general meeting, we agreed to the concept of hosting an event in Santa Clara County as part of Green Party presidential candidate Jared Ball's visiting the area December 12-14th. On Friday, I emailed and spoke by telephone with Wes Rolley and he agreed to be the local contact person with the campaign. The first information we are going to need are clearly identified dates and times for the candidate's itinerary. Once we have that, we can figure out what and where events can be planned. Wes indicated that part of the entourage will be a hip hop performer. So... In the meantime... Who wants to volunteer to be on the planning committee for this? We will need intense workers for publicity once the schedule is arranged. We might also use the event for some outreach to other organizations and for some phone banking to GPSCC registered voters. Warner ************************************** See what's new at http://www.aol.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JamBoi at Greens.org Sun Nov 4 08:46:19 2007 From: JamBoi at Greens.org (Drew Johnson) Date: Sun, 4 Nov 2007 08:46:19 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Fwd: Jared Ball Message-ID: <2754.38.99.84.36.1194194779.squirrel@greens.org> {Forwarding this from Wes...} ---------------------------- Original Message ---------------------------- Subject: Jared Ball From: "Wes Rolley" Date: Tue, October 23, 2007 07:00 -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Dr. Ball will be in the Bay Area on December 14-16 as part of his campaign for GP Presidential Nomination. I think that it would be great to have an event in Silicon Valley. I have been told by Silicon Valley Debug that they would be interested in an article, so have started some outreach for younger generation Greens. In fact, it is the idea that we could use the connection between Dr. Ball (University Asst. Professor - Morgan State Univ.) and the hip-hop culture to our advantage in trying to increase GP membership. I am attaching two sets of "requirement" for Outreach / Fund Raising events as supplied by Ball's Co-Campaign Manager. Remember, the intent is to reach out to some who are currently non-Greens using, among other things, music. They refer to "People of Culture". The documents that I am forwarded are the requirements for doing things their way... i.e. with the music. They are a bit more than the normal requirements. One defined what they need for a larger public space (note comments about permits) and the other for an in-the-home event. {SNIP} My general leanings {for Presidential nominee} are toward Kent Mesplay. However, I believe that the message Dr. Ball has regarding inclusive politics, race and responsibility is important to the continued vitality of the party and I strongly support the idea of finding a way to let him get his message out here in the valley. -- "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 -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Requirements for JB4P HOME Campaign Fundraising Outreach Event.doc Type: application/msword Size: 29696 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Requirements for JB4P COMMUNITY Campaign Fundraising Outreach Event.doc Type: application/msword Size: 28672 bytes Desc: not available URL: From JamBoi at Greens.org Sun Nov 4 09:14:24 2007 From: JamBoi at Greens.org (Drew Johnson) Date: Sun, 4 Nov 2007 09:14:24 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Planning for Jared Ball SF Bay Appearances December 14th-16th In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <3058.38.99.84.36.1194196464.squirrel@greens.org> Self correction: According to Wes' note the dates are Dec. 14th-16th. My mistake. Green is Core! Drew On Sat, November 3, 2007 18:04, WB4D23 at aol.com wrote: > At Thursday's GPSCC general meeting, we agreed to the concept of hosting > an > event in Santa Clara County as part of Green Party presidential candidate > Jared Ball's visiting the area December {14th-16th}. On Friday, I emailed > and spoke > by telephone with Wes Rolley and he agreed to be the local contact person > with the campaign. > The first information we are going to need are clearly identified dates > and > times for > the candidate's itinerary. Once we have that, we can figure out what and > where events can be planned. Wes indicated that part of the entourage > will be > a hip hop performer. > > So... In the meantime... Who wants to volunteer to be on the planning > committee for this? We will need intense workers for publicity once the > schedule > is arranged. We might also use the event for some outreach to other > organizations and for some phone banking to GPSCC registered voters. > Warner > > > > ************************************** See what's new at > http://www.aol.com > _______________________________________________ > sosfbay-discuss mailing list > sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org > http://lists.cagreens.org/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss > From MKmusic03 at aol.com Sun Nov 4 01:07:21 2007 From: MKmusic03 at aol.com (MKmusic03 at aol.com) Date: Sun, 4 Nov 2007 03:07:21 EST Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Fwd: Special Impeachment Alert Message-ID: Hi All, Good news!!! On Tuesday Nov. 6 Dennis Kucinich will introduce on the floor of the House of Representatives his Bill to Impeach Dick Cheney. Kucinich is calling for Town Hall meetings on Monday afternoon Nov. 5 in support of his action in the House. Silicon Valley Impeachment Coalition is having a Town Hall meeting at 3:30pm on Monday at the San Jose Peace Center. Below is the Action Alert with information about our Town Hall meeting. Please join us and please send out this information to everyone you know. Please let me know if you will be coming to the Town Hall. Also for those who live in Palo Alto, Mountain View and Los Altos area Silicon Valley Impeachment Coalition is planning on having aTown Hall meeting in Mountain View as well, if we can find a location. Thanks, Merriam mkmusic03 at aol.com 408-482-6032 (cell) ************************************** See what's new at http://www.aol.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- An embedded message was scrubbed... From: San Jose Peace Center Subject: Special Impeachment Alert Date: Sat, 3 Nov 2007 16:16:30 -0800 (PST) Size: 7458 URL: From JamBoi at Greens.org Sun Nov 4 16:47:49 2007 From: JamBoi at Greens.org (Drew Johnson) Date: Sun, 4 Nov 2007 16:47:49 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Cheney Impeach Monday 3:30 Townhall's, call-in by Kucinich Message-ID: <1170.38.99.84.36.1194223669.squirrel@greens.org> Monday, Nov. 5 at 3:30pm gather to call your congress people and to hear Dennis Kucinich via phone conference (Call-in info below) San Jos? Peace Center; 48 S. 7th St. (Near Santa Clara Street, on the 22/522 bus line ) San Jos? (408)297-2299 OR Mountain View 29 Horizon Ave. That's parallel to Moffett, from Castro, just cross the tracks and Central Expressway; on foot, turn right on the walkway past the Adobe House. Keep going on Willowgate until you reach Horizon. #229 is on the right about 2/3 the way to Central Ave (yes another Central). By car, drive on Moffett to Central Ave (not Expressway), turn right if coming from Castro. Horizon is the second street on the right. If you get lost, call 650-215-3772. ____ Dennis Kucinich will be on the phone, Monday, November 5 4:30 PT. If you want to listen, call (641) 715-3300 The access number is: 324341# This is a one-way call with no restriction on the number who are on the line to listen. Please get everybody together and put it on a speaker phone! ____ http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=104&STORY=/www/story/11-04-2007/0004697142&EDATE= Kucinich Schedules Nationwide Call-in Monday to Address Cheney Impeachment Measure WASHINGTON, Nov. 4 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- Thousands of supporters, political activists, and other interested citizens are expected to dial in Monday (tomorrow) evening to a nationwide conference call to hear Democratic Presidential candidate Dennis Kucinich explain why and how he plans to force an up-or-down vote in the U.S. House of Representatives on the impeachment resolution against Vice President Richard B. Cheney. Last week, the Ohio Congressman announced that he will be offering a "privileged resolution" on Tuesday, November 6, that will, within two days, require House members to vote on what to do with the impeachment measure, which currently has 22 sponsors. Dozens of supportive organizations have advised the Kucinich campaign that they will be lobbying Congressional representatives heavily over the next few days to support the Ohio Congressman impeachment resolution (House Resolution 333). The conference call is expected to begin at about 7:30 p.m. ET on Monday. It will be open to anyone, including representatives of the news media. Additional details will be posted on the campaign website, http://www.dennis4president.com. From kaisha_marie at comcast.net Sun Nov 4 18:04:26 2007 From: kaisha_marie at comcast.net (Kaisha Torres) Date: Sun, 4 Nov 2007 18:04:26 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] [SC-SM] SF Green Festival Nov 9-11 In-Reply-To: <38843.38.99.84.36.1193958635.squirrel@greens.org> Message-ID: I was going to send out an email and see if anyone would be interested in going on Saturday. If anyone would be, let me know. My environmental studies professor says we can get in free if we volunteer and I am trying to find out who to contact about that. Kaisha -----Original Message----- From: sosfbay-discuss-bounces at cagreens.org [mailto:sosfbay-discuss-bounces at cagreens.org]On Behalf Of Drew Johnson Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2007 4:11 PM To: Santa Clara - San Mateo Communications Cc: sosfbay discussion group Subject: Re: [Sosfbay-discuss] [SC-SM] SF Green Festival Nov 9-11 One reason we'd like to get folks going is there's talk in GP of Santa Clara about partnering with them and getting them to do some kind of mini one next year (or later) down our way. We'd love to get San Mateo folks involved too. This is not the only possiblity, but I'm talking to Merriam Kathaleen about going together on Sunday the 11th. Anybody else want to join in? Green is Core! Drew On Thu, November 1, 2007 10:03, Andrea Dorey wrote: > Drew, > I plan to try to show up depending on the condition of my knee. > Andrea > > On Oct 31, 2007, at 10:39 PM, Drew Johnson wrote: > >> * Green Festival, Nov. 9-11, 10 a.m.-8 p.m. >> San Francisco Concourse Exhibition Center, 635 8th St, at Brannan >> Street >> (between 7th and 8th streets) >> Enjoy more than 200 visionary speakers and 400 green businesses in >> the Bay >> Area, great how-to workshops, green films, yoga and movement classes, >> green-career sessions, organic beer and wine, delicious organic >> cuisine >> and live music. >> + Join SFGP tabling Saturday & Sunday, Nov 10-11. Contact Sue >> Vaughan at >> 415-668-3119, 415-601-9297, info at sfgreenparty.org -- or just show up. >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> SC-SM mailing list >> SC-SM at lists.sonic.net >> http://lists.sonic.net/mailman/listinfo/sc-sm >> > > _______________________________________________ > SC-SM mailing list > SC-SM at lists.sonic.net > http://lists.sonic.net/mailman/listinfo/sc-sm > _______________________________________________ sosfbay-discuss mailing list sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org http://lists.cagreens.org/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss From kaisha_marie at comcast.net Sun Nov 4 18:04:27 2007 From: kaisha_marie at comcast.net (Kaisha Torres) Date: Sun, 4 Nov 2007 18:04:27 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] FW: LIONS FOR LAMBS In-Reply-To: <20071101200636.8937.qmail@truffula.sj.ca.us> Message-ID: I cannot imagine paying money to view another Hollywood movie that "normalizes" a horrific behavior of our government. I understand art imitates life but when you take a horrible act and bring it to a screen for everyone to ingest with a neat and tidy ending, doesn't it stop being horrific and then become art? Kaisha -----Original Message----- From: sosfbay-discuss-bounces at cagreens.org [mailto:sosfbay-discuss-bounces at cagreens.org]On Behalf Of cls at truffula.sj.ca.us Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2007 1:07 PM To: sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org Subject: Re: [Sosfbay-discuss] FW: LIONS FOR LAMBS I saw Rendition yesterday. If you thought Syriana disappeared out of the theaters fast, watch Rendition vanish. The torture scenes are relatively mild. Straightforward message, the US is kidnapping and torturing people on really flimsy leads, even though we know it doesn't produce reliable intelligence. This is the movie the Jepperson protesters should be leafletting at, if they can figure out where there will be audiences of more than a dozen people. At the weekday matinee at the Berryessa 10-screen, there were three people including me. I wonder if they still run the projector if they don't sell any seats. Cameron _______________________________________________ sosfbay-discuss mailing list sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org http://lists.cagreens.org/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss From cls at truffula.sj.ca.us Sun Nov 4 18:56:22 2007 From: cls at truffula.sj.ca.us (cls at truffula.sj.ca.us) Date: 5 Nov 2007 02:56:22 -0000 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] phone-action monday 3:30 to impeach Cheney Message-ID: <20071105025622.19460.qmail@truffula.sj.ca.us> From: MKmusic03 at aol.com Date: Sun, 4 Nov 2007 03:09:02 EST To: svic[]lists.riseup.net Subject: [SVIC] Fwd: Special Impeachment Alert Reply-To: svic at lists.riseup.net,MKmusic03 at aol.com Hi All, Good news!!! On Tuesday Nov. 6 Dennis Kucinich will introduce on the floor of the House of Representatives his Bill to Impeach Dick Cheney. Kucinich is calling for Town Hall meetings on Monday afternoon Nov. 5 in support of his action in the House. Silicon Valley Impeachment Coalition is having a Town Hall meeting at 3:30pm on Monday at the San Jose Peace Center. Below is the Action Alert with information about our Town Hall meeting. Please join us and please send out this information to everyone you know. Please let me know if you will be coming to the Town Hall.=A0 Also for those who live in Palo Alto, Mountain View and Los Altos area Silicon Valley Impeachment Coalition is planning on having aTown Hall meeting in Mountain View as well, if we can find a location. Thanks, Merriam mkmusic03 at aol.com 408-482-6032 (cell) From wrolley at charter.net Sun Nov 4 20:25:31 2007 From: wrolley at charter.net (Wes Rolley) Date: Sun, 04 Nov 2007 20:25:31 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Dr. Jared Ball Message-ID: <472E9B3B.8090904@charter.net> After figuring out the coordination, and discovering the Craig Peterson of Contra Costa County is coordinating contacts, we now have a definite day and some information about what types of venues / equipment we need. Dr. Ball will be available in South County on Saturday, Dec. 15. We will be looking for three possible types of events if we can pull it off. - a public event, probably in the afternoon. Something that we can announce and bring in non-Greens. If we can pull this off, it might be a great way to attract new, younger members to the effort. Remember, one of his campaign coordinators is a hip-hop artist. - possibly a dinner with people who might be key to any Green presidential campaign in the area. - later, a house party type event that would include fund raising as well as getting to know more about Dr. Ball. In particular, if we have a major public event we need to pin that down quickly to get it out to KPFA and the alternative media, etc. Most have a 4 week lead time on public service announcements, etc. -- "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 aceweb.com Sun Nov 4 21:29:34 2007 From: tnharter at aceweb.com (Tian Harter) Date: Sun, 04 Nov 2007 21:29:34 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] [SC-SM] SF Green Festival Nov 9-11 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <472EAA3E.10907@aceweb.com> To volunteer: 1) Go to: http://www.greenfestivals.org 2) Click on the volunteer button. That took me to: http://www.greenfestivals.org/content/view/602/184/ (I don't know if you would get the same url or not.) 3) If you haven't volunteered for them before click on the "register now" button. 4) Fill out the form. When you submit it they send you an email with the url where the page to confirm is. After you do that you can pick through the available jobs. The process is fairly self explanitory. I got a shift from 2 to 6:30 PM on Saturday. I'd love to hitch a ride up there. I'll be glad to help with gas or parking or whatever. Tian Kaisha Torres wrote: > I was going to send out an email and see if anyone would be interested in > going on Saturday. If anyone would be, let me know. > > My environmental studies professor says we can get in free if we volunteer > and I am trying to find out who to contact about that. > > Kaisha > > -----Original Message----- > From: sosfbay-discuss-bounces at cagreens.org > [mailto:sosfbay-discuss-bounces at cagreens.org]On Behalf Of Drew Johnson > Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2007 4:11 PM > To: Santa Clara - San Mateo Communications > Cc: sosfbay discussion group > Subject: Re: [Sosfbay-discuss] [SC-SM] SF Green Festival Nov 9-11 > > > One reason we'd like to get folks going is there's talk in GP of Santa > Clara about partnering with them and getting them to do some kind of mini > one next year (or later) down our way. We'd love to get San Mateo folks > involved too. > > This is not the only possiblity, but I'm talking to Merriam Kathaleen > about going together on Sunday the 11th. Anybody else want to join in? > > > Green is Core! > > Drew > > > On Thu, November 1, 2007 10:03, Andrea Dorey wrote: >> Drew, >> I plan to try to show up depending on the condition of my knee. >> Andrea >> >> On Oct 31, 2007, at 10:39 PM, Drew Johnson wrote: >> >>> * Green Festival, Nov. 9-11, 10 a.m.-8 p.m. >>> San Francisco Concourse Exhibition Center, 635 8th St, at Brannan >>> Street >>> (between 7th and 8th streets) >>> Enjoy more than 200 visionary speakers and 400 green businesses in >>> the Bay >>> Area, great how-to workshops, green films, yoga and movement classes, >>> green-career sessions, organic beer and wine, delicious organic >>> cuisine >>> and live music. >>> + Join SFGP tabling Saturday & Sunday, Nov 10-11. Contact Sue >>> Vaughan at >>> 415-668-3119, 415-601-9297, info at sfgreenparty.org -- or just show up. >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> SC-SM mailing list >>> SC-SM at lists.sonic.net >>> http://lists.sonic.net/mailman/listinfo/sc-sm >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> SC-SM mailing list >> SC-SM at lists.sonic.net >> http://lists.sonic.net/mailman/listinfo/sc-sm >> > > > _______________________________________________ > sosfbay-discuss mailing list > sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org > http://lists.cagreens.org/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss > > > _______________________________________________ > sosfbay-discuss mailing list > sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org > http://lists.cagreens.org/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss > -- Tian http://tian.greens.org Tuesday evening I saw Mayor Macias of Mountain View sign the Mayors Climate Change Protection Agreement in our City Hall. Wednesday's paper said the earthquake that followed was a 5.6. From kaisha_marie at comcast.net Mon Nov 5 07:03:29 2007 From: kaisha_marie at comcast.net (Kaisha Torres) Date: Mon, 5 Nov 2007 07:03:29 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] [SC-SM] SF Green Festival Nov 9-11 In-Reply-To: <472EAA3E.10907@aceweb.com> Message-ID: I got a shift from 6-9 in the main room but I want to get down there much earlier than that. I would be willing to bring others with us. We have room for three more. Kaisha -----Original Message----- From: Tian Harter [mailto:tnharter at aceweb.com] Sent: Sunday, November 04, 2007 9:30 PM To: sosfbay discussion group Cc: kaisha_marie at comcast.net Subject: Re: [Sosfbay-discuss] [SC-SM] SF Green Festival Nov 9-11 To volunteer: 1) Go to: http://www.greenfestivals.org 2) Click on the volunteer button. That took me to: http://www.greenfestivals.org/content/view/602/184/ (I don't know if you would get the same url or not.) 3) If you haven't volunteered for them before click on the "register now" button. 4) Fill out the form. When you submit it they send you an email with the url where the page to confirm is. After you do that you can pick through the available jobs. The process is fairly self explanitory. I got a shift from 2 to 6:30 PM on Saturday. I'd love to hitch a ride up there. I'll be glad to help with gas or parking or whatever. Tian Kaisha Torres wrote: > I was going to send out an email and see if anyone would be interested in > going on Saturday. If anyone would be, let me know. > > My environmental studies professor says we can get in free if we volunteer > and I am trying to find out who to contact about that. > > Kaisha > > -----Original Message----- > From: sosfbay-discuss-bounces at cagreens.org > [mailto:sosfbay-discuss-bounces at cagreens.org]On Behalf Of Drew Johnson > Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2007 4:11 PM > To: Santa Clara - San Mateo Communications > Cc: sosfbay discussion group > Subject: Re: [Sosfbay-discuss] [SC-SM] SF Green Festival Nov 9-11 > > > One reason we'd like to get folks going is there's talk in GP of Santa > Clara about partnering with them and getting them to do some kind of mini > one next year (or later) down our way. We'd love to get San Mateo folks > involved too. > > This is not the only possiblity, but I'm talking to Merriam Kathaleen > about going together on Sunday the 11th. Anybody else want to join in? > > > Green is Core! > > Drew > > > On Thu, November 1, 2007 10:03, Andrea Dorey wrote: >> Drew, >> I plan to try to show up depending on the condition of my knee. >> Andrea >> >> On Oct 31, 2007, at 10:39 PM, Drew Johnson wrote: >> >>> * Green Festival, Nov. 9-11, 10 a.m.-8 p.m. >>> San Francisco Concourse Exhibition Center, 635 8th St, at Brannan >>> Street >>> (between 7th and 8th streets) >>> Enjoy more than 200 visionary speakers and 400 green businesses in >>> the Bay >>> Area, great how-to workshops, green films, yoga and movement classes, >>> green-career sessions, organic beer and wine, delicious organic >>> cuisine >>> and live music. >>> + Join SFGP tabling Saturday & Sunday, Nov 10-11. Contact Sue >>> Vaughan at >>> 415-668-3119, 415-601-9297, info at sfgreenparty.org -- or just show up. >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> SC-SM mailing list >>> SC-SM at lists.sonic.net >>> http://lists.sonic.net/mailman/listinfo/sc-sm >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> SC-SM mailing list >> SC-SM at lists.sonic.net >> http://lists.sonic.net/mailman/listinfo/sc-sm >> > > > _______________________________________________ > sosfbay-discuss mailing list > sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org > http://lists.cagreens.org/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss > > > _______________________________________________ > sosfbay-discuss mailing list > sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org > http://lists.cagreens.org/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss > -- Tian http://tian.greens.org Tuesday evening I saw Mayor Macias of Mountain View sign the Mayors Climate Change Protection Agreement in our City Hall. Wednesday's paper said the earthquake that followed was a 5.6. From cls at truffula.sj.ca.us Mon Nov 5 09:56:49 2007 From: cls at truffula.sj.ca.us (cls at truffula.sj.ca.us) Date: 5 Nov 2007 17:56:49 -0000 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] [SC-SM] SF Green Festival Nov 9-11 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20071105175649.22060.qmail@truffula.sj.ca.us> >From: "Kaisha Torres" >To: "Tian Harter" , > "sosfbay discussion group" >Date: Mon, 5 Nov 2007 07:03:29 -0800 >Reply-To: kaisha_marie at comcast.net >I got a shift from 6-9 in the main room but I want to get down there much >earlier than that. I would be willing to bring others with us. We have room >for three more. I'm guessing you're talking about Saturday. I see shifts available 4-6:30 box office, 4-8:30 box office lobby, 4:30-9 Global Exchange Store 4-8:30 Bike Valet 2-6:30 main stage 5-9:30 green team 4:30-9 food court 6-8:30 gift center Where did you find "6-9 in the main room?" I got the same shift as Tian. Cameron >Kaisha >-----Original Message----- >From: Tian Harter [mailto:tnharter at aceweb.com] >Sent: Sunday, November 04, 2007 9:30 PM >To: sosfbay discussion group >Cc: kaisha_marie at comcast.net >Subject: Re: [Sosfbay-discuss] [SC-SM] SF Green Festival Nov 9-11 >To volunteer: >1) Go to: >http://www.greenfestivals.org >2) Click on the volunteer button. That took me to: >http://www.greenfestivals.org/content/view/602/184/ >(I don't know if you would get the same url or not.) >3) If you haven't volunteered for them before click on the "register >now" button. >4) Fill out the form. When you submit it they send you an email with the >url where the page to confirm is. After you do that you can pick through >the available jobs. The process is fairly self explanitory. >I got a shift from 2 to 6:30 PM on Saturday. I'd love to hitch a ride up >there. I'll be glad to help with gas or parking or whatever. >Tian >Kaisha Torres wrote: >> I was going to send out an email and see if anyone would be interested in >> going on Saturday. If anyone would be, let me know. >> >> My environmental studies professor says we can get in free if we volunteer >> and I am trying to find out who to contact about that. >> >> Kaisha >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: sosfbay-discuss-bounces at cagreens.org >> [mailto:sosfbay-discuss-bounces at cagreens.org]On Behalf Of Drew Johnson >> Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2007 4:11 PM >> To: Santa Clara - San Mateo Communications >> Cc: sosfbay discussion group >> Subject: Re: [Sosfbay-discuss] [SC-SM] SF Green Festival Nov 9-11 >> >> >> One reason we'd like to get folks going is there's talk in GP of Santa >> Clara about partnering with them and getting them to do some kind of mini >> one next year (or later) down our way. We'd love to get San Mateo folks >> involved too. >> >> This is not the only possiblity, but I'm talking to Merriam Kathaleen >> about going together on Sunday the 11th. Anybody else want to join in? >> >> >> Green is Core! >> >> Drew >> >> >> On Thu, November 1, 2007 10:03, Andrea Dorey wrote: >>> Drew, >>> I plan to try to show up depending on the condition of my knee. >>> Andrea >>> >>> On Oct 31, 2007, at 10:39 PM, Drew Johnson wrote: >>> >>>> * Green Festival, Nov. 9-11, 10 a.m.-8 p.m. >>>> San Francisco Concourse Exhibition Center, 635 8th St, at Brannan >>>> Street >>>> (between 7th and 8th streets) >>>> Enjoy more than 200 visionary speakers and 400 green businesses in >>>> the Bay >>>> Area, great how-to workshops, green films, yoga and movement classes, >>>> green-career sessions, organic beer and wine, delicious organic >>>> cuisine >>>> and live music. >>>> + Join SFGP tabling Saturday & Sunday, Nov 10-11. Contact Sue >>>> Vaughan at >>>> 415-668-3119, 415-601-9297, info at sfgreenparty.org -- or just show up. >>>> From wrolley at charter.net Mon Nov 5 12:55:39 2007 From: wrolley at charter.net (Wes Rolley) Date: Mon, 05 Nov 2007 12:55:39 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] EcoArt Message-ID: <472F834B.1010806@charter.net> I received this today from the Bay Area Ceramic Art Forum. Interesting idea... I don't know anything about the instructor. __ INTERESTED IN ART??? INTERESTED IN THE ENVIRONMENT???? JOIN US IN 2008 LANEY COLLEGE ECOART MATTERS CLASS *141 L1706 TUESDAYS 9 to 3 LEARN AND MAKE ART ABOUT URGENT ENVIRONMENTAL & COMMUNITY ISSUES COMBINING CREATIVE AESTHETICS WITH SCIENCE THIS UNIQUE COURSE COVERS A BRIEF HISTORY OF ENVIRONMENTAL AND COMMUNITYART, WITH DISTINGUISHED GUEST ARTIST AND SCIENCE LECTURERS. STUDENTS CREATE ART WORKS, INSTALLATIONS OR VISUAL, ORAL PRESENTATIONS BASED ON AN IMPORTANT "MATTER" OF THEIR CHOOSING. THIS WORK IS THEN DISPLAYED IN AN EXHIBIT ON CAMPUS OR IN THE COMMUNITY. PAST SHOWS HAVE BEEN AT THE OAKLAND MUSEUM, JUNE STEINGART GALLERY, OAKLAND ZOO EDUCATIONAL CENTER,THE NEW ART CENTERGALLERY, THE BERKELEY CITY ADDISON STREET WINDOWSAND THE BERKELEY GREENGALLERY. IN VIEW OF DISTURBING REPORTS ON GLOBAL WARMING, EMPHASIS WILL BE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES, WITH SCIENCE CLASSES AT THEOAKLAND MUSEUM SCIENCE CENTER AND SEVERAL FIELD TRIPS FOR HANDS ON EXPERIENCE. STUDENTS INTERESTED IN TEACHING OR DOING COMMUNITY OUTREACH, CAN GET EXPERIENCE AND CREDIT BY VOLUNTEERING IN LOCAL ORGANIZATIONS LIKE THE ELLA BAKER CENTER, CENTER FOR A BETTER ENVIRONMENT,CREATIVE GROWTH, LOCAL SCHOOLS, SENIOR AND COMMUNITY CENTERS AND MUSEUMS. FINAL PROJECTS WILL CONSIST OF EXAMPLES, DEMONSTRATIONS, PHOTOGRAPHS, AND/OR ORAL PRESENTATIONS. FOR MORE INFORMATION, PLEASE CONTACT THE INSTRUCTOR: Andr?e Thompson 510 841 0588 andreest at yahoo.com -- "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 aceweb.com Thu Nov 1 11:59:02 2007 From: tnharter at aceweb.com (Tian Harter) Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2007 11:59:02 -0700 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Mountain View Steps It Up! Message-ID: <472A21F6.2040105@aceweb.com> Tuesday evening Mountain View's City Council began their meeting with a signing ceremony. They signed onto the Mayor's Climate Protection Agreement. You can see my pictures from the event by visiting: http://tian.greens.org/MountainView/ClimateChange/MayorsAgreement/index.html On the same theme, we are having a Step It Up event on City Hall Plaza this coming Saturday. The press advisory for that follows. Come on down! Tian Rally to Honor Mountain View City Council on Signing the Mayor?s Climate Protection Agreement and to Call for National Action As Part of Step It Up?s Second Historic Event To Support A Plan to Curb Global Warming When: Saturday, November 3, 2007, 11:00 am - 1:00 pm Where: Mountain View?s Civic Center Plaza, 500 Castro Street Who: Speakers include * Mountain View Mayor Laura Macias * Mountain View Council Members Ronit Bryant and Margaret Abe-Koga * Julio Magalhaes and Gary Bailey, Sierra Club * Gail Slocum, PG&E * Carole McClelland, Green Career Central * Sven Thesen, Calcars * Aileen La Bouff, Ecobroker/Realtor * Bruce Karney, SolarCity * Gary Bailey, Cool Cities/Sierra Club Mountain View celebrates the City joining nearly 700 U.S. Mayors in promising to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. This event is one of the nationwide ?Step It Up? rallies that will build on the more than 1,400 Step It Up events on April 14 in 50 states, the largest global warming event in U.S. history. The events across the country?held one year before the 2008 election? will show the contrast between the intense concern of ordinary Americans and the leadership vacuum in Washington. Participants in November 3, 2007 events all across the country will call for real leadership on global warming, including the ?1 Sky? priorities: (1) no new coal plants, (2) 80% reduction in carbon emissions by 2050, and (3) 5 million new green jobs. For more information please visit the Step It Up campaign website: www.stepitup2007.org. Speakers at the Mountain View event will address what the city is doing as well as how individuals can contribute to solutions. Activities and displays will include energy efficient cars; a crafts table for kids with recycled art materials; an opportunity to send a message to national leaders; and Palo Alto's Energy Bicycle, where participants can see how hard they have to pedal to generate enough electricity to light an incandescent bulb compared to a compact fluorescent (CFL) bulb. Attendees are asked to walk, bicycle, or use public transportation to the event. Free Parking is also available in nearby lots. -- Tian http://tian.greens.org Last evening I saw Mayor Macias of Mountain View sign the Mayors Climate Change Protection Agreement in our City Hall. Today's paper said the earthquake that followed was a 5.6. From JamBoi at Greens.org Tue Nov 6 00:39:41 2007 From: JamBoi at Greens.org (Drew Johnson) Date: Tue, 6 Nov 2007 00:39:41 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Olbermann: The presidency is now a criminal conspiracy Message-ID: <1800.38.99.84.36.1194338381.squirrel@greens.org> http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21644133/ MSNBC video Special Comment: On waterboarding and torture Nov. 5: Keith Olbermann comments on Pres. Bush and Michael Mukasey?s response to allegations of waterboarding in the Bush administration. Why was an Acting Assistant Attorney General forced out ? just because he had the guts to do what Pres. Bush couldn't? TRANSCRIPT: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21644133/ The presidency is now a criminal conspiracy Olbermann: Bush may not observe the rules, but the country abides by them It is a fact startling in its cynical simplicity and it requires cynical and simple words to be properly expressed: The presidency of George W. Bush has now devolved into a criminal conspiracy to cover the ass of George W. Bush. All the petulancy, all the childish threats, all the blank-stare stupidity; all the invocations of World War III, all the sophistic questions about which terrorist attacks we wanted him not to stop, all the phony secrets; all the claims of executive privilege, all the stumbling tap-dancing of his nominees, all the verbal flatulence of his apologists... All of it is now, after one revelation last week, transparently clear for what it is: the pathetic and desperate manipulation of the government, the refocusing of our entire nation, toward keeping this mock president and this unstable vice president and this departed wildly self-overrating attorney general, and the others, from potential prosecution for having approved or ordered the illegal torture of prisoners being held in the name of this country. "Waterboarding is torture," Daniel Levin was to write. Daniel Levin was no theorist and no protester. He was no troublemaking politician. He was no table-pounding commentator. Daniel Levin was an astonishingly patriotic American and a brave man. Brave not just with words or with stances, even in a dark time when that kind of bravery can usually be scared or bought off. Charged, as you heard in the story from ABC News last Friday, with assessing the relative legality of the various nightmares in the Pandora's box that is the Orwell-worthy euphemism "Enhanced Interrogation," Mr. Levin decided that the simplest, and the most honest, way to evaluate them ... was to have them enacted upon himself. Daniel Levin took himself to a military base and let himself be waterboarded. Mr. Bush, ever done anything that personally courageous? Perhaps when you've gone to Walter Reed and teared up over the maimed servicemen? And then gone back to the White House and determined that there would be more maimed servicemen? Has it been that kind of personal courage, Mr. Bush, when you've spoken of American victims and the triumph of freedom and the sacrifice of your own popularity for the sake of our safety? And then permitted others to fire or discredit or destroy anybody who disagreed with you, whether they were your own generals, or Max Cleland, or Joe Wilson and Valerie Plame, or Daniel Levin? Daniel Levin should have a statue in his honor in Washington right now. Instead, he was forced out as acting assistant attorney general nearly three years ago because he had the guts to do what George Bush couldn't do in a million years: actually put himself at risk for the sake of his country, for the sake of what is right. And they waterboarded him. And he wrote that even though he knew those doing it meant him no harm, and he knew they would rescue him at the instant of the slightest distress, and he knew he would not die ? still, with all that reassurance, he could not stop the terror screaming from inside of him, could not quell the horror, could not convince that which is at the core of each of us, the entity who exists behind all the embellishments we strap to ourselves, like purpose and name and family and love, he could not convince his being that he wasn't drowning. Waterboarding, he said, is torture. Legally, it is torture! Practically, it is torture! Ethically, it is torture! And he wrote it down. Wrote it down somewhere, where it could be contrasted with the words of this country's 43rd president: "The United States of America ... does not torture." Made you into a liar, Mr. Bush. Made you into, if anybody had the guts to pursue it, a criminal, Mr. Bush. Waterboarding had already been used on Khalid Sheik Mohammed and a couple of other men none of us really care about except for the one detail you'd forgotten ? that there are rules. And even if we just make up these rules, this country observes them anyway, because we're Americans and we're better than that. We're better than you. And the man your Justice Department selected to decide whether or not waterboarding was torture had decided, and not in some phony academic fashion, nor while wearing the Walter Mitty poseur attire of flight suit and helmet. He had put his money, Mr. Bush, where your mouth was. So, Levin was fired. Because if it ever got out what he'd concluded, and the lengths to which he went to validate that conclusion, anybody who had sanctioned waterboarding and who-knows-what-else on anybody, you yourself, you would have been screwed. And screwed you are. It can't be coincidence that the story of Daniel Levin should emerge from the black hole of this secret society of a presidency just at the conclusion of the unhappy saga of the newest attorney general nominee. Another patriot somewhere listened as Judge Mukasey mumbled like he'd never heard of waterboarding and refused to answer in words that which Daniel Levin answered on a waterboard somewhere in Maryland or Virginia three years ago. And this someone also heard George Bush say, "The United States of America does not torture," and realized either he was lying or this wasn't the United States of America anymore, and either way, he needed to do something about it. Not in the way Levin needed to do something about it, but in a brave way nonetheless. We have U.S. senators who need to do something about it, too. Chairman Leahy of the Judiciary Committee has seen this for what it is and said "enough." Sen. Schumer has seen it, reportedly, as some kind of puzzle piece in the New York political patronage system, and he has failed. What Sen. Feinstein has seen, to justify joining Schumer in rubber-stamping Mukasey, I cannot guess. It is obvious that both those senators should look to the meaning of the story of Daniel Levin and recant their support for Mukasey's confirmation. And they should look into their own committee's history and recall that in 1973, their predecessors were able to wring even from Richard Nixon a guarantee of a special prosecutor (ultimately a special prosecutor of Richard Nixon!), in exchange for their approval of his new attorney general, Elliott Richardson. If they could get that out of Nixon, before you confirm the president's latest human echo on Tuesday, you had better be able to get a "yes" or a "no" out of Michael Mukasey. Ideally you should lock this government down financially until a special prosecutor is appointed, or 50 of them, but I'm not holding my breath. The "yes" or the "no" on waterboarding will have to suffice. Because, remember, if you can't get it, or you won't with the time between tonight and the next presidential election likely to be the longest year of our lives, you are leaving this country, and all of us, to the waterboards, symbolic and otherwise, of George W. Bush. Ultimately, Mr. Bush, the real question isn't who approved the waterboarding of this fiend Khalid Sheik Mohammed and two others. It is: Why were they waterboarded? Study after study for generation after generation has confirmed that torture gets people to talk, torture gets people to plead, torture gets people to break, but torture does not get them to tell the truth. Of course, Mr. Bush, this isn't a problem if you don't care if the terrorist plots they tell you about are the truth or just something to stop the tormentors from drowning them. If, say, a president simply needed a constant supply of terrorist threats to keep a country scared. From alexcathy at aol.com Tue Nov 6 07:50:17 2007 From: alexcathy at aol.com (alexcathy at aol.com) Date: Tue, 06 Nov 2007 10:50:17 -0500 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Check Out Discussion on "Free Markets" on Green Commons Message-ID: <8C9EEA3DD022132-BB0-4966@webmail-dd03.sysops.aol.com> Dear Green Friends, For those of you who don't pay much attention to the Green blogs.? F.Y.I. Cameron kicked off a really deep discussion on the Green Commons web site about "Free Markets." Check it out at: 'free markets' are metastable ( http://www.greencommons.org/node/824 ) I don't mean to crow about my Green friends, but I dare say, you'll *NEVER* read this kind of discussion on a Democratic Party web site nowadays? At most you'll see a furious take-no-prisoners argument over whether or not Hillary Clinton's or Barack Obama's corporate-friendly neoliberal health plan is an inch or two more to "The Left" or "The Right" or about whether or not the election of one or the other will have some vaguely progressive impact on the world simply because they will be *THE FIRST WOMAN* or *THE FIRST PERSON OF COLOR* to serve as the American Caesar, thus "restoring" the presumed pre-Bush "moral authority" of the Empire! Have Greens become the new "Reds?"?? Everybody hates us.? Everybody ridicules us.? But they steal our ideas because we constitute the only organized political party whose members actually *THINK* about this stuff.? Alex Walker ________________________________________________________________________ Email and AIM finally together. You've gotta check out free AOL Mail! - http://mail.aol.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From wechslertoo at earthlink.net Tue Nov 6 09:16:05 2007 From: wechslertoo at earthlink.net (Curt Wechsler) Date: Tue, 6 Nov 2007 09:16:05 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Join Cindy Sheehan in signing a petition to reverse expulsions of protesting students Message-ID: <410-22007112617165421@earthlink.net> http://tinyurl.com/2nt8fs Please circulate widely. Media Alert: For Immediate Release Press Conference 9:30 AM, Tuesday, November 6 In front of Morton West High School, 2400 South Home Ave., Berwyn, Illinois Parents Urge High School to Reverse Expulsions for Students Who Held ?Day of Dead? Iraq War Protest Petition in support of students draws signatures from Gold Star mom Cindy Sheehan, peace activist Kathy Kelly, antiwar veterans, teachers, parents and students across the nation. School administrators say they will expel dozens of students who took part in peaceful school cafeteria sit-in to voice opposition to Iraq War ? and routine presence of military recruiters. Berwyn ? Parents of Morton West High School students will gather for a press conference at 9:30 AM Tuesday, November 6 in front of the school, to urge school administrators to reverse their decision to expel dozens of children who marked All Saints Day last week by staging a peaceful, non-violent sit-in at the school cafeteria to voice opposition to the Iraq War. The November 1 school cafeteria event served in part as a counterpoint in the school setting to military recruiters on campus, who routinely visit the high school cafeteria seeking to enlist young people into military service. Dozens of students participated in the anti-war protest through the course of the day. All Saints Day -- November 1 ? is a revered holiday in the Latino community, when families and friends traditionally gather to honor dead loved onesloved ones. Students complied with an administrator's request to move the action outside the cafeteria after initially being assured that the only disciplinary action they would face was citation for cutting classes. But administrators have since issued formal expulsion notices to dozens of students, suspended many more, and threatened to bring criminal charges against students age 17 and older who participated in the anti-war action. School administrators also put the school on lockdown briefly during the All Saints Day protest. That action stands in stark contrast to administrators? response to a report of a student with a gun on campus last month. In that incident, administrators chose not to lock down the school. At the press conference, parents and students will read a letter to the superintendent demanding complete amnesty for the students before delivering the letter to the School District 201 office. Administrators have said they?ll issue final decisions on appeals of the suspensions, on Tuesday ? but also say expulsion orders still stand. The District 201 School Board will meet at 7PM at Morton East High School on Wednesday evening, located at 2423 S. Austin in Cicero. The students are marshalling national support through the blogosphere, the Illinois Coalition for Peace & Justice (www.ilcpj.org) and a national petition circulated by a local chapter of Students for a Democratic Society. Signers include Gold Star mom Cindy Sheehan, anti-war activist Kathy Kelly, authors Jeffrey St. Claire and Joshua Frank, a growing number of anti-war military veterans, local Berwyn residents and teachers, and supporters from New York to Oregon. To view the national petition in support of the students, see this link: www.petitiononline.com/mortonw/petition.html For more information on the case, go to chicago.indymedia.org. From JamBoi at Greens.org Tue Nov 6 11:24:33 2007 From: JamBoi at Greens.org (Drew Johnson) Date: Tue, 6 Nov 2007 11:24:33 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Kucinich brings impeach Cheney to house; 23rd signer of H Res 333 joins Message-ID: <2362.38.99.84.36.1194377073.squirrel@greens.org> http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/?q=node/28467 Kucinich Introduced Resolution, Response from Leadership Required Within Two Days Rep. Jose Serrano chaired the session. Congressman Kucinich introduced H Res 333 and read the three charges against Cheney contained therein. Serrano said that a time would be designated within the next two days for the bill to be considered. At that time, anything could happen, including a vote on the resolution, a vote on tabling the resolution, or sending the resolution to committee (potentially with a time limit for a response). Rep. Steny Hoyer has reportedly said he will move to table the resolution. We have somewhere between 10 mins and 48 hours to let our Congress Members know to vote No on tabling, Yes on impeachment. See: http://impeachcheney.org http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/?q=node/28464 Rep. Danny Davis Cosponsors Cheney Impeachment Congressman Danny Davis has signed on as the 22nd cosponsor and 23rd total congress member to support H Res 333: http://impeachcheney.org From wechslertoo at earthlink.net Mon Nov 5 11:40:56 2007 From: wechslertoo at earthlink.net (Curt Wechsler) Date: Mon, 5 Nov 2007 11:40:56 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] [gpsmc-d] FW: Join us for an anti-torture action on November 16 Message-ID: <410-220071115194056296@earthlink.net> for anyone able to participate in the Jeppesen action, http://tinyurl.com/yvtt87 , tonight's event in SF will provide great background: Mon, Nov 5, 2007 6:00 pm - 7:30 pm ?FRONTLINE?S Extraordinary Rendition ? A Look at the CIA?s Controversial Rendition Program? World Affairs Council 312 Sutter St, 2nd floor Auditorium San Francisco British investigative journalist Stephen Grey joins the Council for a screening of his PBS? FRONTLINE/World Video Report, Extraordinary Rendition, and to discuss the CIA?s controversial practice of kidnapping terror suspects for interrogation, often in countries where torture is common. Grey is a leading authority on the Agency?s controversial ?rendition? program, having quit his job as head of investigations at The Sunday Times of London in order to independently pursue his investigation. Author of Ghost Plane: The True Story of the CIA?s Rendition and Torture Program and one of the first reporters to track the CIA?s rendition flights around the world, he travels to sites in Europe and Africa, and ultimately to Washington, D.C. for this report, which presents new details and evidence about the U.S. government?s controversial interrogation program and a rare on-camera interview with former Egyptian detainee Abu Omar. This event is co-sponsored by UC Berkeley's Human Rights Center. Advanced registration is recommended for guaranteed seating. However, pre-registration is not required and walk-ins on the day of this program are welcome. Admission Costs: Member: Free; Non-Member: $15; Student with Valid ID: $5; Ticket+Membership: $95 For more information contact: World Affairs Council 415.293.4600 info at wacsf.org http://www.itsyourworld.org/ OR if you can't make it but care about the issue, the FRONTLINE episode will be aired on TV tomorrow night. Check for show times @ http://www.pbs.org/tvschedules/ (10pm on channel 9). FRONTLINE/World http://www.pbs.org/frontlineworld/ - This Week: "Extraordinary Rendition" and "A Second Opinion" (60 minutes), Tuesday, November 6th at 9pm on PBS (check local listings) - Live Discussion: Chat with investigative reporter Stephen Grey Nov. 7, at 11 am ET This week, we turn our newsletter over to Stephen Talbot, series editor of our international news magazine, FRONTLINE/World -- ------- With all the debate in Washington about "waterboarding" -- and the upcoming vote on the nominee for attorney general -- our episode of FRONTLINE/World this Tuesday night is right on target. Our lead story, "Extraordinary Rendition," is an investigation into the CIA's controversial, extra-legal practice of seizing terrorist suspects abroad and transporting them to third countries for interrogation in jails where torture is common. Investigative reporter Stephen Grey has been pursuing this story for four years. The author of "Ghost Plane: The True Story of the CIA Torture and Rendition Program," Grey breaks new ground in this report, interviewing an Iraqi-born British resident who was flown on a CIA-chartered Gulfstream jet to a secret interrogation site in Afghanistan known as the "dark prison." He also uncovers evidence of a rendition that took place earlier this year in the Horn of Africa, involving the detention of women and children in what appears to be a failed attempt to smoke out the mastermind of the 1998 bombings of the U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania. Grey interviews former CIA and FBI officials who were active in the hunt for Al Qaeda leaders and other suspected terrorists around the world. He finds that many U.S. agents who were involved in extraordinary renditions are now worried about the legal and political consequences of the program, which was denounced in a recent Council of Europe investigation that exposed CIA "black site" prisons in Romania and Poland. It is a gripping and disturbing report. For those of you who have seen the new movie, "Rendition," it may seem eerily similar. But this is fact not fiction and President Bush has signed a new executive order allowing the CIA to continue to question terrorist suspects in secret jails. I find the FRONTLINE series to be excellent... you can also watch previous episodes online, http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/view/ . Well worth the time. From JamBoi at Greens.org Tue Nov 6 13:41:20 2007 From: JamBoi at Greens.org (Drew Johnson) Date: Tue, 6 Nov 2007 13:41:20 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] House sent Cheney impeachment to commitee Message-ID: <2834.38.99.84.36.1194385280.squirrel@greens.org> More parliamentary maneuvering by Dem Leader Steney Hoyer. After his motion to table (kill) Kucinich's H Res 333 failed he moved to send the resolution to the Judicial Committee. This time his ploy succeeded. No debate was held. Dem leadership succeeded in stifling the debate ... for now... From JamBoi at Greens.org Tue Nov 6 14:32:01 2007 From: JamBoi at Greens.org (Drew Johnson) Date: Tue, 6 Nov 2007 14:32:01 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Honda voted right way, Eshoo, Lofgren didn't; play by play of impeach Cheney Message-ID: <1094.38.99.84.36.1194388321.squirrel@greens.org> Many more links with voting detail, etc.: http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/node/28469 4:41 The motion to send it to the Judiciary Committee passed with only about 5 Dems voting No and 3 Republicans voting Yes. Presumably the 78 or so Dems who voted No on tabling believed that to be enough to appease their constituents, while 5 Dems actually had integrity enough to put the Constitution ahead of Pelosi and Hoyer. There was no discussion of a time limit for the Judiciary Committee to report back (even though there are precedents for insisting on one with impeachment resolutions). This bill has, of course, ALREADY been in the Judiciary Committee for months, and that committee has done nothing with it. Roll call. These 5 Dems voted right: Filner, Kaptur, Kucinich, Waters, Towns. 4:19 p.m. There is now a 5-min vote underway on whether to refer to the House Judiciary Committee. 4:18 p.m. The procedural vote passed just barely (218-194). Of the 218, 3 were Republicans. Roll call. These 5 Dems voted right: Filner, Kaptur, Kucinich, Waters, Watson. 4:14 p.m. The motion to table having failed, Hoyer moved to refer the resolution to the House Judiciary Committee. Kucinich tried to avoid that and get a vote on the resolution, but - unable to do that - asked for a vote on the decision to refer to committee. Hoyer withdrew his motion and then unwithdrew his motion. Boehner asked for 40 minutes of debate. Serrano as chair seemed clueless for a while, and then ordered a procedural vote on whether to vote on sending to committee. If this new 15-min vote passes, then they will vote on whether to send to committee. 4:02 p.m. Over an hour into this 15 min vote, 78 Dems are voting Nay on tabling, joined by 164 Republicans in an apparent stunt to surprise the Dems and bring the issue to the floor -- which the Republicans will regret if the Democrats actually debate it and debate it well (admittedly a remote possibility). They will say over and over and over that this has divided the Democrats. Not outside the Beltway it hasn't. Over 3/4 of Dems want Cheney impeached. Currently 142 Dems to table, 78 not to [or was it 84??], 13 not voting; 28 Repubs to table, 164 not to, and 9 not voting. Most of the Republicans switched their votes, and for some reason the leadership kept the vote open for over an hour, allowing them to do so. No doubt the Republicans want to get the Dem leaders on tape on the floor defending Cheney against impeachment. But how smart is it of them to allow the topic to gain attention? The evidence, after all, is overwhelming that Cheney has committed impeachable offenses. Roll call. It turns out 86 Democrats voted the right way: Abercrombie, Allen, Baca, Baldwin, Braley (IA), Capps, Capuano, Clarke, Clay, Cleaver, Cohen, Conyers, Crowley, Cummings, Davis (IL), DeFazio, Dicks, Doggett, Doyle, Ellison, Farr, Filner, Green, Al; Green, Gene; Grijalva, Gutierrez, Hare, Hinchey, Hirono, Hodes, Holt, Honda, Hooley, Inslee, Jackson (IL), Jackson-Lee (TX), Johnson (GA), Jones (OH), Kanjorski, Kaptur, Kilpatrick, Kucinich, Lee, Lewis (GA), Loebsack, Maloney (NY), McCollum (MN), McDermott, Meeks (NY), Michaud, Miller (NC), Moore (WI), Moran (VA), Napolitano, Ortiz, Pallone, Pascrell, Perlmutter, Price (NC), Rangel, Richardson, Roybal-Allard, Rush, Schakowsky, Scott (VA), Serrano, Shea-Porter, Sherman, Slaughter, Solis, Stark, Stupak, Sutton, Thompson (CA), Tierney, Towns, Vel?zquez, Waters, Watson, Watt, Weiner, Welch (VT), Wexler, Woolsey, Wu, Wynn 2:54 p.m. Hoyer moves to table. Kucinich asks for Yays and Nays. 15 minute recorded vote begins. C-Span quotes sentence from Tribune with lie about impeachment dividing the Dems' base. C-Span brings on Sabrina Eaton from the Plain Dealer to talk some more trash. http://www.c-span.org From JamBoi at Greens.org Tue Nov 6 18:13:35 2007 From: JamBoi at Greens.org (Drew Johnson) Date: Tue, 6 Nov 2007 18:13:35 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Green candidate Jared Ball wins West Ill. U's mock primary Message-ID: <1081.38.99.84.36.1194401615.squirrel@greens.org> ---------------------------- Original Message ---------------------------- Subject: [usgp-media] Jared Ball wins West Ill. U's mock primary From: "Ann Link" Date: Tue, November 6, 2007 08:06 -------------------------------------------------------------------------- it will be interesting to see how he does in the election - Ann http://media.www.westerncourier.com/media/storage/paper650/news/2007/11/05/News/Stage.Set.Obama.Vs.Guiliani-3079051.shtml Stage set: Obama vs. Guiliani "The Road to the White House Starts at Western Illinois University," from 6:30 to 8:30 p.m. Monday, Nov. 5 in Western Hall Jason Nevel Issue date: 11/5/07 Section: News The votes were tallied at Western Illinois University's first-ever mock presidential election, and Barack Obama won the Democratic ticket with 60 percent of delegate votes. Rudy Giuliani claimed the Republican nomination after the second ballot. Texas Senator Ron Paul received the Libertarian nomination and Jared Ball led all Green Party candidates. Students can vote for the president Monday night from 6:30 to 8:30 p.m. in Western Hall. Former North Carolina Senator John Edwards will be Obama's running mate while Arizona Senator John McCain completes onto Giuliani's ticket. "On Nov. 5, the major presidential election portion of the mock election will be taking place at Western Hall," said Tara Short, Student Government Association attorney general. "This will be when everyone from all the different parties will come together and vote." On the Republican side, Giuliani was unable to garner a majority vote over Republican presidential hopeful Mitt Romney on the first ballot, but after a period of negotiating, delegates shifted votes to Giuliani's side to push him over the threshold. One of the ways Giuliani was able to surpass Romney was by taking Utah. However, some people felt that was inaccurate because in real national polls, Romney is winning in the state. "The state of Utah, which is the home of the Mormon church, voted for Giuliani and the current poles show that Mitt Romney, who is a Mormon, is winning in the real polls, so in no means was that a correct vote," said Teresa Spavin, senior public administration major and Romney campaign manager. Short added that it is easy for students to vote, and SGA encourages a high voter turnout. "It takes 30 seconds to vote, and (students) don't even have to go back to their hometowns," Short said. For those interested in voting, Western Hall will be the main polling location from 6:30 to 8:30 p.m. _________________________________________________________________ Climb to the top of the charts! Play Star Shuffle: the word scramble challenge with star power. http://club.live.com/star_shuffle.aspx?icid=starshuffle_wlmailtextlink_oct -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JamBoi at Greens.org Tue Nov 6 21:32:59 2007 From: JamBoi at Greens.org (Drew Johnson) Date: Tue, 6 Nov 2007 21:32:59 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Watching today's election results in SCCo Message-ID: <1394.38.99.84.36.1194413579.squirrel@greens.org> http://www.sccgov.org/elections/results/nov2007/ Green, Tim Gray in Palo Alto is currently coming in 8th place (top 4 win) Near Green Debbie Mytels (even though she didn't campaign) is doing next well and is in 7th place. Two candidates I endorsed in Sunnyvale (neither Green, but whose politics are generally progressive): David Whittum is winning his 2-way race for Sunnyvale City Council, and Pat Myering (who came to our holiday party last year) is losing his 2 way race. Anybody else to watch? Green is Care! Drew From edenw at gal3.com Tue Nov 6 22:43:07 2007 From: edenw at gal3.com (eden) Date: Tue, 6 Nov 2007 22:43:07 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Watching today's election results in SCCo In-Reply-To: <1394.38.99.84.36.1194413579.squirrel@greens.org> References: <1394.38.99.84.36.1194413579.squirrel@greens.org> Message-ID: On Nov 6, 2007 9:32 PM, Drew Johnson wrote: > http://www.sccgov.org/elections/results/nov2007/ > > Green, Tim Gray in Palo Alto is currently coming in 8th place (top 4 win) Umm... is there a reason why i never knew he was Green? I didn't vote for him because his statements led me to believe there were better candidates. The headline on a Palo Alto Daily editorial was something like "You get a choice for Palo Alto City Council, but they're all male and pro-business". I understand that City Council is a non-partisan position, but knowing he was Green might have at least made me look twice at voting for him. -- eden From tnharter at aceweb.com Tue Nov 6 23:00:34 2007 From: tnharter at aceweb.com (Tian Harter) Date: Tue, 06 Nov 2007 23:00:34 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Watching today's election results in SCCo In-Reply-To: References: <1394.38.99.84.36.1194413579.squirrel@greens.org> Message-ID: <47316292.3040502@aceweb.com> eden wrote: > On Nov 6, 2007 9:32 PM, Drew Johnson wrote: >> http://www.sccgov.org/elections/results/nov2007/ >> >> Green, Tim Gray in Palo Alto is currently coming in 8th place (top 4 win) > > Umm... is there a reason why i never knew he was Green? I didn't > vote for him because his statements led me to believe there were > better candidates. The headline on a Palo Alto Daily editorial was > something like "You get a choice for Palo Alto City Council, but > they're all male and pro-business". I understand that City Council is > a non-partisan position, but knowing he was Green might have at least > made me look twice at voting for him. > Dana St. George and Gerry Gras met with him on our behalf. After the meeting Dana's comment was something along the lines "I had total culture clash with him." I read several articles about the race and nothing I saw made me want to insert my Mountain View based efforts into the race on his behalf. If Debbie Mytels had wanted help with her campaign, I would have walked at least four or five precincts for her. This was the first fall I didn't help ANY candidates in many years. I was jonesing to get out there, but nobody wanted my help that I wanted to help. BTW: Anybody know how Don Havis up in San Mateo County is doing? -- Tian http://tian.greens.org On Sunday Night Football they kept flashing this "GREEN IS UNIVERSAL" banner. The peacock in the network logo was all green. I was surprised. From JamBoi at Greens.org Wed Nov 7 01:15:17 2007 From: JamBoi at Greens.org (Drew Johnson) Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2007 01:15:17 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] GALLUP: Bush Finally Tops Nixon -- In Unpopularity Message-ID: <3422.38.99.84.36.1194426917.squirrel@greens.org> http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003668731 GALLUP: Bush Finally Tops Nixon -- In Unpopularity -- As Call for Iraq Pullout Hits New Peak By E&P Staff Published: November 06, 2007 2:50 PM ET NEW YORK For almost two years, President Bush has been threatening to unseat Richard M. Nixon as the most unpopular president in the history of the Gallup poll, and it finally happened this week. The latest USA TODAY/Gallup survey finds Bush with a 31% approval rating -- and for the first time ever in the polling history, 50% say they "strongly disapprove" of a president. The previous high (or low?) was a 48% strong disapproval rating for Nixon at the worst moments of Watergate in 1974. The telephone survey of 1,024 adults was conducted last Friday through Sunday. Meanwhile, ABC News relates today, "Recent reports of fewer casualties in Iraq haven't altered most Americans' perceptions of the war: Fifty-nine percent still don't think the United States is making significant progress restoring civil order there, and a record six in 10 want the level of U.S. forces reduced. "Those results in the latest ABC News/Washington Post poll seem to reflect a continued hardening of attitudes on Iraq. Views on progress are unchanged from early September, and they haven't been positive since December 2005, shortly after the Iraqi elections." From jean_comfort at yahoo.com Wed Nov 7 14:57:15 2007 From: jean_comfort at yahoo.com (Jean Comfort) Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2007 14:57:15 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Watching today's election results in SCCo and San Mateo In-Reply-To: <47316292.3040502@aceweb.com> Message-ID: <406190.64719.qm@web50708.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Tian asked: BTW: Anybody know how Don Havis up in San Mateo County is doing? <><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><> >From the San Mateo County TIMES 11/7/07, News page 8: San Mateo Union High School District Donald S.Havis 5539 votes, 17.7% Don was 4th out of 4, (2 winners) but received more votes than the winner of the San Mateo City Council race. -Jean Tian Harter wrote: eden wrote: > On Nov 6, 2007 9:32 PM, Drew Johnson wrote: >> http://www.sccgov.org/elections/results/nov2007/ >> >> Green, Tim Gray in Palo Alto is currently coming in 8th place (top 4 win) > > Umm... is there a reason why i never knew he was Green? I didn't > vote for him because his statements led me to believe there were > better candidates. The headline on a Palo Alto Daily editorial was > something like "You get a choice for Palo Alto City Council, but > they're all male and pro-business". I understand that City Council is > a non-partisan position, but knowing he was Green might have at least > made me look twice at voting for him. > Dana St. George and Gerry Gras met with him on our behalf. After the meeting Dana's comment was something along the lines "I had total culture clash with him." I read several articles about the race and nothing I saw made me want to insert my Mountain View based efforts into the race on his behalf. If Debbie Mytels had wanted help with her campaign, I would have walked at least four or five precincts for her. This was the first fall I didn't help ANY candidates in many years. I was jonesing to get out there, but nobody wanted my help that I wanted to help. BTW: Anybody know how Don Havis up in San Mateo County is doing? -- Tian http://tian.greens.org On Sunday Night Football they kept flashing this "GREEN IS UNIVERSAL" banner. The peacock in the network logo was all green. I was surprised. _______________________________________________ sosfbay-discuss mailing list sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org http://lists.cagreens.org/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss Jean Comfort 48 Lorelei Lane Menlo Park, CA 94025 jean_comfort at yahoo.com (650)323-7188 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JamBoi at Greens.org Wed Nov 7 23:58:12 2007 From: JamBoi at Greens.org (Drew Johnson) Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2007 23:58:12 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Cheney Impeachment Alive! Message-ID: <3338.38.99.84.36.1194508692.squirrel@greens.org> http://www.huffingtonpost.com/joseph-a-palermo/dennis-kucinich-makes-his_b_71562.html Dennis Kucinich Makes History with HR-333 Impeach Cheney! Joseph A. Palermo Posted November 7, 2007 | 11:53 AM (EST) Representative Dennis Kucinich has succeeded in keeping alive his "privileged resolution" calling for the House Judiciary Committee to begin impeachment proceedings against Vice President Dick Cheney. The House Democratic leadership, listening to Beltway consultants who are experts at "triangulating" against the party's base, tried all manner of parliamentary tricks to table or kill HR-333. But these underhanded tactics failed after John Boehner and the Republicans' Beltway consultants told them they could milk political gain from helping Kucinich keep impeachment alive. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Majority Leader Steny Hoyer were afraid of the political risks in bringing impeachment to the House floor; the GOP leaders thought they could rally their base to defend Cheney (who has an 11 percent approval rating) and score political points with full-throated denunciations of those mean, over-reaching Democrats in Congress. In both cases, the Beltway political wizards were dead wrong. Impeachment should have never been taken "off the table." Impeachment is the only corrective that Congress holds to check runaway Executive power. With signing statements and Bush-Cheney cronies inside the Justice Department and with no Independent Counsel statute, the checks and balances of our system of government have been undermined. John Yoo and David Addington's "legal opinions," (if one bothers to look at them), amount to Enabling Acts for the Executive in "time of war." They believe there are no limits on presidential power as Commander-in-Chief in wartime. The Bush legal geniuses, with Alberto Gonzales leading the way, claim the President has "inherent powers" to order torture, suspend habeas corpus, spy on Americans without warrants, and pick and choose which laws he will follow and which ones he won't. This kind of interpretation of presidential powers might be suitable grist for abstract discussions in a seminar at Pepperdine University, but all of these hair-brained notions are hogwash, and dangerous hogwash at that. And they run counter to the U.S. Constitution. Even the most cursory reading of anything James Madison wrote on the subject of executive power clearly shows that Dick Cheney's expansive views of the powers of the Executive Branch are totally un-American. During the Civil War, when Abraham Lincoln expanded presidential power, or during World War Two when Franklin D. Roosevelt did the same, neither president claimed they had "inherent" powers to do so. They made it clear the expanded Executive was a temporary emergency measure and the Constitution would be set back to its pre-war normalcy after the crisis abated. Bush and Cheney claim the opposite. They say we are now in a war that is never-ending (like a George Orwell novel), and that even without the "War on Terror," the president can do anything he wants, effectively nullify acts of Congress, bring the nation to war on false pretenses, squander our national treasure with lucrative contracts to cronies, and so on. What does a president or vice president have to do nowadays to get impeached? The smart, Enlightenment-era white guys, with their powdered wigs and silver snuff boxes, who invented the United States of America in the summer of 1787 in Philadelphia went to great lengths to prevent the possibility of an imperial King George III-type presidency. The founders tried to equip the new nation with the safeguards that would prevent exactly what we have seen happen the last six years. They even recognized that it would be during war when the Executive would make its power grab. They made sure the war powers were in the Congress. More importantly, they gave the Congress the power to impeach a wayward president or vice president if they violated the Constitution. It is time to remind Bush and Cheney that they live in a republic and not a monarchy. Dennis Kucinich has done the nation a favor. History will be kind to him for doing so. The Executive Branch must be held accountable now and the corrective of impeachment cannot be postponed to wait around for the 2008 elections. Those Democratic leaders who are hell bent on playing it safe so they can get Hillary Clinton in office in January 2009 so she can abuse all of the powers that Bush and Cheney have horded for the Executive Branch is the wrong path to take. The system is out of balance and it will not bode well for the future to have these imbalances continue no matter what party happens to be in power. Meanwhile, Senators Chuck Schumer and Dianne Feinstein capitulated to all of the worst aspects of the abuse of power of the Bush White House by breaking ranks with the Senate Judiciary Committee and voting to confirm Michael "let's waterboard 'em" Mukasey as the new Attorney General. Their actions in giving Bush another victory demoralizes the Democratic Party's base and makes people want to give up on the Democrats. Ron Paul, who opposed the Iraq war all along, is raising huge amounts of money and I hope Dennis Kucinich does too. It should show Democratic leaders that they are out of touch with the electorate, especially the base of the Democratic Party. I don't care about the 2008 elections as much as I care about the U.S. Constitution. The Democrats were handed the Congress in 2006 to put the brakes on the Bush-Cheney juggernaut. They have thus far failed to do so, and therefore do not deserve to be re-elected in 2008. Dick Cheney was a principal actor in the lies and fabrications that brought the United States to war in Iraq on false pretenses. That war has now cost the nation nearly 4,000 American dead, 18,000 wounded, and will cost over $1 trillion. It has swelled the profits of Cheney's old company, Halliburton, while destabilizing a large swathe of the Middle East. The Iraqi people have suffered the brunt of this illegal aggression. Cheney deserves to be impeached, removed from office, and then tried for war crimes and crimes against humanity when he becomes a private citizen again. Here is a list of the 86 Democrats who voted against impeaching Dick Cheney, time to give them a call: NY-5 Ackerman, Gary [D]
PA-4 Altmire, Jason [D]
NJ-1 Andrews, Robert [D]
NY-24 Arcuri, Michael [D]
WA-3 Baird, Brian [D]
GA-12 Barrow, John [D]
IL-8 Bean, Melissa [D]
CA-31 Becerra, Xavier [D]
NV-1 Berkley, Shelley [D]
CA-28 Berman, Howard [D]
AR-1 Berry, Robert [D]
GA-2 Bishop, Sanford [D]
NY-1 Bishop, Timothy [D]
OR-3 Blumenauer, Earl [D]
OK-2 Boren, Dan [D]
IA-3 Boswell, Leonard [D]
VA-9 Boucher, Frederick [D]
FL-2 Boyd, F. [D]
KS-2 Boyda, Nancy [D]
FL-3 Brown, Corrine [D]
CA-18 Cardoza, Dennis [D]
MO-3 Carnahan, Russ [D]
PA-10 Carney, Christopher [D]
FL-11 Castor, Kathy [D]
SC-6 Clyburn, James [D]
TN-5 Cooper, Jim [D] CA-20 Costa, Jim [D]
IL-12 Costello, Jerry [D]
CT-2 Courtney, Joe [D]
AL-5 Cramer, Robert [D]
TX-28 Cuellar, Henry [D]
AL-7 Davis, Artur [D]
TN-4 Davis, Lincoln [D]
CA-53 Davis, Susan [D]
CO-1 DeGette, Diana [D]
MA-10 Delahunt, William [D]
CT-3 DeLauro, Rosa [D]
MI-15 Dingell, John [D]
IN-2 Donnelly, Joe [D]
TX-17 Edwards, Thomas [D]
IN-8 Ellsworth, Brad [D]
IL-5 Emanuel, Rahm [D]
NY-17 Engel, Eliot [D]
CA-14 Eshoo, Anna [D]
NC-2 Etheridge, Bob [D]
PA-2 Fattah, Chaka [D]
MA-4 Frank, Barney [D]
AZ-8 Giffords, Gabrielle [D]
TX-20 Gonzalez, Charles [D]
TN-6 Gordon, Barton [D]
NY-19 Hall, John [D]
CA-36 Harman, Jane [D]
FL-23 Hastings, Alcee [D]
SD-0 Herseth Sandlin, Stephanie [D]
NY-27 Higgins, Brian [D]
IN-9 Hill, Baron [D]
TX-15 Hinojosa, Rub?n [D]
PA-17 Holden, Tim [D]
MD-5 Hoyer, Steny [D]
NY-2 Israel, Steve [D]
LA-2 Jefferson, William [D]
TX-30 Johnson, Eddie [D]
WI-8 Kagen, Steve [D]
RI-1 Kennedy, Patrick [D]
MI-5 Kildee, Dale [D]
WI-3 Kind, Ronald [D]
FL-22 Klein, Ron [D]
TX-22 Lampson, Nicholas [D]
RI-2 Langevin, James [D]
CA-12 Lantos, Tom [D]
WA-2 Larsen, Rick [D]
CT-1 Larson, John [D]
MI-12 Levin, Sander [D]
IL-3 Lipinski, Daniel [D]
CA-16 Lofgren, Zoe [D]
NY-18 Lowey, Nita [D]
MA-9 Lynch, Stephen [D]
FL-16 Mahoney, Tim [D]
MA-7 Markey, Edward [D]
GA-8 Marshall, James [D]
UT-2 Matheson, Jim [D]
CA-5 Matsui, Doris [D]
NY-4 McCarthy, Carolyn [D]
NC-7 McIntyre, Mike [D]
CA-11 McNerney, Jerry [D]
FL-17 Meek, Kendrick [D]
LA-3 Melancon, Charles [D]
CA-7 Miller, George [D]
AZ-5 Mitchell, Harry [D]
WV-1 Mollohan, Alan [D]
KS-3 Moore, Dennis [D] CT-5 Murphy, Christopher [D]
PA-8 Murphy, Patrick [D]
PA-12 Murtha, John [D]
NY-8 Nadler, Jerrold [D]
MA-2 Neal, Richard [D]
WI-7 Obey, David [D]
MA-1 Olver, John [D]
MN-7 Peterson, Collin [D]
ND-0 Pomeroy, Earl [D]
WV-3 Rahall, Nick [D]
TX-16 Reyes, Silvestre [D]
TX-23 Rodriguez, Ciro [D]
AR-4 Ross, Mike [D]
NJ-9 Rothman, Steven [D]
MD-2 Ruppersberger, C.A. [D]
OH-17 Ryan, Timothy [D]
CO-3 Salazar, John [D]
CA-39 Sanchez, Linda [D]
CA-47 Sanchez, Loretta [D]
MD-3 Sarbanes, John [D]
CA-29 Schiff, Adam [D]
PA-13 Schwartz, Allyson [D]
GA-13 Scott, David [D]
PA-7 Sestak, Joe [D]
NC-11 Shuler, Heath [D]
NJ-13 Sires, Albio [D]
MO-4 Skelton, Ike [D] WA-9 Smith, Adam [D]
AR-2 Snyder, Victor [D]
OH-18 Space, Zackary [D]
SC-5 Spratt, John [D]
TN-8 Tanner, John [D]
CA-10 Tauscher, Ellen [D]
MS-4 Taylor, Gene [D]
MS-2 Thompson, Bennie [D]
MA-5 Tsongas, Niki [D]
CO-2 Udall, Mark [D]
NM-3 Udall, Tom [D]
MD-8 Van Hollen, Christopher [D]
IN-1 Visclosky, Peter [D]
MN-1 Walz, Timothy [D]
FL-20 Wasserman Schultz, Debbie [D]
CA-30 Waxman, Henry [D]
OH-6 Wilson, Charles [D]. From JamBoi at Greens.org Thu Nov 8 00:36:16 2007 From: JamBoi at Greens.org (Drew Johnson) Date: Thu, 8 Nov 2007 00:36:16 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Watching today's election results in SCCo In-Reply-To: References: <1394.38.99.84.36.1194413579.squirrel@greens.org> Message-ID: <3494.38.99.84.36.1194510976.squirrel@greens.org> When he approached us (very late) and told us he was a Green we tried to let people know. Sorry we missed you. On Tue, November 6, 2007 22:43, eden wrote: > On Nov 6, 2007 9:32 PM, Drew Johnson wrote: >> http://www.sccgov.org/elections/results/nov2007/ >> >> Green, Tim Gray in Palo Alto is currently coming in 8th place (top 4 >> win) > > Umm... is there a reason why i never knew he was Green? I didn't > vote for him because his statements led me to believe there were > better candidates. The headline on a Palo Alto Daily editorial was > something like "You get a choice for Palo Alto City Council, but > they're all male and pro-business". I understand that City Council is > a non-partisan position, but knowing he was Green might have at least > made me look twice at voting for him. > > -- > eden > _______________________________________________ > sosfbay-discuss mailing list > sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org > http://lists.cagreens.org/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss > From JamBoi at Greens.org Thu Nov 8 00:54:08 2007 From: JamBoi at Greens.org (Drew Johnson) Date: Thu, 8 Nov 2007 00:54:08 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Bush could take us from bad to worse Message-ID: <1050.38.99.84.36.1194512048.squirrel@greens.org> http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/opinion/337917_firstperson05.html Bush could take us from bad to worse DONALD A. SMITH GUEST COLUMNIST Thousands of anti-war protesters marched in Seattle on Oct. 27, including several co-signers of this essay. But can this war be stopped? Recent articles in Mother Jones and The New Yorker quote experts who say that leaving Iraq suddenly would likely be disastrous, for both Iraq and the U.S. The three Democratic presidential front-runners refuse to promise to bring the troops home by 2013. But staying in Iraq may be worse. Even war supporters aren't claiming that the U.S. can actually "win" in Iraq. At best, a lengthy, debilitating occupation awaits us. U.S. troops already are exhausted and understaffed. Prolonging the war may merely postpone the day of reckoning, with an even greater loss of lives and money. Meanwhile, Turkey may attack the Kurds, oil has topped $90 a barrel and President Bush is asking for another $200 billion for the war and is beating the drums for war with Iran. In short, the Bush administration has made a huge mess while ignoring the real terrorists responsible for 9/11 and failing to address the Palestinian-Israeli conflict or the high demand for oil that are the root causes for the war and for terrorism. If members of Congress can't end this war, we beg them to hold its architects accountable, by investigative hearings leading to censure or (better yet) impeachment. Some people argue that pursing accountability would be a distraction from the real things that matter. But Congress is not accomplishing much anyway. Until Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney are stifled, things will continue to be bad -- and will get a lot worse if Bush attacks Iran. Some people say the populace has no patience for drawn-out hearings. But according to a recent Reuters/Zogby poll, Bush's approval ratings are 24 percent; polls this summer by American Research Group indicate 45 percent of Americans favor impeaching Bush, with 54 percent favoring impeaching Cheney. One of the reasons Congress' approval ratings are even lower than Bush's is that Congress hasn't stood up to the administration. Many Democrats would love to see Bush and Cheney in jail but believe pursuing impeachment is useless; we beg to differ. In contrast to Bill Clinton, whose "crime" involved lying about sex, the Bush administration is responsible for: a disastrous war based on falsehoods; the deaths of hundreds of thousands of civilians and nearly 4,000 U.S. soldiers; the displacement of several million Iraqis; promotion of torture and rendition; illegal wiretapping; signing statements that thwart the will of Congress; revealing the name of a CIA agent; politicizing the Justice Department; denial of fair trial at Guantanamo; suppression of inconvenient evidence; obsessive secrecy; and gross incompetence and corruption in the management of federal agencies, the Hurricane Katrina disaster, the war and veterans' care. Impeachment by the House is a real possibility. Even if the Senate is unable to convict, hearings would embarrass and weaken the administration. Most of all, hearings would reveal the truth, re-establish the rule of law and demonstrate that Americans defend their Constitution. We have an obligation -- to the world, to justice and to posterity -- to at least try to hold Bush and Cheney accountable. What high crimes are more odious than promoting torture and misleading the country into a disastrous, mismanaged war based on lies? Please, America, hold these men accountable. Donald A. Smith of Bellevue wrote this on behalf of more than two dozen anti-war activists. From JamBoi at Greens.org Thu Nov 8 01:01:14 2007 From: JamBoi at Greens.org (Drew Johnson) Date: Thu, 8 Nov 2007 01:01:14 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Political cartoons: A Field Guide for American Policy Makers; Beyond Neanderthal Message-ID: <1083.38.99.84.36.1194512474.squirrel@greens.org> David Horsey A Field Guide for American Policy Makers http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/horsey/viewbydate.asp?id=1665 Beyond Neanderthal http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/horsey/viewbydate.asp?id=1666 From andid at cagreens.org Thu Nov 8 07:39:09 2007 From: andid at cagreens.org (Andrea Dorey) Date: Thu, 8 Nov 2007 07:39:09 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Is this for real? Sounds good! Message-ID: ? RE-USE A SHOE Every year, millions of pairs of athletic shoes end up in landfills or are disposed of in some other way. One solution is Nike's Reuse-a- Shoe program, where worn-out athletic shoes of any brand are collected, processed and recycled into material used in sports surfaces like basketball courts, tennis courts, athletic fields, running tracks and playgrounds for youth around the world. Since it began, Reuse-A-Shoe has expanded from the USA to include Canada, U.K., Netherlands, Germany, Australia and Japan. Please help turn your old sneakers into places to play. Drop-Off Locations are available in the USA, Europe, Japan, Australia? RACE AGAINST GLOBAL WARMING -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: nike.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 3678 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: race.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 9922 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tnharter at aceweb.com Thu Nov 8 14:28:42 2007 From: tnharter at aceweb.com (Tian Harter) Date: Thu, 08 Nov 2007 14:28:42 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Pictures from Mountain View Steps It Up last Saturday! Message-ID: <47338D99.9050008@aceweb.com> http://tian.greens.org/MountainView/ClimateChange/StepItUp/index.html I enjoyed this event so much. Thank you to all that made it happen! -- Tian http://tian.greens.org Latest change: Added Saturday's Mountain View Steps It Up pictures. From the_alliance47 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 8 18:42:51 2007 From: the_alliance47 at yahoo.com (Edward) Date: Thu, 8 Nov 2007 18:42:51 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] I'm very confused... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <251173.40058.qm@web54303.mail.re2.yahoo.com> After December 2008, troops left behind in Iraq should be restricted to a narrow set of missions, namely counterterrorism, training Iraqi security forces and protecting U.S. assets, Pelosi said. My question is, isn't that what they are already doing? Is there anything else that our troops are doing in Iraq that does not fall under the objectives above? Also in regards to Gen. Musharraf, President Bush said, "You can't be the president and the head of the military at the same time." If this is true, what does "Commander-in-Chief" mean? There are those who may argue that Pakistan has a tendency in the recent past to succumb to military dictatorships. However, in a boundary-less War on Terror coupled with the Congressional approval of the suspension of the Posse Commitus Act, there is nothing preventing the current (or future) president from legally instating martial law. __________________________________________________ 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 JamBoi at Greens.org Fri Nov 9 02:14:15 2007 From: JamBoi at Greens.org (Drew Johnson) Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2007 02:14:15 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Suddenly, Impeachment Hearings Are Looking Like a Strong Possibility Message-ID: <3410.38.99.84.36.1194603255.squirrel@greens.org> http://www.thiscantbehappening.net/?q=node/63 Suddenly, Impeachment Hearings Are Looking Like a Strong Possibility Thu, 11/08/2007 - 17:14 ? dlindorff You wouldn?t know it if you just watch TV news or read the corporate press, but this past Tuesday, something remarkable happened. Despite the pig-headed opposition of the Democratic Party?s top congressional leadership, a majority of the House, including three Republicans, voted to send Dennis Kucinich?s long sidelined Cheney impeachment bill (H Res 333) to the Judiciary Committee for hearings. The vote was 218 to 194. Now the behind-the-scenes partisan maneuvering that preceded that vote was arcane indeed, with Kucinich first exercising a member?s privilege motion to present his stymied impeachment bill to the full House, only to have Speaker Nancy Pelosi arrange for a colleague (Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-MD) offer a motion to table it. The Republicans, anxious to embarrass the Speaker, threw a wrench into that plan, though, by voting as a bloc to oppose tabling. Since Kucinich already has 22 co-sponsors for his bill, it was clear that the tabling gambit would fail. As soon as that became apparent, rank-and-file Democrats, unwilling to be seen by their constituents as defending Cheney, rushed to change their votes to opposing the tabling motion. In the end, tabling failed by 242 to 170 with 77 Democrats supporting a pleasantly surprised Kucinich. In order to avoid a floor debate on the merits of impeaching the eminently impeachable Vice President Cheney, Pelosi and her allies then moved to send Kucinich?s bill directly to the Judiciary Committee. They were joined by three Republicans, including maverick Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul (R-TX). Now the hope of the Democratic leadership is that this means Kucinich?s impeachment bill will continue to be safely bottled up in a subcommittee of the Judiciary Committee. But it may not work out that way for them. Whatever the explanation, this impeachment bill has been endorsed by a floor vote of the full House, with bipartisan support. For the Judiciary Committee to sit on it now and not schedule a hearing would be a gross travesty of parliamentary procedure and custom. Indeed, some House members not associated with Kucinich?s resolution are now openly calling for immediate hearings into Cheney?s impeachable actions?specifically lying the country into a war in Iraq, and threatening war with Iran. One indication of the change in the political climate in the House is the announcement by Rep. Robert Wexler (D-FL), a six-term congressman and a member of the House Judiciary Committee, that he will call for the Judiciary Committee to take up Kucinich?s impeachment bill. This is significant because Wexler, no left-wing hothead, is not a co-signer of the Kucinich bill. In an email message to constituents, Wexler said: ?I share your belief that Vice President Cheney must answer for his deceptive actions in office, particularly with regard to the preparations for the Iraq war and the revelation of the identity of covert agent Valerie Plame Wilson as part of political retribution against her husband.? ? Cheney and the bush Administration have demonstrated a consistent pattern of abusing the law and misleading Congress and the American people. We see the consequences of these actions abroad in Iraq and at home through the violations of our civil liberties. The American people are served well with a legitimate and thorough impeachment inquiry. I will urge the Judiciary Committee to schedule impeachment hearings immediately and not let this issue languish as it has over the last six months. Only through hearings can we begin to correct the abuses of Dick Cheney and the bush administration; and if it is determined in these hearings that Vice President Cheney has committed High Crimes and Misdemeanors, he should be impeached and removed from office. It is time for Congress to expose the multitude of misdeeds of the Administration and I am hopeful that the Judiciary Committee will expeditiously begin an investigation of this matter.? Also calling for prompt action by the Judiciary Committee in the wake of the Tuesday House vote was Carol Shea-Porter, a first-term Democrat from New Hampshire, who also is not a sponsor of the Kucinich measure. In explaining her vote to send the Kucinich bill to the Judiciary Committee, she said: ?It is the duty of the Vice President to faithfully execute the laws of the United States of America and to defend the Constitution. There is growing evidence that the Executive Branch has ignored some of our laws and has attempted to bend the Constitution to its will. Members of both parties decided that this issue is too important to ignore. I voted with my Republican and Democratic colleagues to investigate the Vice President?s actions in office.? She characterized the resolution sending the bill to the Judiciary Committee as a ?strongly bi-partisan vote.? With these kinds of endorsements and calls for action, it is clear both that Speaker Pelosi is looking increasingly pathetic and out of touch with her ?impeachment is off the table? mantra, and also that Judiciary Chair John Conyers (D-MI), who seems to have been intimidated by the Speaker for the past year, but who earlier had been a leader in exposing the crimes of the Bush/Cheney administration, is getting strong support for taking a bolder stand. Stephen Cohen (D-TN), a member of the Judiciary Committee who is a co-sponsor of the Kucinich resolution, says he thinks that there will be an impeachment hearing in the committee. The 22 House members who have already signed on as co-sponsors of Kucinich?s Cheney impeachment resolution are: Jan Schakowsky (D-IL), Maxine Waters D-CA), Hank Johnson (D-GA), Keith Ellison (D-MN), Lynn Woolsey D-CA), Barbara Lee (D-CA), Albert Wynn (D-MD), William Lacy Clay (D-MO, Yvette Clarke (D-NY), Jim McDermott (D-WA), Jim Moran (D-VA), Bob Filner (D-CA), Sam Farr (D-CA), Robert Brady (D-PA), Tammy Baldwin (D-WI), Donald Payne (D-NJ), Steve Cohen (D-TN), Sheila Jackson Lee (D-TX), Carolyn Kilpatrick (D-MI), Ed Towns (D-NY, Diane Watson (D-CA, and Danny Davis (D-IL). The change in attitude toward impeachment among the rank and file, and the evident increasing willingness to buck the Speaker, reflects growing awareness of the groundswell of popular anger with the Bush administration and the Democratic Congress over continued funding of the Iraq War, and over continued erosion of Constitutional government and civil liberties by an administration that wants unfettered executive power and by a Congress that is afraid to act. The latest polls show three in four Democrats in favor of impeaching the vice president and president, while a majority of all Americans favor impeaching the vice president and roughly half of all Americans favor impeaching the president. This is before hearings and presentation of evidence have even begun! The Democratic strategy for the 2008 election has been to do nothing overly confrontational, to pass no significant legislation, to collect lots of money from corporate interests, and to hope that the Republican Party, saddled with an unpopular administration and an unpopular war, will implode. The strategy, however, is proving to be a disaster, as public support for the Democratic do-nothing Congress has fallen even below the president?s record low numbers. Just running against Republicans, Bush/Cheney, and the continuing war risks seeing Democrats go down to defeat in ?08. It is awareness of this looming electoral disaster that underlies the growing restiveness among rank-and-file Democrats in the House, all of whom have to face the voters in less than a year?s time. As recently as a month ago, it didn?t look like impeachment was in the cards, Now it?s starting to look like we Cheney?s going to be put in the dock. It may not be long before we start to see bills of impeachment filed against President Bush too. The corporate media enjoy making fun of Rep. Kucinich, a height-challenged but dedicated progressive who has made a career of standing tall for his views. If his bill ends up leading to impeachment hearings against Cheney, Kucinich will end up having the last laugh. From JamBoi at Greens.org Fri Nov 9 02:25:22 2007 From: JamBoi at Greens.org (Drew Johnson) Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2007 02:25:22 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Naomi Wolf: "Impeach, Prosecute, and Save America!" Message-ID: <1043.38.99.84.36.1194603922.squirrel@greens.org> http://www.dailyscare.com/2396/naomi-wolf-impeach-prosecute-and-save-america Naomi Wolf: "Impeach, Prosecute, and Save America!" From jean_comfort at yahoo.com Fri Nov 9 16:52:29 2007 From: jean_comfort at yahoo.com (Jean Comfort) Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2007 16:52:29 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] "Oil Apocalypse" on History Channel, Tues, Nov.13 Message-ID: <126903.21613.qm@web50705.mail.re2.yahoo.com> We are planning on watching this program (actually taping it since it airs pretty late). We thought some on this list might also be interested. -Jean (and Arlen) <><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><> Oil Apocalypse A New Documentary from Filmmaker Martin Kent Press Release This week, the price of crude oil is trading at a shocking $96 a barrel. By year?s end, analysts predict petroleum will reach $100. And it?s not going to stop there. The world we?ve created runs on oil. But energy experts say the world is running out of oil. Much faster than previously thought. Demand will continue to outpace supplies, shortages are inevitable, and the price will only continue to rise dramatically -- causing a ripple effect of disastrous economic, social and political consequences. On Tuesday night, November 13th, (at 11:00 p.m. EST/PST ? 10:00 p.m. C), the History Channel will present Megadisasters: Oil Apocalypse, a documentary that Los Angeles-based filmmaker Martin Kent is calling ?a wake up call,? about the world?s energy crisis. ?We can no longer count on getting all the gasoline we need ? and there?s no plan B.? By plan B, Kent is referring to a coordinated system of alternative energies laid out in his film, that could replace our addiction and dependence on oil, if society mobilizes quickly to make it happen. It?s long been known that oil is a finite, non-renewable resource, that pollutes the environment, and now mankind is coming to realize that it is also most likely causing climate change. With China and India rapidly industrializing, creating an energy-hungry middle class, demand for oil will increase from the world?s current consumption of 84 million barrels a day, to 100 million barrels within the next 5 years. Unfortunately, while oil producers and refiners are scrambling to develop new techniques and sources of production, as yet there are no sure means to meet the growing demand. Oil Apocalypse presents a terrifying set of scenarios. True to the laws of supply and demand, we are fast approaching the breaking point, when the imbalance could destabilize the economies and infrastructures of virtually every nation on the planet. The worst-case scenario, say experts in the film, is a worldwide depression, which could lead to a world war. Still, they say it?s not too late. But we have to act fast. Says Kent: ?My hope is that upon seeing this film, everyone will be inspired to become an energy activist -- instead of sitting back and hoping that the scientists and leaders will somehow pull everything together and fix this in the eleventh hour. The time to act is now.? Energy experts appearing on camera in Oil Apocalypse include authors Richard Heinberg, Matthew Simmons, David Goodstein, Kenneth Deffeyes, Michael Economides and Christine Woodside; Oppenheimer energy analyst Fadel Gheit, PFC Energy chairman J. Robinson West, RAND Corp.?s James Bartis and Congressman Roscoe Bartlett. Megadisasters: Oil Apocalypse is a Creative Differences, Inc. production. Martin Kent is available for interviews and public speaking engagements accompanying a screening of this film. Please contact: LightHouse Public Relations dsLightHousePR at aol.com (6 November 2007) >From Rep. Roscoe Barlett's staff: Congressman Roscoe Bartlett was interviewed for this documentary about peak oil that will air on Tuesday, Nov. 13 at 11:00 pm Eastern on the History Channel. www.history.com/shows.do?action=detail&episodeId=251195 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kaisha_marie at comcast.net Sat Nov 10 00:23:58 2007 From: kaisha_marie at comcast.net (kaisha_marie at comcast.net) Date: Sat, 10 Nov 2007 08:23:58 +0000 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Kucinich on DemocracyNow Message-ID: <111020070823.16884.47356A9E0003D95B000041F422007621940A079D0E03A10E089C070E05@comcast.net> Great discussion on impeachment with Kucinich on DemocracyNow, Friday 11/09/07. He articulated the urgency to keep on trying to impeach Cheney since this administration can do a lot of damage in 14 months. It was quite terrifying, frankly. Transcript below: On Tuesday, Dennis Kucinich nearly forced the full House to vote on his measure to impeach Cheney. House Resolution 333 accuses Cheney of deliberately manipulating intelligence and deceiving the public to build support for the invasion of Iraq and now towards a possible attack on Iran. [includes rush transcript] Despite the best efforts of the Democratic leadership, impeachment was indeed on the table this week in Washington. On Tuesday, Congressmember and presidential hopeful Dennis Kucinich nearly forced the full House to vote on his measure to impeach Vice President Dick Cheney. House Resolution 333 accuses Cheney of deliberately manipulating intelligence and deceiving the public to build support for the invasion of Iraq and now towards a possible attack on Iran. Twenty-one House Democrats have supported the bill, but it's met fierce opposition from the Democratic leadership. Democratic leaders were able to send the bill to the House Judiciary Committee, where they expect it to languish. In a bizarre sequence, Republican lawmakers initially voted against tabling the bill after their leadership apparently decided a House debate would embarrass the Democrats. The bill was eventually sent to committee after a back-and-forth wrangling between Kucinich and Majority Leader Steny Hoyer. Democratic leaders have famously declared that impeachment is off the table. But their view does not fall in line with recent polling figures. An American Research Group poll in July found that fifty-four percent of Americans support beginning impeachment proceedings against Vice President Cheney. Seventy-four percent of Democrats were also in favor. Congressmember Dennis Kucinich of Ohio introduced the measure. He joins me now from Washington. Rep. Dennis Kucinich, Ohio Congressman and Democratic presidential candidate. Introduced House measure to impeach Vice President Dick Cheney. RUSH TRANSCRIPT This transcript is available free of charge. However, donations help us provide closed captioning for the deaf and hard of hearing on our TV broadcast. Thank you for your generous contribution. Donate - $25, $50, $100, more... JUAN GONZALEZ: Despite the best efforts of the Democratic leadership, impeachment was indeed on the table this week in Washington. On Tuesday, Congress member and presidential hopeful Dennis Kucinich nearly forced the full House to vote on his measure to impeach Vice President Dick Cheney. House Resolution 333 accuses Cheney of deliberately manipulating intelligence and deceiving the public to build support for the invasion of Iraq and now towards a possible attack on Iran. Twenty-one House Democrats have supported the bill, but it's met fierce opposition from the Democratic leadership. Democratic leaders were able to send the bill to the House Judiciary Committee, where they expect it to languish. In a bizarre sequence, Republican lawmakers initially voted against tabling the bill after their leadership apparently decided a House debate would embarrass the Democrats. The bill was eventually sent to committee after a back-and-forth wrangling between Kucinich and Majority Leader Steny Hoyer. AMY GOODMAN: Democratic leaders have famously declared impeachment is off the table. But their view does not fall in line with recent polling figures. An American Research Group poll in July found 54% of Americans support beginning impeachment proceedings against Vice President Cheney. 74% of Democrats were also in favor. Congressmember Dennis Kucinich of Ohio introduced the measure. The presidential candidate joins us now from Washington, D.C. We welcome you to Democracy Now!, Congressman Kucinich. REP. DENNIS KUCINICH: Good morning. Good morning, Amy. AMY GOODMAN: Explain exactly what you did this week. REP. DENNIS KUCINICH: The articles of impeachment that were introduced under a privileged resolution cite the Vice President's persistent lies relating to Iraq. He claimed that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction, that necessitated the US response. He claimed that Iraq somehow was connected to al-Qaeda's role in 9/11. He has been beating the drums for war against Iran. Those are the elements of the articles of impeachment that were introduced into the House this week. JUAN GONZALEZ: And why introduce your resolution in regards to Vice President Cheney and not to President Bush? REP. DENNIS KUCINICH: Well, certainly President Bush also has to be held accountable. However, I think that any constitutional process that begins for the removal of an official, when you have the Vice President, who led the effort to deceive this country with respect to a war against Iraq, it?s appropriate that he be dealt with first, so that you don?t create a condition where you remove the President first and then Mr. Cheney becomes his successor, and then you have to have an impeachment of two presidents consecutively. AMY GOODMAN: Explain the leadership's position and why you chose to do what you did this week. REP. DENNIS KUCINICH: I think it?s very difficult to explain their position, because I don?t think their position is defensible. I think when you consider that our whole nation is at risk, our constitutional form of government has been undermined by lies, by illegal war, by massive debt, how can you explain the position of Democratic leaders? I think that the American people and their response is becoming more and more powerful, and we?re seeing that there being rising discontent among Democrats in Congress about the direction that our leaders have said is not possible. I think that people want to see this administration held accountable. After all, what could be more important than having an opportunity to get to the truth of what happened in Iraq, that the war was based on lies; that over almost 4,000 of our brave young men and women who represent this country have lost their lives because of those lies; that over a million innocent Iraqis, noncombatants, civilians, have lost their lives because of those lies; that we will spend between one and two trillion dollars for this war, even borrowing money from China? And our whole domestic agenda is being capsized by this war. And the administration is preparing still to take us in another war against Iran, similarly lying about a cause for war. So what can be more importan t? Our country is at risk, and it?s time for our Democratic leaders to take a stand. JUAN GONZALEZ: What do you say to those who will argue that even though they may agree with you on a lot of your concerns, that the impeachment process itself would drag out for so long that it may as well -- people should just move forward toward the elections and elect a new president? REP. DENNIS KUCINICH: Right, well, you think about that. You know, the administration will be in office for at least fourteen more months. They can cause a lot of damage in that time. They?re planning to attack Iran. When you think about the defense authorization budget including a provision that would retrofit Stealth B-2 bombers so they can carry 30,000-pound bombs, which would then be dropped on nuclear research labs, creating an humanitarian and ecological disaster, ?What are we waiting for?? is the question, not ?Why don?t we wait for the election?? AMY GOODMAN: The other argument that the leadership has used is that they?re concerned about losing in a landslide vote against them, that that is bad strategically, Congressman Kucinich. REP. DENNIS KUCINICH: Since when does it become unfashionable to stand up for the Constitution, to stand up for our nation's laws, to stand up for international law, to stand up for moral law? Since when does it become inconvenient to take a stand that would help secure our democracy once again? I mean, we?re really -- it?s all at risk right now, and it?s time that the Democratic leadership exerted an effective influence. As a coequal branch of government, Congress cannot stand by and let this administration continue to undermine our Constitution. That?s why I introduced those articles of impeachment. AMY GOODMAN: What happens now? Is it over? REP. DENNIS KUCINICH: Not at all. I mean, Representative Wexler, who?s a member of the committee, sent a note to the members of the committee two days ago saying that we ought to proceed with hearings. Members have been talking to John Conyers on a regular basis since the impeachment resolution was introduced, asking him to take this up, and I?m hopeful that he will. AMY GOODMAN: Do you feel Conyers has changed his position from, when he was in the minority, calling for impeachment, and then, when he became head of the House Judiciary Committee, stepping back with pressure from the House leadership? REP. DENNIS KUCINICH: I think John Conyers wants to do the right thing, and I?m hopeful that he will. JUAN GONZALEZ: Congressman, I?d like to ask you, on another matter, a vote this week in Congress over the Peru free trade bill. Many Democrats supported the administration position on this. You?ve been outspoken in your opposition to many of these free trade agreements. Your perspective on this vote? REP. DENNIS KUCINICH: It?s a disaster for the people of Peru. It?s a disaster for farmers whose land is being poisoned by gold mining and the cyanide that?s used in that process. And American workers have absolutely no protection about jobs being moved out of this country. It?s basically a modeling of NAFTA sent to Peru. This is really a continuation of the stripping of rights of peoples of both nations. And a reason why NAFTA has to be canceled -- and I?ve said that I would do that as President -- that we must get out of the WTO -- I said that I would withdraw from the WTO -- and to have trade that is wholly and solely based on workers' rights, human rights and environmental quality principles. And it?s time that we recognize that this whole trade model has been about nothing but a race to the bottom for workers. It?s time we stood up for workers, no matter if they?re in Peru or anywhere else in the world, but certainly in the United States. We should have some concern about what the effect of these trade agreements are on American workers. AMY GOODMAN: Congressman Kucinich, you are head of the Domestic Policy Subcommittee, which has oversight over the FCC. Today in Seattle, there is going to be the last of the FCC hearings, as Kevin Martin, the chair, wants to expedite media consolidation. He says perhaps they?ll be taking a vote around December 18th. What control do you have over this? REP. DENNIS KUCINICH: Well, as the chairman of the Domestic Policy Subcommittee, I can and will hold hearings on the FCC's decision-making process. I think that we are in a time when media consolidation is having a material and adverse impact on our exercise of First Amendment rights in a democratic society. The public may be largely unaware that the electronic media are regulated because the airwaves belong to the people. And the Federal Communications Act of 1934 said that the electronic broadcast media must serve in the public interest, convenience and necessity. And the more monopolization that happens, the less likely it is that the public interest is going to be protected. So there is a long and historic train here of thought that says that media consolidation is a danger to our democracy and that, notwithstanding what the FCC does, Congress should intervene to block any effort that would enable further media consolidation. JUAN GONZALEZ: And the argument of those who say that the advances, the technological advances in communications, the development of the internet, basically has made -- outmoded a lot of the regulations that the FCC operates now to regulate media ownership. REP. DENNIS KUCINICH: There?s a lot of people who think the Constitution is outmoded, too. I think that when we realize the concentration of wealth in our society has accelerated wealth to the top, the concentration of information in our society and control over information accelerates the intellectual wealth of the country and the First Amendment rights of the country into the hands of fewer and fewer. You know, A.J. Liebling years ago famously said freedom of the press belongs to the man who owns one. But when you?re talking about electronic broadcast media, the people own the airwaves. I mean, that is the fundamental understanding that the American people should have. Those airwaves do not belong to those networks or to those big media companies. The airwaves belong to the public, and they're supposed to serve in the public interest. AMY GOODMAN: We?re talking to Congressmember Dennis Kucinich, not only a Congress member from Ohio, but Democratic presidential candidate. I wanted to ask you about the issue of exclusion of presidential candidates from various debates, most recently Mike Gravel, the former Alaska senator. You weren?t invited to the Democratic Party?s Jefferson Jackson dinner in Des Moines, that the six other Democratic contenders are; your response? REP. DENNIS KUCINICH: Well, it?s pretty interesting when you consider the fact that I?ve been running consistently fourth in a number of national polls, ahead of three of the candidates who have been invited. So what does that say? It says that there?s an attempt to rig the presidential election, using the Iowa Democratic Party as an accomplice. That?s not acceptable. This election doesn?t belong to one state or, for that matter, to one party. And so, you know, look of the national polls, and you?ll see what I?m talking about. Amy, while we?re still on the air, there?s something I want to mention to you that I think is really important. Last night I was reading the Defense Authorization Bill, and there is a section in the bill that I want to read to you: Section 1615 requires the Secretary of Defense to, one, ?determine the military-unique capabilities needed to be provided by the Department of Defense to support civil authorities in an incident of national significance or a catastrophic incident.? And then it goes on to say provide funds to develop a plan. What?s going on in this country? How can we stand by and see our basic liberties undermined? AMY GOODMAN: We?re talking to Congressmember Dennis Kucinich in Washington, D.C., running for president. I wanted to ask you about the comment you made during one of the presidential debates, that issue of seeing an unidentified flying object. Can you explain what it is that you saw? REP. DENNIS KUCINICH: Well, first of all, you know, I was kind of taken aback when I was asked that question, but I understand in Washington the truth is an unidentified flying object, so I guess I could admit that I saw something, found out later that Ronald Reagan on two occasions was said to have seen a UFO, that Jimmy Carter was said to have seen a UFO. So I?m assuming that now becomes a prerequisite for becoming President of the United States. AMY GOODMAN: Final comment on media coverage right now of the presidential race that you?re a part of. REP. DENNIS KUCINICH: Well, you know, I mean, the New York Times has yet to discover that I?m a candidate. I could -- if I suddenly catch fire in New Hampshire, where we?re running fourth and closing in on third place, I would imagine that I could even win the election, and the New York Times would have a big story about second, third, and fourth place and fail to mention that I won. There is an attempt by the media to manage this election, to try to determine the outcome of the election prior to the people casting votes. It?s just another way to try to defeat the public interest and to make of the election a kind of a farce. You know, all I need is an opportunity to debate Senator Clinton on the war. She has voted for the war. She voted to fund the war. She wants to stay in Iraq through 2013. And, frankly, her positions aren?t much different than Barack Obama?s, John Edwards?s. I mean, when I break into the top three, the whole election changes. And I?m working on that. I realize I?m a long shot. I don?t have any delusions about that. But I also know that right now democracy is a long shot in America, and I realize that our constitutional protections are kind of a long shot. So I?m willing to take that stand, and I think that the people of New Hampshire are going to have an opportunity to append the political process by voting for my candidacy, which will give them a chance to have a voice and a consistent supporter, not just of peace and workers' rights and healthcare for all, but of the basic constitutional principles that brought us together to form a nation so many years ago. AMY GOODMAN: Congressmember Kucinich, I want to thank you very much for being with us, Congress member from Ohio and Democratic presidential candidate. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- An embedded message was scrubbed... From: Jean Comfort Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] "Oil Apocalypse" on History Channel, Tues, Nov.13 Date: Sat, 10 Nov 2007 00:52:38 +0000 Size: 708 URL: From kaisha_marie at comcast.net Sat Nov 10 00:51:13 2007 From: kaisha_marie at comcast.net (kaisha_marie at comcast.net) Date: Sat, 10 Nov 2007 08:51:13 +0000 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Zinn on Impeachment Message-ID: <111020070851.29523.473571010000A5EF0000735322007621940A079D0E03A10E089C070E05@comcast.net> Actually, Kucinich was then followed by Howard Zinn who had this to say about impeachment and Kucinich's efforts: November 9th - www.democracynow.org AMY GOODMAN: Howard Zinn, we began today?s show with Congressmember Dennis Kucinich, who has been trying to force the issue of impeachment, wanting to start with the impeachment of Vice President Dick Cheney. The Democratic leadership is fighting hard to stop it from coming to the House. Your thoughts on that issue as an historian and an American? HOWARD ZINN: I believe that impeachment is an issue that should be raised all over the country. If Congress and the Democrats are too timid to raise it, then it should be done in grassroots meetings all over the country. I understand at least thirty or forty town meetings in Vermont have called for impeachment, that local groups in various parts of the country have called for it. It?s the kind of situation that we faced on the eve of the revolution against England, where the colonial officials were not going to lead a fight against England, and so people gathered in various towns in the colonies, and they formed committees of correspondence, and they brought up the issue of independence. We need to bring up the issue of impeachment, because when you bring up the issue of impeachment, whether it succeeds or not -- I mean, the idea of counting votes to see whether you're going to win an impeachment misses the point. To bring up impeachment would excite the country, because it would force a discussion on all the most fundamental issues on the war, on civil liberties, on the stealing of the people?s money to pay for the war and to enrich the rich. Impeachment would excite the country. And if the people in the leadership of the Democratic Party don?t realize it, then the rest of us should try to make them realize it. I applaud Dennis Kucinich for bringing it up. I hope that John Conyers, who is head of the Judiciary Committee and who at one time showed signs of being a true progressive and a leader of and person of courage, I wish that John Conyers would stop playing with Nancy Pelosi and the Democratic policy of conciliation and caution. And John Conyers, as head of the Judiciary Committee, could hold hearings and start the ball rolling on impeachment. I think everybody who is listening to this broadcast, everybody should write, talk, email their congressman, email John Conyers, and demand that they begin the impeachment process against Cheney, against Bush. I think it would galvanize the energy of the country in a good direction. -------------- Original message -------------- From: kaisha_marie at comcast.net Great discussion on impeachment with Kucinich on DemocracyNow, Friday 11/09/07. He articulated the urgency to keep on trying to impeach Cheney since this administration can do a lot of damage in 14 months. It was quite terrifying, frankly. Transcript below: On Tuesday, Dennis Kucinich nearly forced the full House to vote on his measure to impeach Cheney. House Resolution 333 accuses Cheney of deliberately manipulating intelligence and deceiving the public to build support for the invasion of Iraq and now towards a possible attack on Iran. [includes rush transcript] Despite the best efforts of the Democratic leadership, impeachment was indeed on the table this week in Washington. On Tuesday, Congressmember and presidential hopeful Dennis Kucinich nearly forced the full House to vote on his measure to impeach Vice President Dick Cheney. House Resolution 333 accuses Cheney of deliberately manipulating intelligence and deceiving the public to build support for the invasion of Iraq and now towards a possible attack on Iran. Twenty-one House Democrats have supported the bill, but it's met fierce opposition from the Democratic leadership. Democratic leaders were able to send the bill to the House Judiciary Committee, where they expect it to languish. In a bizarre sequence, Republican lawmakers initially voted against tabling the bill after their leadership apparently decided a House debate would embarrass the Democrats. The bill was eventually sent to committee after a back-and-forth wrangling between Kucinich and Majority Leader Steny Hoyer. Democratic leaders have famously declared that impeachment is off the table. But their view does not fall in line with recent polling figures. An American Research Group poll in July found that fifty-four percent of Americans support beginning impeachment proceedings against Vice President Cheney. Seventy-four percent of Democrats were also in favor. Congressmember Dennis Kucinich of Ohio introduced the measure. He joins me now from Washington. Rep. Dennis Kucinich, Ohio Congressman and Democratic presidential candidate. Introduced House measure to impeach Vice President Dick Cheney. RUSH TRANSCRIPT This transcript is available free of charge. However, donations help us provide closed captioning for the deaf and hard of hearing on our TV broadcast. Thank you for your generous contribution. Donate - $25, $50, $100, more... JUAN GONZALEZ: Despite the best efforts of the Democratic leadership, impeachment was indeed on the table this week in Washington. On Tuesday, Congress member and presidential hopeful Dennis Kucinich nearly forced the full House to vote on his measure to impeach Vice President Dick Cheney. House Resolution 333 accuses Cheney of deliberately manipulating intelligence and deceiving the public to build support for the invasion of Iraq and now towards a possible attack on Iran. Twenty-one House Democrats have supported the bill, but it's met fierce opposition from the Democratic leadership. Democratic leaders were able to send the bill to the House Judiciary Committee, where they expect it to languish. In a bizarre sequence, Republican lawmakers initially voted against tabling the bill after their leadership apparently decided a House debate would embarrass the Democrats. The bill was eventually sent to committee after a back-and-forth wrangling between Kucinich and Majority Leader Steny Hoyer. AMY GOODMAN: Democratic leaders have famously declared impeachment is off the table. But their view does not fall in line with recent polling figures. An American Research Group poll in July found 54% of Americans support beginning impeachment proceedings against Vice President Cheney. 74% of Democrats were also in favor. Congressmember Dennis Kucinich of Ohio introduced the measure. The presidential candidate joins us now from Washington, D.C. We welcome you to Democracy Now!, Congressman Kucinich. REP. DENNIS KUCINICH: Good morning. Good morning, Amy. AMY GOODMAN: Explain exactly what you did this week. REP. DENNIS KUCINICH: The articles of impeachment that were introduced under a privileged resolution cite the Vice President's persistent lies relating to Iraq. He claimed that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction, that necessitated the US response. He claimed that Iraq somehow was connected to al-Qaeda's role in 9/11. He has been beating the drums for war against Iran. Those are the elements of the articles of impeachment that were introduced into the House this week. JUAN GONZALEZ: And why introduce your resolution in regards to Vice President Cheney and not to President Bush? REP. DENNIS KUCINICH: Well, certainly President Bush also has to be held accountable. However, I think that any constitutional process that begins for the removal of an official, when you have the Vice President, who led the effort to deceive this country with respect to a war against Iraq, it?s appropriate that he be dealt with first, so that you don?t create a condition where you remove the President first and then Mr. Cheney becomes his successor, and then you have to have an impeachment of two presidents consecutively. AMY GOODMAN: Explain the leadership's position and why you chose to do what you did this week. REP. DENNIS KUCINICH: I think it?s very difficult to explain their position, because I don?t think their position is defensible. I think when you consider that our whole nation is at risk, our constitutional form of government has been undermined by lies, by illegal war, by massive debt, how can you explain the position of Democratic leaders? I think that the American people and their response is becoming more and more powerful, and we?re seeing that there being rising discontent among Democrats in Congress about the direction that our leaders have said is not possible. I think that people want to see this administration held accountable. After all, what could be more important than having an opportunity to get to the truth of what happened in Iraq, that the war was based on lies; that over almost 4,000 of our brave young men and women who represent this country have lost their lives because of those lies; that over a million innocent Iraqis, noncombatants, civilians, have lost their lives because of those lies; that we will spend between one and two trillion dollars for this war, even borrowing money from China? And our whole domestic agenda is being capsized by this war. And the administration is preparing still to take us in another war against Iran, similarly lying about a cause for war. So what can be more impor ta nt? Our country is at risk, and it?s time for our Democratic leaders to take a stand. JUAN GONZALEZ: What do you say to those who will argue that even though they may agree with you on a lot of your concerns, that the impeachment process itself would drag out for so long that it may as well -- people should just move forward toward the elections and elect a new president? REP. DENNIS KUCINICH: Right, well, you think about that. You know, the administration will be in office for at least fourteen more months. They can cause a lot of damage in that time. They?re planning to attack Iran. When you think about the defense authorization budget including a provision that would retrofit Stealth B-2 bombers so they can carry 30,000-pound bombs, which would then be dropped on nuclear research labs, creating an humanitarian and ecological disaster, ?What are we waiting for?? is the question, not ?Why don?t we wait for the election?? AMY GOODMAN: The other argument that the leadership has used is that they?re concerned about losing in a landslide vote against them, that that is bad strategically, Congressman Kucinich. REP. DENNIS KUCINICH: Since when does it become unfashionable to stand up for the Constitution, to stand up for our nation's laws, to stand up for international law, to stand up for moral law? Since when does it become inconvenient to take a stand that would help secure our democracy once again? I mean, we?re really -- it?s all at risk right now, and it?s time that the Democratic leadership exerted an effective influence. As a coequal branch of government, Congress cannot stand by and let this administration continue to undermine our Constitution. That?s why I introduced those articles of impeachment. AMY GOODMAN: What happens now? Is it over? REP. DENNIS KUCINICH: Not at all. I mean, Representative Wexler, who?s a member of the committee, sent a note to the members of the committee two days ago saying that we ought to proceed with hearings. Members have been talking to John Conyers on a regular basis since the impeachment resolution was introduced, asking him to take this up, and I?m hopeful that he will. AMY GOODMAN: Do you feel Conyers has changed his position from, when he was in the minority, calling for impeachment, and then, when he became head of the House Judiciary Committee, stepping back with pressure from the House leadership? REP. DENNIS KUCINICH: I think John Conyers wants to do the right thing, and I?m hopeful that he will. JUAN GONZALEZ: Congressman, I?d like to ask you, on another matter, a vote this week in Congress over the Peru free trade bill. Many Democrats supported the administration position on this. You?ve been outspoken in your opposition to many of these free trade agreements. Your perspective on this vote? REP. DENNIS KUCINICH: It?s a disaster for the people of Peru. It?s a disaster for farmers whose land is being poisoned by gold mining and the cyanide that?s used in that process. And American workers have absolutely no protection about jobs being moved out of this country. It?s basically a modeling of NAFTA sent to Peru. This is really a continuation of the stripping of rights of peoples of both nations. And a reason why NAFTA has to be canceled -- and I?ve said that I would do that as President -- that we must get out of the WTO -- I said that I would withdraw from the WTO -- and to have trade that is wholly and solely based on workers' rights, human rights and environmental quality principles. And it?s time that we recognize that this whole trade model has been about nothing but a race to the bottom for workers. It?s time we stood up for workers, no matter if they?re in Peru or anywhere else in the world, but certainly in the United States. We should have some concern a bout what the effect of these trade agreements are on American workers. AMY GOODMAN: Congressman Kucinich, you are head of the Domestic Policy Subcommittee, which has oversight over the FCC. Today in Seattle, there is going to be the last of the FCC hearings, as Kevin Martin, the chair, wants to expedite media consolidation. He says perhaps they?ll be taking a vote around December 18th. What control do you have over this? REP. DENNIS KUCINICH: Well, as the chairman of the Domestic Policy Subcommittee, I can and will hold hearings on the FCC's decision-making process. I think that we are in a time when media consolidation is having a material and adverse impact on our exercise of First Amendment rights in a democratic society. The public may be largely unaware that the electronic media are regulated because the airwaves belong to the people. And the Federal Communications Act of 1934 said that the electronic broadcast media must serve in the public interest, convenience and necessity. And the more monopolization that happens, the less likely it is that the public interest is going to be protected. So there is a long and historic train here of thought that says that media consolidation is a danger to our democracy and that, notwithstanding what the FCC does, Congress should intervene to block any effort that would enable further media consolidation. JUAN GONZALEZ: And the argument of those who say that the advances, the technological advances in communications, the development of the internet, basically has made -- outmoded a lot of the regulations that the FCC operates now to regulate media ownership. REP. DENNIS KUCINICH: There?s a lot of people who think the Constitution is outmoded, too. I think that when we realize the concentration of wealth in our society has accelerated wealth to the top, the concentration of information in our society and control over information accelerates the intellectual wealth of the country and the First Amendment rights of the country into the hands of fewer and fewer. You know, A.J. Liebling years ago famously said freedom of the press belongs to the man who owns one. But when you?re talking about electronic broadcast media, the people own the airwaves. I mean, that is the fundamental understanding that the American people should have. Those airwaves do not belong to those networks or to those big media companies. The airwaves belong to the public, and they're supposed to serve in the public interest. AMY GOODMAN: We?re talking to Congressmember Dennis Kucinich, not only a Congress member from Ohio, but Democratic presidential candidate. I wanted to ask you about the issue of exclusion of presidential candidates from various debates, most recently Mike Gravel, the former Alaska senator. You weren?t invited to the Democratic Party?s Jefferson Jackson dinner in Des Moines, that the six other Democratic contenders are; your response? REP. DENNIS KUCINICH: Well, it?s pretty interesting when you consider the fact that I?ve been running consistently fourth in a number of national polls, ahead of three of the candidates who have been invited. So what does that say? It says that there?s an attempt to rig the presidential election, using the Iowa Democratic Party as an accomplice. That?s not acceptable. This election doesn?t belong to one state or, for that matter, to one party. And so, you know, look of the national polls, and you?ll see what I?m talking about. Amy, while we?re still on the air, there?s something I want to mention to you that I think is really important. Last night I was reading the Defense Authorization Bill, and there is a section in the bill that I want to read to you: Section 1615 requires the Secretary of Defense to, one, ?determine the military-unique capabilities needed to be provided by the Department of Defense to support civil authorities in an incident of national significance or a catastrophic incident.? And then it goes on to say provide funds to develop a plan. What?s going on in this country? How can we stand by and see our basic liberties undermined? AMY GOODMAN: We?re talking to Congressmember Dennis Kucinich in Washington, D.C., running for president. I wanted to ask you about the comment you made during one of the presidential debates, that issue of seeing an unidentified flying object. Can you explain what it is that you saw? REP. DENNIS KUCINICH: Well, first of all, you know, I was kind of taken aback when I was asked that question, but I understand in Washington the truth is an unidentified flying object, so I guess I could admit that I saw something, found out later that Ronald Reagan on two occasions was said to have seen a UFO, that Jimmy Carter was said to have seen a UFO. So I?m assuming that now becomes a prerequisite for becoming President of the United States. AMY GOODMAN: Final comment on media coverage right now of the presidential race that you?re a part of. REP. DENNIS KUCINICH: Well, you know, I mean, the New York Times has yet to discover that I?m a candidate. I could -- if I suddenly catch fire in New Hampshire, where we?re running fourth and closing in on third place, I would imagine that I could even win the election, and the New York Times would have a big story about second, third, and fourth place and fail to mention that I won. There is an attempt by the media to manage this election, to try to determine the outcome of the election prior to the people casting votes. It?s just another way to try to defeat the public interest and to make of the election a kind of a farce. You know, all I need is an opportunity to debate Senator Clinton on the war. She has voted for the war. She voted to fund the war. She wants to stay in Iraq through 2013. And, frankly, her positions aren?t much different than Barack Obama?s, John Edwards?s. I mean, when I break into the top three, the whole election changes. And I?m working on that. I realize I?m a long shot. I don?t have any delusions about that. But I also know that right now democracy is a long shot in America, and I realize that our constitutional protections are kind of a long shot. So I?m willing to take that stand, and I think that the people of New Hampshire are going to have an opportunity to append the political process by voting for my candidacy, which will give them a chance to have a voice and a consistent supporter, not just of peace and workers' rights and healthcare for all, but of the basic constitutional principles that brought us together to form a nation so many years ago. AMY GOODMAN: Congressmember Kucinich, I want to thank you very much for being with us, Congress member from Ohio and Democratic presidential candidate. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- An embedded message was scrubbed... From: kaisha_marie at comcast.net Subject: Kucinich on DemocracyNow Date: Sat, 10 Nov 2007 08:24:00 +0000 Size: 1063 URL: From egroups at duendevision.com Sat Nov 10 11:02:00 2007 From: egroups at duendevision.com (Duende) Date: Sat, 10 Nov 2007 11:02:00 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Volunteers for Oil Spill Cleanup Message-ID: <1EDD4D8B-011B-4597-9B4F-CE552DD94ED3@duendevision.com> Hey all. Long time no speak. I just came across this. A friend and myself will be attending one this evening. http://www.mercurynews.com/peninsula/ci_7425694?nclick_check=1 Namaste Duende ______________________________________________ "The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the source of all true art and all science. He to whom this emotion is a stranger, who can no longer pause to wonder and stand rapt in awe, is as good as dead: his eyes are closed." Albert Einstein From wechslertoo at earthlink.net Sat Nov 10 11:33:21 2007 From: wechslertoo at earthlink.net (Curt Wechsler) Date: Sat, 10 Nov 2007 11:33:21 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] if you happen to be online today, Sat, Nov 10, there is an international panel discussing impeachment @ noon Message-ID: <410-2200711610193321515@earthlink.net> ----- Original Message ----- From: Debra Sweet Sent: 11/9/2007 3:27:07 PM Subject: [Wcw-organizers-ANNOUNCE] World Can't Wait in the news Saturday November 10, at 3 pm EST, I'll be live on PressTV, the English language channel that broadcasts news about Iran. I'll be on a panel with other people around the world discussing the Cheney impeachment effort. You can watch online at http://www.presstv.com/ Debra -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From egroups at duendevision.com Sat Nov 10 11:49:21 2007 From: egroups at duendevision.com (Duende) Date: Sat, 10 Nov 2007 11:49:21 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Kucinich on DemocracyNow In-Reply-To: <111020070823.16884.47356A9E0003D95B000041F422007621940A079D0E03A10E089C070E05@comcast.net> References: <111020070823.16884.47356A9E0003D95B000041F422007621940A079D0E03A10E089C070E05@comcast.net> Message-ID: <5685CEE3-1334-4825-AA95-D0BA82A9DDF8@duendevision.com> I heard him on KPFA yesterday and he was amazing (as usual). He pointed at the Democratic party as being in league with with the neo con agenda (as well as the media of course). He pulled no punches. What was brilliant was that he was going after Cheney first since if we impeached Bush, then Cheney would be prez and then we'd have to impeach Cheney. Dennis felt it would be too difficult to impeach two Presidents in a row, but but a vice president and then a president would be more doable. paz Duende On Nov 10, 2007, at 12:23 AM, kaisha_marie at comcast.net wrote: > Great discussion on impeachment with Kucinich on DemocracyNow, > Friday 11/09/07. He articulated the urgency to keep on trying to > impeach Cheney since this administration can do a lot of damage in > 14 months. It was quite terrifying, frankly. > > Transcript below: > > On Tuesday, Dennis Kucinich nearly forced the full House to vote on > his measure to impeach Cheney. House Resolution 333 accuses Cheney > of deliberately manipulating intelligence and deceiving the public > to build support for the invasion of Iraq and now towards a possible > attack on Iran. [includes rush transcript] > > Despite the best efforts of the Democratic leadership, impeachment > was indeed on the table this week in Washington. On Tuesday, > Congressmember and presidential hopeful Dennis Kucinich nearly > forced the full House to vote on his measure to impeach Vice > President Dick Cheney. House Resolution 333 accuses Cheney of > deliberately manipulating intelligence and deceiving the public to > build support for the invasion of Iraq and now towards a possible > attack on Iran. Twenty-one House Democrats have supported the bill, > but it's met fierce opposition from the Democratic leadership. > > Democratic leaders were able to send the bill to the House Judiciary > Committee, where they expect it to languish. In a bizarre sequence, > Republican lawmakers initially voted against tabling the bill after > their leadership apparently decided a House debate would embarrass > the Democrats. The bill was eventually sent to committee after a > back-and-forth wrangling between Kucinich and Majority Leader Steny > Hoyer. > > Democratic leaders have famously declared that impeachment is off > the table. But their view does not fall in line with recent polling > figures. An American Research Group poll in July found that fifty- > four percent of Americans support beginning impeachment proceedings > against Vice President Cheney. Seventy-four percent of Democrats > were also in favor. > > Congressmember Dennis Kucinich of Ohio introduced the measure. He > joins me now from Washington. > > Rep. Dennis Kucinich, Ohio Congressman and Democratic presidential > candidate. Introduced House measure to impeach Vice President Dick > Cheney. > RUSH TRANSCRIPT > > This transcript is available free of charge. However, donations help > us provide closed captioning for the deaf and hard of hearing on our > TV broadcast. Thank you for your generous contribution. > Donate - $25, $50, $100, more... > > JUAN GONZALEZ: Despite the best efforts of the Democratic > leadership, impeachment was indeed on the table this week in > Washington. On Tuesday, Congress member and presidential hopeful > Dennis Kucinich nearly forced the full House to vote on his measure > to impeach Vice President Dick Cheney. House Resolution 333 accuses > Cheney of deliberately manipulating intelligence and deceiving the > public to build support for the invasion of Iraq and now towards a > possible attack on Iran. Twenty-one House Democrats have supported > the bill, but it's met fierce opposition from the Democratic > leadership. > > Democratic leaders were able to send the bill to the House Judiciary > Committee, where they expect it to languish. In a bizarre sequence, > Republican lawmakers initially voted against tabling the bill after > their leadership apparently decided a House debate would embarrass > the Democrats. The bill was eventually sent to committee after a > back-and-forth wrangling between Kucinich and Majority Leader Steny > Hoyer. > > AMY GOODMAN: Democratic leaders have famously declared impeachment > is off the table. But their view does not fall in line with recent > polling figures. An American Research Group poll in July found 54% > of Americans support beginning impeachment proceedings against Vice > President Cheney. 74% of Democrats were also in favor. > > Congressmember Dennis Kucinich of Ohio introduced the measure. The > presidential candidate joins us now from Washington, D.C. We welcome > you to Democracy Now!, Congressman Kucinich. > > REP. DENNIS KUCINICH: Good morning. Good morning, Amy. > > AMY GOODMAN: Explain exactly what you did this week. > > REP. DENNIS KUCINICH: The articles of impeachment that were > introduced under a privileged resolution cite the Vice President's > persistent lies relating to Iraq. He claimed that Iraq had weapons > of mass destruction, that necessitated the US response. He claimed > that Iraq somehow was connected to al-Qaeda's role in 9/11. He has > been beating the drums for war against Iran. Those are the elements > of the articles of impeachment that were introduced into the House > this week. > > JUAN GONZALEZ: And why introduce your resolution in regards to Vice > President Cheney and not to President Bush? > > REP. DENNIS KUCINICH: Well, certainly President Bush also has to be > held accountable. However, I think that any constitutional process > that begins for the removal of an official, when you have the Vice > President, who led the effort to deceive this country with respect > to a war against Iraq, it?s appropriate that he be dealt with first, > so that you don?t create a condition where you remove the President > first and then Mr. Cheney becomes his successor, and then you have > to have an impeachment of two presidents consecutively. > > AMY GOODMAN: Explain the leadership's position and why you chose to > do what you did this week. > > REP. DENNIS KUCINICH: I think it?s very difficult to explain their > position, because I don?t think their position is defensible. I > think when you consider that our whole nation is at risk, our > constitutional form of government has been undermined by lies, by > illegal war, by massive debt, how can you explain the position of > Democratic leaders? > > I think that the American people and their response is becoming more > and more powerful, and we?re seeing that there being rising > discontent among Democrats in Congress about the direction that our > leaders have said is not possible. I think that people want to see > this administration held accountable. After all, what could be more > important than having an opportunity to get to the truth of what > happened in Iraq, that the war was based on lies; that over almost > 4,000 of our brave young men and women who represent this country > have lost their lives because of those lies; that over a million > innocent Iraqis, noncombatants, civilians, have lost their lives > because of those lies; that we will spend between one and two > trillion dollars for this war, even borrowing money from China? And > our whole domestic agenda is being capsized by this war. And the > administration is preparing still to take us in another war against > Iran, similarly lying about a cause for war. So what can be more > impor tant? Our country is at risk, and it?s time for our Democratic > leaders to take a stand. > > JUAN GONZALEZ: What do you say to those who will argue that even > though they may agree with you on a lot of your concerns, that the > impeachment process itself would drag out for so long that it may as > well -- people should just move forward toward the elections and > elect a new president? > > REP. DENNIS KUCINICH: Right, well, you think about that. You know, > the administration will be in office for at least fourteen more > months. They can cause a lot of damage in that time. They?re > planning to attack Iran. When you think about the defense > authorization budget including a provision that would retrofit > Stealth B-2 bombers so they can carry 30,000-pound bombs, which > would then be dropped on nuclear research labs, creating an > humanitarian and ecological disaster, ?What are we waiting for?? is > the question, not ?Why don?t we wait for the election?? > > AMY GOODMAN: The other argument that the leadership has used is that > they?re concerned about losing in a landslide vote against them, > that that is bad strategically, Congressman Kucinich. > > REP. DENNIS KUCINICH: Since when does it become unfashionable to > stand up for the Constitution, to stand up for our nation's laws, to > stand up for international law, to stand up for moral law? Since > when does it become inconvenient to take a stand that would help > secure our democracy once again? I mean, we?re really -- it?s all at > risk right now, and it?s time that the Democratic leadership exerted > an effective influence. As a coequal branch of government, Congress > cannot stand by and let this administration continue to undermine > our Constitution. That?s why I introduced those articles of > impeachment. > > AMY GOODMAN: What happens now? Is it over? > > REP. DENNIS KUCINICH: Not at all. I mean, Representative Wexler, > who?s a member of the committee, sent a note to the members of the > committee two days ago saying that we ought to proceed with > hearings. Members have been talking to John Conyers on a regular > basis since the impeachment resolution was introduced, asking him to > take this up, and I?m hopeful that he will. > > AMY GOODMAN: Do you feel Conyers has changed his position from, when > he was in the minority, calling for impeachment, and then, when he > became head of the House Judiciary Committee, stepping back with > pressure from the House leadership? > > REP. DENNIS KUCINICH: I think John Conyers wants to do the right > thing, and I?m hopeful that he will. > > JUAN GONZALEZ: Congressman, I?d like to ask you, on another matter, > a vote this week in Congress over the Peru free trade bill. Many > Democrats supported the administration position on this. You?ve been > outspoken in your opposition to many of these free trade agreements. > Your perspective on this vote? > > REP. DENNIS KUCINICH: It?s a disaster for the people of Peru. It?s a > disaster for farmers whose land is being poisoned by gold mining and > the cyanide that?s used in that process. And American workers have > absolutely no protection about jobs being moved out of this country. > It?s basically a modeling of NAFTA sent to Peru. This is really a > continuation of the stripping of rights of peoples of both nations. > And a reason why NAFTA has to be canceled -- and I?ve said that I > would do that as President -- that we must get out of the WTO -- I > said that I would withdraw from the WTO -- and to have trade that is > wholly and solely based on workers' rights, human rights and > environmental quality principles. And it?s time that we recognize > that this whole trade model has been about nothing but a race to the > bottom for workers. It?s time we stood up for workers, no matter if > they?re in Peru or anywhere else in the world, but certainly in the > United States. We should have some con cern a bout what the effect > of these trade agreements are on American workers. > > AMY GOODMAN: Congressman Kucinich, you are head of the Domestic > Policy Subcommittee, which has oversight over the FCC. Today in > Seattle, there is going to be the last of the FCC hearings, as Kevin > Martin, the chair, wants to expedite media consolidation. He says > perhaps they?ll be taking a vote around December 18th. What control > do you have over this? > > REP. DENNIS KUCINICH: Well, as the chairman of the Domestic Policy > Subcommittee, I can and will hold hearings on the FCC's decision- > making process. I think that we are in a time when media > consolidation is having a material and adverse impact on our > exercise of First Amendment rights in a democratic society. The > public may be largely unaware that the electronic media are > regulated because the airwaves belong to the people. And the Federal > Communications Act of 1934 said that the electronic broadcast media > must serve in the public interest, convenience and necessity. And > the more monopolization that happens, the less likely it is that the > public interest is going to be protected. So there is a long and > historic train here of thought that says that media consolidation is > a danger to our democracy and that, notwithstanding what the FCC > does, Congress should intervene to block any effort that would > enable further media consolidation. > > JUAN GONZALEZ: And the argument of those who say that the advances, > the technological advances in communications, the development of the > internet, basically has made -- outmoded a lot of the regulations > that the FCC operates now to regulate media ownership. > > REP. DENNIS KUCINICH: There?s a lot of people who think the > Constitution is outmoded, too. I think that when we realize the > concentration of wealth in our society has accelerated wealth to the > top, the concentration of information in our society and control > over information accelerates the intellectual wealth of the country > and the First Amendment rights of the country into the hands of > fewer and fewer. > > You know, A.J. Liebling years ago famously said freedom of the press > belongs to the man who owns one. But when you?re talking about > electronic broadcast media, the people own the airwaves. I mean, > that is the fundamental understanding that the American people > should have. Those airwaves do not belong to those networks or to > those big media companies. The airwaves belong to the public, and > they're supposed to serve in the public interest. > > AMY GOODMAN: We?re talking to Congressmember Dennis Kucinich, not > only a Congress member from Ohio, but Democratic presidential > candidate. I wanted to ask you about the issue of exclusion of > presidential candidates from various debates, most recently Mike > Gravel, the former Alaska senator. You weren?t invited to the > Democratic Party?s Jefferson Jackson dinner in Des Moines, that the > six other Democratic contenders are; your response? > > REP. DENNIS KUCINICH: Well, it?s pretty interesting when you > consider the fact that I?ve been running consistently fourth in a > number of national polls, ahead of three of the candidates who have > been invited. So what does that say? It says that there?s an attempt > to rig the presidential election, using the Iowa Democratic Party as > an accomplice. That?s not acceptable. This election doesn?t belong > to one state or, for that matter, to one party. And so, you know, > look of the national polls, and you?ll see what I?m talking about. > > Amy, while we?re still on the air, there?s something I want to > mention to you that I think is really important. Last night I was > reading the Defense Authorization Bill, and there is a section in > the bill that I want to read to you: Section 1615 requires the > Secretary of Defense to, one, ?determine the military-unique > capabilities needed to be provided by the Department of Defense to > support civil authorities in an incident of national significance or > a catastrophic incident.? And then it goes on to say provide funds > to develop a plan. What?s going on in this country? How can we stand > by and see our basic liberties undermined? > > AMY GOODMAN: We?re talking to Congressmember Dennis Kucinich in > Washington, D.C., running for president. I wanted to ask you about > the comment you made during one of the presidential debates, that > issue of seeing an unidentified flying object. Can you explain what > it is that you saw? > > REP. DENNIS KUCINICH: Well, first of all, you know, I was kind of > taken aback when I was asked that question, but I understand in > Washington the truth is an unidentified flying object, so I guess I > could admit that I saw something, found out later that Ronald Reagan > on two occasions was said to have seen a UFO, that Jimmy Carter was > said to have seen a UFO. So I?m assuming that now becomes a > prerequisite for becoming President of the United States. > > AMY GOODMAN: Final comment on media coverage right now of the > presidential race that you?re a part of. > > REP. DENNIS KUCINICH: Well, you know, I mean, the New York Times has > yet to discover that I?m a candidate. I could -- if I suddenly catch > fire in New Hampshire, where we?re running fourth and closing in on > third place, I would imagine that I could even win the election, and > the New York Times would have a big story about second, third, and > fourth place and fail to mention that I won. > > There is an attempt by the media to manage this election, to try to > determine the outcome of the election prior to the people casting > votes. It?s just another way to try to defeat the public interest > and to make of the election a kind of a farce. > > You know, all I need is an opportunity to debate Senator Clinton on > the war. She has voted for the war. She voted to fund the war. She > wants to stay in Iraq through 2013. And, frankly, her positions > aren?t much different than Barack Obama?s, John Edwards?s. I mean, > when I break into the top three, the whole election changes. And I?m > working on that. > > I realize I?m a long shot. I don?t have any delusions about that. > But I also know that right now democracy is a long shot in America, > and I realize that our constitutional protections are kind of a long > shot. So I?m willing to take that stand, and I think that the people > of New Hampshire are going to have an opportunity to append the > political process by voting for my candidacy, which will give them a > chance to have a voice and a consistent supporter, not just of peace > and workers' rights and healthcare for all, but of the basic > constitutional principles that brought us together to form a nation > so many years ago. > > AMY GOODMAN: Congressmember Kucinich, I want to thank you very much > for being with us, Congress member from Ohio and Democratic > presidential candidate. > > > From: Jean Comfort > Date: November 9, 2007 4:52:38 PM PST > To: sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org > Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] "Oil Apocalypse" on History Channel, > Tues, Nov.13 > > > _______________________________________________ > sosfbay-discuss mailing list > sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org > http://lists.cagreens.org/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss > > > _______________________________________________ > sosfbay-discuss mailing list > sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org > http://lists.cagreens.org/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss ___________________________________ The one conspiracy theory I can always count on to be a lie is the one proposed by the government and main stream media. 9/11 and Weapons of Mass Destruction being perfect examples. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From gerrygras at earthlink.net Sat Nov 10 14:17:56 2007 From: gerrygras at earthlink.net (Gerry Gras) Date: Sat, 10 Nov 2007 14:17:56 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Kucinich on DemocracyNow References: <111020070823.16884.47356A9E0003D95B000041F422007621940A079D0E03A10E089C070E05@comcast.net> <5685CEE3-1334-4825-AA95-D0BA82A9DDF8@duendevision.com> Message-ID: <47362E14.10206@earthlink.net> I don't know all of what Kucinich is thinking. But consider this.... It is also easier to impeach a VP than impeach a Pres. So if you start with Cheney, you are more likely to have at least one impeachment succeed. And you are not running the risk of making Cheney Pres, even briefly. Gerry Duende wrote: > I heard him on KPFA yesterday and he was amazing (as usual). He pointed > at the Democratic party as being in league with with the neo con agenda > (as well as the media of course). He pulled no punches. What was > brilliant was that he was going after Cheney first since if we impeached > Bush, then Cheney would be prez and then we'd have to impeach Cheney. > Dennis felt it would be too difficult to impeach two Presidents in a > row, but but a vice president and then a president would be more doable. > > paz > > > Duende > > > On Nov 10, 2007, at 12:23 AM, kaisha_marie at comcast.net > wrote: > > >> Great discussion on impeachment with Kucinich on DemocracyNow, Friday >> 11/09/07. He articulated the urgency to keep on trying to impeach >> Cheney since this administration can do a lot of damage in 14 months. >> It was quite terrifying, frankly. >> >> Transcript below: >> >> On Tuesday, Dennis Kucinich nearly forced the full House to vote on >> his measure to impeach Cheney. House Resolution 333 accuses Cheney of >> deliberately manipulating intelligence and deceiving the public to >> build support for the invasion of Iraq and now towards a possible >> attack on Iran. [includes rush transcript] >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> >> Despite the best efforts of the Democratic leadership, impeachment was >> indeed on the table this week in Washington. On Tuesday, >> Congressmember and presidential hopeful Dennis Kucinich nearly forced >> the full House to vote on his measure to impeach Vice President Dick >> Cheney. House Resolution 333 accuses Cheney of deliberately >> manipulating intelligence and deceiving the public to build support >> for the invasion of Iraq and now towards a possible attack on Iran. >> Twenty-one House Democrats have supported the bill, but it's met >> fierce opposition from the Democratic leadership. >> >> Democratic leaders were able to send the bill to the House Judiciary >> Committee, where they expect it to languish. In a bizarre sequence, >> Republican lawmakers initially voted against tabling the bill after >> their leadership apparently decided a House debate would embarrass the >> Democrats. The bill was eventually sent to committee after a >> back-and-forth wrangling between Kucinich and Majority Leader Steny >> Hoyer. >> >> Democratic leaders have famously declared that impeachment is off the >> table. But their view does not fall in line with recent polling >> figures. An American Research Group poll in July found that fifty-four >> percent of Americans support beginning impeachment proceedings against >> Vice President Cheney. Seventy-four percent of Democrats were also in >> favor. >> >> Congressmember Dennis Kucinich of Ohio introduced the measure. He >> joins me now from Washington. >> >> * Rep. Dennis Kucinich, Ohio Congressman and Democratic >> presidential candidate. Introduced House measure to impeach Vice >> President Dick Cheney. >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> >> RUSH TRANSCRIPT >> >> This transcript is available free of charge. However, donations help >> us provide closed captioning for the deaf and hard of hearing on our >> TV broadcast. Thank you for your generous contribution. >> Donate - $25 >> , >> $50 >> , >> $100 >> > emocra cynow.org>, more... >> >> >> JUAN GONZALEZ: Despite the best efforts of the Democratic leadership, >> impeachment was indeed on the table this week in Washington. On >> Tuesday, Congress member and presidential hopeful Dennis Kucinich >> nearly forced the full House to vote on his measure to impeach Vice >> President Dick Cheney. House Resolution 333 accuses Cheney of >> deliberately manipulating intelligence and deceiving the public to >> build support for the invasion of Iraq and now towards a possible >> attack on Iran. Twenty-one House Democrats have supported the bill, >> but it's met fierce opposition from the Democratic leadership. >> >> Democratic leaders were able to send the bill to the House Judiciary >> Committee, where they expect it to languish. In a bizarre sequence, >> Republican lawmakers initially voted against tabling the bill after >> their leadership apparently decided a House debate would embarrass the >> Democrats. The bill was eventually sent to committee after a >> back-and-forth wrangling between Kucinich and Majority Leader Steny >> Hoyer. >> >> AMY GOODMAN: Democratic leaders have famously declared impeachment is >> off the table. But their view does not fall in line with recent >> polling figures. An American Research Group poll in July found 54% of >> Americans support beginning impeachment proceedings against Vice >> President Cheney. 74% of Democrats were also in favor. >> >> Congressmember Dennis Kucinich of Ohio introduced the measure. The >> presidential candidate joins us now from Washington, D.C. We welcome >> you to Democracy Now!, Congressman Kucinich. >> >> REP. DENNIS KUCINICH: Good morning. Good morning, Amy. >> >> AMY GOODMAN: Explain exactly what you did this week. >> >> REP. DENNIS KUCINICH: The articles of impeachment that were introduced >> under a privileged resolution cite the Vice President's persistent >> lies relating to Iraq. He claimed that Iraq had weapons of mass >> destruction, that necessitated the US response. He claimed that Iraq >> somehow was connected to al-Qaeda's role in 9/11. He has been beating >> the drums for war against Iran. Those are the elements of the articles >> of impeachment that were introduced into the House this week. >> >> JUAN GONZALEZ: And why introduce your resolution in regards to Vice >> President Cheney and not to President Bush? >> >> REP. DENNIS KUCINICH: Well, certainly President Bush also has to be >> held accountable. However, I think that any constitutional process >> that begins for the removal of an official, when you have the Vice >> President, who led the effort to deceive this country with respect to >> a war against Iraq, it's appropriate that he be dealt with first, so >> that you don't create a condition where you remove the President first >> and then Mr. Cheney becomes his successor, and then you have to have >> an impeachment of two presidents consecutively. >> >> AMY GOODMAN: Explain the leadership's position and why you chose to do >> what you did this week. >> >> REP. DENNIS KUCINICH: I think it's very difficult to explain their >> position, because I don't think their position is defensible. I think >> when you consider that our whole nation is at risk, our constitutional >> form of government has been undermined by lies, by illegal war, by >> massive debt, how can you explain the position of Democratic leaders? >> >> I think that the American people and their response is becoming more >> and more powerful, and we're seeing that there being rising discontent >> among Democrats in Congress about the direction that our leaders have >> said is not possible. I think that people want to see this >> administration held accountable. After all, what could be more >> important than having an opportunity to get to the truth of what >> happened in Iraq, that the war was based on lies; that over almost >> 4,000 of our brave young men and women who represent this country have >> lost their lives because of those lies; that over a million innocent >> Iraqis, noncombatants, civilians, have lost their lives because of >> those lies; that we will spend between one and two trillion dollars >> for this war, even borrowing money from China? And our whole domestic >> agenda is being capsized by this war. And the administration is >> preparing still to take us in another war against Iran, similarly >> lying about a cause for war. So what can be more impor tant? Our >> country is at risk, and it's time for our Democratic leaders to take a >> stand. >> >> JUAN GONZALEZ: What do you say to those who will argue that even >> though they may agree with you on a lot of your concerns, that the >> impeachment process itself would drag out for so long that it may as >> well -- people should just move forward toward the elections and elect >> a new president? >> >> REP. DENNIS KUCINICH: Right, well, you think about that. You know, the >> administration will be in office for at least fourteen more months. >> They can cause a lot of damage in that time. They're planning to >> attack Iran. When you think about the defense authorization budget >> including a provision that would retrofit Stealth B-2 bombers so they >> can carry 30,000-pound bombs, which would then be dropped on nuclear >> research labs, creating an humanitarian and ecological disaster, "What >> are we waiting for?" is the question, not "Why don't we wait for the >> election?" >> >> AMY GOODMAN: The other argument that the leadership has used is that >> they're concerned about losing in a landslide vote against them, that >> that is bad strategically, Congressman Kucinich. >> >> REP. DENNIS KUCINICH: Since when does it become unfashionable to stand >> up for the Constitution, to stand up for our nation's laws, to stand >> up for international law, to stand up for moral law? Since when does >> it become inconvenient to take a stand that would help secure our >> democracy once again? I mean, we're really -- it's all at risk right >> now, and it's time that the Democratic leadership exerted an effective >> influence. As a coequal branch of government, Congress cannot stand by >> and let this administration continue to undermine our Constitution. >> That's why I introduced those articles of impeachment. >> >> AMY GOODMAN: What happens now? Is it over? >> >> REP. DENNIS KUCINICH: Not at all. I mean, Representative Wexler, who's >> a member of the committee, sent a note to the members of the committee >> two days ago saying that we ought to proceed with hearings. Members >> have been talking to John Conyers on a regular basis since the >> impeachment resolution was introduced, asking him to take this up, and >> I'm hopeful that he will. >> >> AMY GOODMAN: Do you feel Conyers has changed his position from, when >> he was in the minority, calling for impeachment, and then, when he >> became head of the House Judiciary Committee, stepping back with >> pressure from the House leadership? >> >> REP. DENNIS KUCINICH: I think John Conyers wants to do the right >> thing, and I'm hopeful that he will. >> >> JUAN GONZALEZ: Congressman, I'd like to ask you, on another matter, a >> vote this week in Congress over the Peru free trade bill. Many >> Democrats supported the administration position on this. You've been >> outspoken in your opposition to many of these free trade agreements. >> Your perspective on this vote? >> >> REP. DENNIS KUCINICH: It's a disaster for the people of Peru. It's a >> disaster for farmers whose land is being poisoned by gold mining and >> the cyanide that's used in that process. And American workers have >> absolutely no protection about jobs being moved out of this country. >> It's basically a modeling of NAFTA sent to Peru. This is really a >> continuation of the stripping of rights of peoples of both nations. >> And a reason why NAFTA has to be canceled -- and I've said that I >> would do that as President -- that we must get out of the WTO -- I >> said that I would withdraw from the WTO -- and to have trade that is >> wholly and solely based on workers' rights, human rights and >> environmental quality principles. And it's time that we recognize that >> this whole trade model has been about nothing but a race to the bottom >> for workers. It's time we stood up for workers, no matter if they're >> in Peru or anywhere else in the world, but certainly in the United >> States. We should have some con cern a bout what the effect of these >> trade agreements are on American workers. >> >> AMY GOODMAN: Congressman Kucinich, you are head of the Domestic Policy >> Subcommittee, which has oversight over the FCC. Today in Seattle, >> there is going to be the last of the FCC hearings, as Kevin Martin, >> the chair, wants to expedite media consolidation. He says perhaps >> they'll be taking a vote around December 18th. What control do you >> have over this? >> >> REP. DENNIS KUCINICH: Well, as the chairman of the Domestic Policy >> Subcommittee, I can and will hold hearings on the FCC's >> decision-making process. I think that we are in a time when media >> consolidation is having a material and adverse impact on our exercise >> of First Amendment rights in a democratic society. The public may be >> largely unaware that the electronic media are regulated because the >> airwaves belong to the people. And the Federal Communications Act of >> 1934 said that the electronic broadcast media must serve in the public >> interest, convenience and necessity. And the more monopolization that >> happens, the less likely it is that the public interest is going to be >> protected. So there is a long and historic train here of thought that >> says that media consolidation is a danger to our democracy and that, >> notwithstanding what the FCC does, Congress should intervene to block >> any effort that would enable further media consolidation. >> >> JUAN GONZALEZ: And the argument of those who say that the advances, >> the technological advances in communications, the development of the >> internet, basically has made -- outmoded a lot of the regulations that >> the FCC operates now to regulate media ownership. >> >> REP. DENNIS KUCINICH: There's a lot of people who think the >> Constitution is outmoded, too. I think that when we realize the >> concentration of wealth in our society has accelerated wealth to the >> top, the concentration of information in our society and control over >> information accelerates the intellectual wealth of the country and the >> First Amendment rights of the country into the hands of fewer and fewer. >> >> You know, A.J. Liebling years ago famously said freedom of the press >> belongs to the man who owns one. But when you're talking about >> electronic broadcast media, the people own the airwaves. I mean, that >> is the fundamental understanding that the American people should have. >> Those airwaves do not belong to those networks or to those big media >> companies. The airwaves belong to the public, and they're supposed to >> serve in the public interest. >> >> AMY GOODMAN: We're talking to Congressmember Dennis Kucinich, not only >> a Congress member from Ohio, but Democratic presidential candidate. I >> wanted to ask you about the issue of exclusion of presidential >> candidates from various debates, most recently Mike Gravel, the former >> Alaska senator. You weren't invited to the Democratic Party's >> Jefferson Jackson dinner in Des Moines, that the six other Democratic >> contenders are; your response? >> >> REP. DENNIS KUCINICH: Well, it's pretty interesting when you consider >> the fact that I've been running consistently fourth in a number of >> national polls, ahead of three of the candidates who have been >> invited. So what does that say? It says that there's an attempt to rig >> the presidential election, using the Iowa Democratic Party as an >> accomplice. That's not acceptable. This election doesn't belong to one >> state or, for that matter, to one party. And so, you know, look of the >> national polls, and you'll see what I'm talking about. >> >> Amy, while we're still on the air, there's something I want to mention >> to you that I think is really important. Last night I was reading the >> Defense Authorization Bill, and there is a section in the bill that I >> want to read to you: Section 1615 requires the Secretary of Defense >> to, one, "determine the military-unique capabilities needed to be >> provided by the Department of Defense to support civil authorities in >> an incident of national significance or a catastrophic incident." And >> then it goes on to say provide funds to develop a plan. What's going >> on in this country? How can we stand by and see our basic liberties >> undermined? >> >> AMY GOODMAN: We're talking to Congressmember Dennis Kucinich in >> Washington, D.C., running for president. I wanted to ask you about the >> comment you made during one of the presidential debates, that issue of >> seeing an unidentified flying object. Can you explain what it is that >> you saw? >> >> REP. DENNIS KUCINICH: Well, first of all, you know, I was kind of >> taken aback when I was asked that question, but I understand in >> Washington the truth is an unidentified flying object, so I guess I >> could admit that I saw something, found out later that Ronald Reagan >> on two occasions was said to have seen a UFO, that Jimmy Carter was >> said to have seen a UFO. So I'm assuming that now becomes a >> prerequisite for becoming President of the United States. >> >> AMY GOODMAN: Final comment on media coverage right now of the >> presidential race that you're a part of. >> >> REP. DENNIS KUCINICH: Well, you know, I mean, the New York Times has >> yet to discover that I'm a candidate. I could -- if I suddenly catch >> fire in New Hampshire, where we're running fourth and closing in on >> third place, I would imagine that I could even win the election, and >> the New York Times would have a big story about second, third, and >> fourth place and fail to mention that I won. >> >> There is an attempt by the media to manage this election, to try to >> determine the outcome of the election prior to the people casting >> votes. It's just another way to try to defeat the public interest and >> to make of the election a kind of a farce. >> >> You know, all I need is an opportunity to debate Senator Clinton on >> the war. She has voted for the war. She voted to fund the war. She >> wants to stay in Iraq through 2013. And, frankly, her positions aren't >> much different than Barack Obama's, John Edwards's. I mean, when I >> break into the top three, the whole election changes. And I'm working >> on that. >> >> I realize I'm a long shot. I don't have any delusions about that. But >> I also know that right now democracy is a long shot in America, and I >> realize that our constitutional protections are kind of a long shot. >> So I'm willing to take that stand, and I think that the people of New >> Hampshire are going to have an opportunity to append the political >> process by voting for my candidacy, which will give them a chance to >> have a voice and a consistent supporter, not just of peace and >> workers' rights and healthcare for all, but of the basic >> constitutional principles that brought us together to form a nation so >> many years ago. >> >> AMY GOODMAN: Congressmember Kucinich, I want to thank you very much >> for being with us, Congress member from Ohio and Democratic >> presidential candidate. >> >> >> From: Jean Comfort > > >> >> Date: November 9, 2007 4:52:38 PM PST >> >> To: sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org >> >> Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] "Oil Apocalypse" on History Channel, Tues, >> Nov.13 >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> sosfbay-discuss mailing list >> sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org >> http://lists.cagreens.org/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> sosfbay-discuss mailing list >> sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org >> http://lists.cagreens.org/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss > > > ___________________________________ > > The one conspiracy theory I can always count on to be a lie is the one > proposed by the government and main stream media. 9/11 and Weapons of > Mass Destruction being perfect examples. > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > sosfbay-discuss mailing list > sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org > http://lists.cagreens.org/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss > From tnharter at aceweb.com Sat Nov 10 23:49:17 2007 From: tnharter at aceweb.com (Tian Harter) Date: Sat, 10 Nov 2007 23:49:17 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] [Fwd: [G-C-F] Please support The Pleasant Revolution - what?] Message-ID: <4736B3FD.9000401@aceweb.com> The website shows them being at Stanford today, meaning Sunday the 11th. -------- Original Message -------- Subject: [G-C-F] Please support The Pleasant Revolution - what? Date: Sat, 10 Nov 2007 19:43:41 -0800 From: Beth Moore To: GPCA Forum Dear Greens, You don't hear from me often, and this is a big deal, with a favor at the end. Kipchoge Spencer and the Ginger Ninjas are friends of mine, from right here on "the ridge" in Nevada County. They've performed at a number of my Earth Day events. Maybe you saw them doing their sustainable living thing on the MTV series last year; maybe you've seen/heard their video "Dick Cheney Needs Love". At any rate they're coming your way! The Ginger Ninjas are embarking on a 5000 mile BICYCLE tour from N. Cal to S. Mexico. They will be playing music and promoting human-powered travel along the way. IN fact, Ninjas leader Kipchoge is also co-founder of the Extracycle Corp. - the super-bike each will be riding. And that's not all - they will power their performances with a human-powered pedal-driven 1000 watt sound system: 4 audience members at a time pedaling to push that PA system! I first saw a baby version of this system when I ran into Kipchoge at a San Francisco peace march a few years ago. He was playing his guitar with a pedal-PA system right in the street - singing marchers following him along like the damned Pied Piper! This group has a videographer and a couple other support folks along for the Pleasant Revolution Tour. They are filming a documentary, too. They have some places to stay, and some gigs lined up, and a LOT of miles to cover. They are Green/green as can be. I sang and jammed with them the night before they left, and next day they hit the road, 5 months of road. So, here's the favor: If you have any gig location connections, or know of an enlightened bike shop looking for a promo opportunity, or know of someone with a big kitchen/backyard/living room/barn/HEART, they could probably use a little support on the road. They'll mostly cruise the coast, but there are a lot of miles and not all passersby will be friendly. Please check their blogs for tour dates - these are rough estimates - and see if you think you can fit them in. I told them I would appeal to the Greens throughout California, who might be able to smooth the road along the way, and help the group keep moving along! They said, "We ARE the green party!" They also just got a great write up in the Sacramento News and Review. Please be creative! Food Not Bombs? Local radio/TV stations? BBQ and bike jam/camp in your own back yard? As Jesse said, "What we need is Not Much!" Thank you very much for any assistance or connections you might share with them. ~~ Beth Moore For tour dates and blog reports, go to: www.gingerninjas.com http://pleasantrevolution.net/ ********************************************* Here's an excerpt... OK, OK, imagine this: Hundreds of cyclists are gathering at your town's biggest intersection. In the middle of the crowd are 4 bikes thumping James Brown like an armada of lowriders-but the beauty is, there are no cars. Suddenly the crowd thunders into unison motion, rolling loudly through the town, turning heads, evoking cheers and applause. Over the music the onlookers can hear: "...This is the Pleasant Revolution people! We started pedaling on November 1st, 2007 in the Sierra mountains of Northern California, and we're going to keep pedaling over 5,000 miles, all the way down to the ancient pyramids of Chiapas, Mexico. No sag wagons or cars to help us haul our stuff - we're carrying it all on our bikes! Right now we're riding to a FREE concert up on the hillside of your town, and this is your invitation to come and watch the sunset with us! Rock the bike with The Ginger Ninjas, Shake Your Peace!, and your local bands too! You're invited to pedal our 800-watt human-powered P/A! That's right - our sound system runs on YOUR leg power. Sexify your biking legs while making some noise! Yeah - I said make some noise people! (crowd cheers) Every song is an audience participation song! Bike culture's blowin' up y'all - come find out how to do your 2-wheeled thing, and get in on this Pleasant Revolution!!!!!" Up on the hillside the 14-person Tour Caravan sets up incredibly fast, kicking their Xtracycle longbikes back and engaging the pedal-power units. As the band strikes up, the crowd smiles and knows they're in for a treat. In the cheering after each song, a new audience member volunteers to take a turn pedaling one of the 4 bicycles that run the P/A system. Everyone feels the magic in the air: "We're doing it ourselves. This is human power. This is the Pleasant Revolution.." Promotion of the Pleasant Revolution will be people powered by community and college radio stations along the journey south. We will be producing a radio show and pod cast from the road, as well as networking with other California stations for interviews and on-air appearances. The tour will be the subject of a film by 21st Paradigm, as well as multiple blogs. Traditional and online tour publicity has been arranged with the help of a generous grant from the Clif Bar Family Foundation. The tour is a project of Worldbike, a 501c3 organization, Kipchoge Spencer, founder of Xtracycle, and Gabe Dominguez of the Bicycle Music Festival. _______________________________________________ cal-forum mailing list cal-forum at cagreens.org http://lists.cagreens.org/mailman/listinfo/cal-forum -- Tian http://tian.greens.org Latest change: Added Saturday's Mountain View Steps It Up pictures. From JamBoi at Greens.org Sun Nov 11 07:07:41 2007 From: JamBoi at Greens.org (Drew Johnson) Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2007 07:07:41 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Stanford students protest Rumsfeld appointment Message-ID: <2790.38.99.84.36.1194793661.squirrel@greens.org> http://www.reuters.com/article/politicsNews/idUSN0828745020071109 Stanford students protest Rumsfeld appointment Thu Nov 8, 2007 10:47pm EST powered by Sphere Sphere STANFORD, California (Reuters) - More than 100 Stanford University students demonstrated on Thursday against a decision to make former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld a visiting fellow at the Hoover Institution amid campus discontent over a symbol of U.S. failings in the Iraq war. To date, nearly 4,000 Stanford faculty, students and alumni have signed a petition begun by a faculty member to reject Rumsfeld's appointment announced in September, but John Raisian, the institute's director, said Rumsfeld deserved the honor of being a "distinguished visiting fellow." "Donald Rumsfeld has a remarkable record of achievement," Raisian told the Stanford Faculty Senate. "Like it or not, he has had a distinguished career." Rumsfeld twice served as defense secretary under President Gerald Ford and President George W. Bush. He also served under President Richard Nixon; in the House of Representatives; as an ambassador to NATO; and as chief executive of two Fortune 500 companies. "The concern with Secretary Rumsfeld is that he might be distinguished for the wrong reasons," said David Spiegel, a professor in the department of psychiatry and behavioral sciences. "The fact that he is available for this appointment speaks to his difficulties." The position does not require residency in the San Francisco area, one of the hotbeds of anti-Iraq war sentiment since Bush launched the war that toppled Saddam Hussein. "If you consider his entire career, you could make an argument for the title distinguished," said Debra Satz, an associate professor in the department of philosophy. "But really, we're talking about the last six or seven years and I think across the board, he has been an incompetent secretary of defense." (Reporting by Clare Baldwin; writing by Adam Tanner; editing by Todd Eastham) From JamBoi at Greens.org Sun Nov 11 07:25:43 2007 From: JamBoi at Greens.org (Drew Johnson) Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2007 07:25:43 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Bay cleanup efforts expanding Message-ID: <3241.38.99.84.36.1194794743.squirrel@greens.org> http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2007/11/11/MNSETAB1P.DTL Bay cleanup efforts expanding VOLUNTEERS FRUSTRATED: Coast Guard defends its response to the spill, as people are warned not to touch oil or wildlife (11-10) 16:02 PST SAN FRANCISCO -- Emergency officials more than doubled the number of ships and cleanup workers attacking the massive oil spill throughout the Bay Area on Saturday - while hundreds of frustrated citizens who tried to help were turned away from contaminated beaches and so-called training sessions. The armada of governmental and private boats on the water either searching for oily messes or mopping them up grew from 11 to 46, the Coast Guard reported, and the number of people working cleanup shifts increased from 300 to 770. Three helicopters did flyovers all day to pinpoint the worst contamination spots. "I assure you, that's not where we're stopping," said Coast Guard Rear Adm. Craig Bone, who for days has been fending off criticism of his agency's response to the crisis. "In the next few days you'll see hundreds more people arriving on these beaches." Sixteen of the boats are skimmers - specially rigged craft that gather oil from the water - from private contractors hired by the company that owns the Cosco Busan container ship that rammed a Bay Bridge tower last week and dumped 58,000 gallons of bunker fuel into the bay. The other 30 boats are volunteer fishermen, recreational sailers and local agency craft that are helping deploy containment booms. The National Transportation Safety Board has just taken over the lead in the investigation, because the primary responsibility for the spill will apparently lie with the crew of the ship that caused it. NTSB officials convened a meeting late Saturday night to get up to speed on the status of the disaster. Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., is due to arrive today to tour the catastrophe by air and confer with disaster officials. Bone, however, indicated that the investigation has already narrowed somewhat - and pointed to the crew of the ship. "Our preliminary investigation shows no indication that there was anything mechanically wrong with the vessel," he said. "What remains is human error." The Coast Guard is the lead agency for the initial response to all big oil spills in the bay, and since Wednesday it has been taking heat from officials from San Francisco to Washington for both the cleanup effort and for its slowness in getting word out. Bone, whose agency will still be involved in the probe along with the NTSB, reiterated his earlier contentions that the immediate response to the crisis on Wednesday was appropriate - even though the Coast Guard did not notify the public of the extent of the spill until more than four hours after learning of it. "We did everything we could as quickly as we could," Bone said. As evidence of that, he noted that a cleanup skimmer was on the spill scene within an hour of the incident, something that he said usually takes several hours to happen. He also noted that the two tanks that ruptured had a capacity of 500,000 gallons - much more than spilled. The notification to the public, however, was not done well, he said. Since the heavy bunker fuel spewed from the Cosco Busan's ruptured hull at 8:30 a.m. Wednesday, oil globules have spread from Ocean Beach to Tomales Bay along the sea coastline, and in the bay from Richmond to Hunters Point. Oil was seen late last week at the Farallon Islands, but state officials said they could find none on Saturday. About 20 beaches around the region are closed. By Saturday evening, 231 injured live birds had been recovered. At least 65 birds have died. Officials suspended their tally of how much oil has been recovered, saying they will release one later. As of Friday, more than 20,500 gallons had been recovered. The increased mopping effort is an improvement, observers said - but not enough. "They need more cleanup crews," said Sejal Choksi, program director of the environmental watchdog group Baykeeper. "It seems like this is the weekend where we could make the most impact, because once it starts raining and another day of tides and currents move this oil around, it will be much harder to get at." Efforts by many people seeking to venture out on a rainy day and join cleanup crews, however, were a mixed bag. Hundreds of volunteers who wanted to do something were advised Saturday in San Francisco and in Richmond to go home and do nothing - spilled oil is just too dangerous for untrained volunteers to clean up, officials told them. The word came at an "informational session" for volunteers at Bill Graham Civic Auditorium, and at a classroom at the Richmond Harbor, both sponsored by the state Department of Fish and Game. "Don't go to the beach, don't pick up tar balls, don't touch wildlife," Yvonne Addassi, a wildlife director for the department, said in San Francisco. "We don't want you to be in contact with the oil. It's a hazardous substance." Scores of public-minded citizens who had shown up for the meeting - many wearing old clothes and gloves and ready for a messy day of hard work on the beach - were clearly confounded. The announcement of the meeting said officials would tell "how the public can get trained." But Addassi said there was really nothing an average person could do at the beach except get in the way or get harmed. Large numbers of people will "scare away" oil-soaked birds from landing on the beach, she said. Training for dealing with hazardous oil takes at least 24 hours, according to state and federal authorities. Officials from several agencies said no such training is available right now. "It's frustrating," said Ryan Gross of San Francisco. "I want to help. I don't want to sit home and do nothing. But that's what they told us to do." Meanwhile, a group of surfer activists with the Surfrider Foundation was urging its members to show up at Ocean Beach with "kitty litter scoops and heavy duty bags." And that's just what Alex Stein of San Francisco did. "It just seemed like the right thing to do," he said, picking up oil droplets with kitchen gloves. In Richmond, not all volunteers felt frustrated. Oakland psychologist Ed Grigas said the prevailing mood at the class for volunteers reflected "a lot of positive public opinion" and understanding about the limited opportunities for untrained helpers. Those who could not undergo 24-hour training were offered other suggestions for helping, such as preparing food for recovering birds or donating supplies. "The Berkeley Marina is accepting donations of sheets and towels," Grigas said. "I called my friends and asked them to help out. I plan to take old sheets and towels after work on Monday." Things were more tense Friday in Marin County, where Sigward Moser led a 30-person volunteer group - including 20 monks-in-training from the Mill Valley Zen Center - onto Muir Beach. For his efforts, he was detained and handcuffed. The little army managed to scoop up nearly 500 bags of gloppy, sandy oil between 2 and 5 p.m. Moser said it was easy duty: "It rolls up like kitty litter, right off the surface of the sand. Went right into the bags with no problem." They got almost all the oil they could find - and then a National Park Service ranger showed up. "He asked us to leave, and we said we needed to do what we were doing, so he put me in handcuffs," said Moser, a communications consultant. "I told him, 'Well, there was nobody else doing the cleanup before we began.' But he just said I was breaking the law and this is hazardous material that I shouldn't be dealing with." Moser was cited for two misdemeanors - failure to obey an official order and entry into a restricted area - and released. Now he has 500 bags of glop in his yard, and he has no idea how to get rid of it. A standing-room-only crowd of more than 200 people gathered Saturday in the Marin Headlands for yet another orientation by the Department of Fish and Game on how they could help - and they, too, wound up feeling flummoxed. There was a long slide show presentation updating the spill situation, describing the cleanup equipment and how Fish and Game operates. But the crowd interrupted, wanting to know what they could do - instead of listening to a lot of talk. "I've been to a lot of oil spills, and I have never been to one where there were this many volunteers," said Addassi, the environmental scientist with the department. She was interrupted by frustrated people. "Don't waste us!" a man shouted. "We want to do something now!" yelled another. Fish and Game volunteer coordinator Cindy Murphy begged people to be patient, and to call her volunteer line - (800) 228-4544 - because there are many opportunities to prepare materials and otherwise help without actually handling oil. Meanwhile, this weekend's two-day San Francisco Triathlon at Treasure Island became a Biathlon when the bay swim part of the competition was canceled. About 900 athletes competed Saturday, and the 72 from around the world who hoped to gain points to qualify for the Olympic Games were left high and dry - even though they still competed for $68,000 in prize money. Chronicle staff writers Joe Garofoli, Charles Burress, Peter Fimrite and Nanette Asimov contributed to this report. E-mail the writers at kfagan at sfchronicle.com, jwildermuth at sfchronicle.com and srubenstein at sfchronicle.com. From gerrygras at earthlink.net Sun Nov 11 23:36:17 2007 From: gerrygras at earthlink.net (Gerry Gras) Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2007 23:36:17 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] NYT Criticism of Bush etc. Message-ID: <47380271.6080103@earthlink.net> This article comes from the New York Times and makes a strong (for the New York Times) criticism of the Bush Administration AND Feinstein and Schumer. "The Coup at Home" http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2007/11/11/5156/ Gerry From gerrygras at earthlink.net Mon Nov 12 00:00:59 2007 From: gerrygras at earthlink.net (Gerry Gras) Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2007 00:00:59 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Feinstein ally of Bush Message-ID: <4738083B.9070900@earthlink.net> This article is mostly about how Senator Dianne Feinstein has been of great assistance to Bush. It also has a bit about support for opponents of Democratic incumbents in the primaries. (Unfortunately Feinstein's current term does not end until 2012.) "Dianne Feinstein - Bush's Key Ally in The Senate - To Support Telecom Amnesty" http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2007/11/11/5154/ Gerry From JamBoi at Greens.org Mon Nov 12 03:31:48 2007 From: JamBoi at Greens.org (Drew Johnson) Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2007 03:31:48 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] The Treason of the Mainstream Democrats Message-ID: <2581.38.99.84.36.1194867108.squirrel@greens.org> http://www.atlanticfreepress.com/content/view/2816/81/ The Treason of the Mainstream Democrats Sunday, 11 November 2007 by Richard W. Behan Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort. ? Article III, Section 3, United States Constitution (emphasis added) The mainstream Democrats?represented, say, by Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, John Edwards, Joe Biden, and Christopher Dodd?have not levied war against the United States. Their treason lies instead in committing the second offense: they adhere to enemies of the country, giving them aid and comfort. The enemies are President George W. Bush and Vice President Richard Cheney. Like no other president and vice president in history, these men attacked their country. It was not our geography George Bush and Richard Cheney invaded. Instead they abandoned and subverted the bedrock institution of our Constitutional democracy: the rule of law. By word and deed, Mr. Bush repeatedly and arrogantly sets himself above the law, claiming obedience to be a matter of Presidential choice. Mr. Cheney orchestrates, coaches, applauds and iterates. This cannot stand if the country we know and cherish is to survive. George Bush and Richard Cheney are literally enemies of the state; long before now and by any measure of Constitutional justice they should have been impeached and removed from office. Abjectly, continuously, and stubbornly refusing to hold them accountable, however, the mainstream Democrats adhere to this criminal president and vice president: nothing they have asked for has been denied, no barriers placed in their way. That is giving them aid and comfort, and that is treason. George Bush and Richard Cheney took the country to war illegally, with a deliberate, carefully designed and executed package of fear-mongering propaganda: lies, distortions, and deceptions. No informed citizen entertains the slightest doubt about this. Lying to the people and the Congress was the most despicable violation of the rule of law by Mr. Bush and Mr. Cheney, but many more followed: torturing prisoners, denying habeas corpus, spying on U.S. citizens, nullifying new laws with ?signing statements,? and so on and on. The litany of impeachable offenses is long and painful, but the so-called ?War on Terror,? these men insist, makes all of it acceptable, even necessary. Nearly six years have elapsed since the Bush Administration first defeated the rule of law. For most of these years a Republican Congress saw fit not to intervene, or even to question this behavior, so effective was the Administration?s propaganda campaign, and so firm were the bonds of partisanship. But now the mainstream Democrats control the Congress. Also during these six years the truth emerged, and now we can see the ?War on Terror? truly for what it is?an overarching mega-lie: an untruth of such unimaginable scope and magnitude it recalibrates for an entire nation the perception of reality. (Aryan supremacy was the mega-lie of Nazi Germany.) No one should be surprised that the threat of terrorism has increased, not diminished, since 9/11: the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq were not even remotely intended to combat it. We know the Bush Administration, when it took office, was indifferent to terrorism, brushing aside explicit warnings about al Qaeda and Osama bin Laden; we know the President was planning instead, at least six months before 9/11, to invade both Afghanistan and Iraq; we know of a National Security Council memorandum dated February 3, 2001 speaking about the ?capture of new and existing oil and gas fields? in Iraq; we have acquired with a lawsuit the maps of Iraqi oil fields Vice President Cheney?s ?Energy Task Force? was studying a month later; we have learned how the privatized structure of Iraq?s postwar oil industry was designed by the Bush Administration a year before the war began; we know the Administration was negotiating pipeline rights-of-way with the Taliban, unsuccessfully, until five weeks before 9/11; we know the final threat to them was a ?carpet of bombs?; we are aware of President Bush twice refusing offers from the Taliban to surrender Osama bin Laden, before and after the carpet of bombs was unleashed; we?ve read of the five ?mega-bases? in Iraq, to house 100,000 troops for as long as 50 years; we?ve learned the U.S. Embassy compound under construction in Baghdad will be ten times larger than any other in the world; and we know Exxon/Mobil, Chevron/Texaco, Royal Dutch/Shell, and British Petroleum/Amoco are poised to claim immense profits from 81% of Iraq?s undeveloped oil fields. Are these the activities and outcomes of a ?War on Terror?? We also know President Bush, a month before 9/11 in August of 2001, notified the governments of Pakistan and India he would launch a military mission into Afghanistan ?before the end of October.? Between the dates of the President?s announcement and his order to attack, the Trade Towers and the Pentagon were struck by the hijacked airliners. Seizing in a heartbeat this spectacular opportunity to disguise and launch the preplanned invasions, the Bush Administration concocted the mega-lie, and the ?War on Terror? was born. The ?War on Terror? is a conscious and ingenious masquerade for the geostrategic pursuit and control of Middle Eastern oil and gas resources. The facts place this beyond dispute. Mr. Bush?s claim of ?taking the fight directly to the terrorists and the states that harbor them? was yet one more intentional deception, as subsequent events fully demonstrated. In Afghanistan the state was overthrown instead of apprehending the terrorists?Osama bin Laden remains at large?and in Iraq, when we invaded, there were no terrorists at all. But today both ?states? are fitted with puppet governments and dotted with permanent U.S. military bases in close proximity to their hydrocarbon assets. Only the Bush Administration continues to natter about a bogus ?War on Terror.? Others are more candid: o Republican Senator Senator Charles Hagel: ?People say we?re not fighting for oil. Of course we are. They talk about America?s national interest. What the hell do you think they?re talking about? We?re not there for figs.? (Speaking at Catholic University, 9/24/07) o Former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan, in his book The Age of Turbulence: Adventures in a New World: ?I?m saddened that it is politically inconvenient to acknowledge what everyone knows: the Iraq war is largely about oil.? o Democratic Senator Jon Tester: ?We?re still fighting a war in Iraq and people who are honest about it will admit we?re there over oil.? (Associated Press, 9/24/07) o General John Abizaid, retired CENTCOM commander: ?Of course it?s about oil, we can?t really deny that.? (Speaking at Stanford University, 10/13/07) The criminal fraudulence of the ?War on Terror? is fully documented (see http://www.alternet.org/waroniraq/63632/ ), but the contemporary press has been derelict in failing to expose the mega-lie and publicize it. The mainstream Democrats are equally derelict in ignoring it. Failing to hold President Bush accountable for his crimes constitutes the most profound obstruction of justice. And failing to contradict his hideous mega-lie clearly reinforces the President?s hand: the mainstream Democrats are now accomplices. The damage done by the Democrats? treason is equally great in prospect. Without exposing the lie of the war in Iraq and acting upon the exposure, there is no credible and reliable way to stop the Administration?s insane intention of attacking Iran. The proffered rationales?and the fraudulence?are identical, as the Democrats stride toward complicity in yet another illegal and immoral war. Why can?t the mainstream Democrats speak sublime truth to demonic power? Doing so, they claim, would be too ?divisive? and jeopardize the party?s success in next year?s election. This strategy is politically suicidal. A Democratic sweep in 2008 grows dimmer every day. The rank-and-file Republicans who continue to believe Mr. Bush?s lies about the ?war on terror? will not vote for a Democrat. The rank-and-file Democrats who see through the lies are increasingly enraged by the insipid waffling of their mainstream candidates. And roughly half the American people don?t bother to vote at all, repelled by the tawdry attack ads and negativity of bitterly partisan, superficial, sophomoric, and issue-avoidance politicking. If the mainstream Democrats do nothing to change this, they will wind up where they?re headed?disappointed and defeated in 2008?and they will deserve it. Only by exposing and acting on the truth about the war can they change any Republican minds, regain the support of disenchanted Democrats, and attract the politically inert, indifferent Americans. A new style of politics needs badly to be engaged, one that is dedicated not merely to winning elections, but to a genuine concern for truth, for justice, for the rule of law, and for integrity in public service. The most direct and honorable way of invoking such a style is by impeaching George Bush and Richard Cheney. Never in our history have the high crimes and misdemeanors been so flagrant, and the people of our country know it. Yes, Congressman Kucinich sought with a ?member?s privilege? motion to initiate an impeachment proceeding on the floor of the House of Representatives. But Democratic Majority Leader Steny Hoyer moved immediately to kill the initiative, only to be thwarted by a Republican trick. Finally Nancy Pelosi, desperate to avoid a floor debate, managed to have the matter referred to the Judiciary Committee?where Chairman John Conyers has been sitting on the original bill since last April. The giving of aid and comfort to the enemies will, seemingly, continue. But the mainstream Democrats now face a carpe diem moment of truly historic measure: if they choose, they can foreswear their treason. It was a majority, bipartisan vote that sent the impeachment bill to Judiciary, and that is all the political cover the Democrats need to take the next courageous and necessary step. For the sake of the rule of law, for the sake of the integrity of the Congress, for the sake of the country?s future, and incidentally for the sake of a potential Democratic victory in 2008, the politics of truth and justice must be showcased. The Judiciary Committee must hold hearings immediately, to see if impeachment is in fact warranted?and polls say the greater part of the country thinks it is. If the mainstream Democrats will not do this, if their treason continues, then decent and thinking citizens everywhere?concerned patriots all?can only weep for their country. Richard W. Behan lives and writes on Lopez Island, off the northwest coast of Washington state. He is working on his next book, To Provide Against Invasions: Corporate Dominion and America?s Derelict Democracy. He can be reached at rwbehan at rockisland.com. (This essay is deliberately not copyrighted: it may be reproduced without restriction.) From JamBoi at Greens.org Mon Nov 12 03:56:58 2007 From: JamBoi at Greens.org (Drew Johnson) Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2007 03:56:58 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Corporate Media Desperate To Suppress Coverage Of Impeachment Movement Message-ID: <1034.38.99.84.36.1194868618.squirrel@greens.org> http://journals.democraticunderground.com/Hissyspit/3166 The PEN: Corporate Media Desperate To Suppress Coverage Of Impeachment Movement Sun Nov 11th 2007, 06:50 AM The Peoples E-mail Network: www.usalone.com Do you have any idea how desperate the corporate media is to suppress coverage of the growing impeachment movement? One of the most riveting events to occur in Congress in recent history occurred last week, and not one of the major so-called news channels wanted you to know it had happened. An incredible live event, and they didn't even cover it. But they will, finally, if only more of us speak out now. Cheney Impeachment Action Page: http://www.usalone.com/hres333.php Facebook Version: http://apps.facebook.com/fb_voices/action.... On Nov. 6, 2007, Dennis Kucinich brought a privileged resolution calling for the impeachment of Vice President Cheney, based on just a couple of Cheney's constitutional high crimes. And for two hours the House of Representatives was tied up in knots trying to figure out how to try to shut him up. In their contempt for the people, the Republicans committed the colossal tactical blunder of trying to mock the momentous occasion. When the Democratic so-called leadership tried to table the Kucinich resolution, as we expected them to do, the Republican big shots suddenly directed their underlings to change their votes, to start voting AGAINST the motion to table, thereby forcing the very vote Kucinich sought. The entire House of Representatives was thrown into a turmoil. It was high drama as the motion to table suddenly was being rejected numerically, with Republican help. The scheduled 15 minute vote extended into two hours, with nobody in a leadership position knowing how to deal with the crisis of one man standing up and speaking the truth. And did you hear about this incredible drama on your cable TV? No you did not. Now the defeatists out there, and we know they are out there, will try to tell you that because the impeachment resolution was ultimately sent to the Judiciary Committee that nothing more will happen. That's like saying because the indictment was given to a judge and a prosecutor, that will be the end of it. But whatever the vain intent of certain so-called Congressional leaders, the Judiciary Committee is exactly where we want the resolution, for that is where the actual impeachment articles must emerge from. Look at what's actually happening, and not what the right wing spinners are trying to tell you is happening. Progressive talk personalities are calling for action all over the dial. They are giving out toll free congressional phone numbers and calling on their listeners to now put real pressure on the Judiciary Committee. This is happening only because your voices forced the issue in the first place, by calling those shows and talking about impeachment and the necessity for it. Look at what's actually happening. Members of the House are being forced to justify why they have not yet acted to defend and protect the Constitution. And their lame and pathetic excuses are exposing just how poorly represented the people of the United States are. More people are realizing that their voices do count, and that Congress has no answer to defend their failure to do their sacred constitutional duty. It is only because of the impeachment movement that attention is being focused on Cheney's insane fixation on bombing Iran and starting the last World War of them all. It is only your voices that can stop the secret march to Armageddon, as they make up new lies to sucker the American people into yet another, and even more monumental, military debacle. Yes, the heat is on the Judiciary Committee alright. Their first bleating reaction was to talk about how busy they were putting together a contempt citation for Mier and Bolton. This is something that should have happened instantly 6 months ago when the subpoenas were first defied, at the direction of the Cheney White House, itself an impeachable offense. Well, we'll just see if they even do that in the next two weeks. Yes, the heat is on the Judiciary Committee, as more and more people all over the country raise their voices, some for the perhaps the first time. Join those voices now. Use the either of the action pages below to send your personal message to the Judiciary Committee, Nancy Pelosi and your own member of the House as well. Tell them we will not shut up. Tell them we will not go away. Tell them they work for us and not the other way around. Cheney Impeachment Action Page: http://www.usalone.com/hres333.php Facebook Version: http://apps.facebook.com/fb_voices/action.... What is actually happening is they have stupidly and arrogantly given the people hope. And hope is the most powerful enemy the corrupters of our democracy have. The only thing they have going for them is fear, and its two evil twins, defeatism and inaction. The rule only by fear . . . flooding our TVs with propaganda and smug indifference to the will of the people, masquerading as the news. Tell them you are not afraid. Tell them you will no longer be ruled by fear. Speak out now to force the hand of the Judiciary Committee, and necessary truth of how our country has been systematically betrayed by imperial subversives in the White House for the last 7 years will be heard and confronted, at last. Please take action NOW, so we can win all victories that are supposed to be ours, and forward this alert as widely as possible. If you would like to get alerts like these, you can do so at http://www.usalone.com/in.htm From JamBoi at Greens.org Mon Nov 12 11:24:30 2007 From: JamBoi at Greens.org (Drew Johnson) Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2007 11:24:30 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Gathering @ Honda's Tues, 11:30 to appreciate vote vs. tabling impeachment Message-ID: <2680.38.99.84.36.1194895470.squirrel@greens.org> I know Merriam, I, Kaisha and others (Merriam has been coordinating) will be there. Will you join us? Tuesday Nov 13th 11:30AM, Mike Honda's office TO give appreciation for Honda voting against killing the impeachment resolution (note this by no means is an endorsement of Honda, but serves to give positive feedback on a single step in the direction of impeaching Cheney, and we'll be sure to ask for the whole tamale. :-) ). Impeach for Peace! Drew From WB4D23 at aol.com Mon Nov 12 20:57:33 2007 From: WB4D23 at aol.com (WB4D23 at aol.com) Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2007 23:57:33 EST Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Attn County Council Members -- Where are the GPCA Announcements? Message-ID: As CCWG Coordinator, I know that a group of CCWG Announcements was posted on the GPCA Official Announcements list (and another is on its way regarding County Polling on Ballot Measures). As a California GPUS Delegate, I have seen another announcement about delegates to the GPUS national nominating convention. It's my understanding that the County Council has the collective responsibility of forwarding such messages to at least this GPSCC general discussion/information list. Where are the announcements? Warner ************************************** See what's new at http://www.aol.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JamBoi at Greens.org Tue Nov 13 09:01:02 2007 From: JamBoi at Greens.org (Drew Johnson) Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2007 09:01:02 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Hyperpartisanship: Anatomy of one party rule and progressive's opportunity Message-ID: <2236.38.99.84.36.1194973262.squirrel@greens.org> {Three articles that spell out the challenge/opportunity facing America today. They detailing how CheneyBush maintain one party duopolistic "hyperpartisan" rule. In the second Lindorf again reiterates his call for progressives to quit the Democratic party and "go somewhere else" or "found a new party". The third NYT article points out that 74% of Americans now believe we are on the 'wrong track' and how lasting political power will go to "a broad coalition that locks arms to produce meaningful progress against the country?s problems". This is opportunity folks! - DJ} http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/?q=node/28666 Perversions of Power Submitted by davidswanson on Tue, 2007-11-13 16:05. Media By Bernard Weiner, Crisis Papers There are a few things in life that one can count on: death, taxes, and people wanting to rewrite your play. And, for our purposes today, the famous dictum from the noted British historian Lord Acton (1834-1902): "...Where you have a concentration of power in a few hands, all too frequently men with the mentality of gangsters get control. History has proven that. ... Power tends to corrupt; absolute power corrupts absolutely.? It doesn't seem to matter whether those power-wielders are liberals or conservatives, Democrats, Republicans or Independents, civilian or military, decent or warped, whatever. There are exceptions, of course, but the tendency certainly is there for power to corrupt, and the reality that absolute power corrupts absolutely. There seems to be something inherent in the holding of power that goes to peoples' heads. The resulting misrule seems especially egregious for those leaders who were installed in power via the electoral process. Somehow, against all expectations, we assume -- we want to assume -- that elected leaders will be more "pure," less likely to abuse the power at their command, will be less prone to corruption, will be more accessible to ordinary citizens. And then our hopes are dashed when the old crew is defeated and the new bunch turn out almost or just as bad, or sometimes even worse. (The only saving grace is that democratic elections, provided they are honest, do make it somewhat easier to remove bad officials -- at least in theory.) Again, we're not surprised when a dictator behaves atrociously -- Hitler, Stalin, Mussolini, Pol Pot, Amin, Mugabe, Saddam Hussein, et al.; indeed, we'd be surprised if they conducted themselves in any other way. Dictators dictate and go wild with the power they have at their command. Eventually, either their own brutalized populations revolt and overthrow them, or their neighbors or the world community finally decide they've had enough and engineer their downfall. (It usually takes years for this revulsion to build to action; in the meantime, during their reigns of terror, millions have died, economies and institutions are in tatters, and countries' souls have been strangled.) So where am I going with this? In case you haven't sussed it out, I'll be talking here about CheneyBush, the Democratic Party, and Pervez Musharraf. Lord Acton would have a field day with these guys as negative role models for how not to lead. CHENEYBUSH & AUTHORITARIANISM Cheney, ever since his days in the Ford Administration, has been consumed with the desire to expand the powers of the presidency -- presumably as long as he's in proximity to the Oval Office. Candidate-Bush appointed Cheney to go find him the best Vice Presidential running-mate; after a nationwide search, Cheney reported back that he found the perfect V.P. for Bush: himself. The rest is (bad) history. Bush has been quoted at least three times expressing, supposedly in jocular fashion, that dictatorships are much preferable to clunky, messy democracy "as long as I get to be the dictator." Ha, ha. As they've clearly demonstrated, neither Cheney nor Bush has any affinity for the give and take of democracy. Certainly they've evidenced very little patience for the way the country's Founding Fathers, in their genius, doled out pieces of power to the three branches of government so that no one person or faction easily could abuse their limited authority. If the three branches couldn't come to compromise agreements, there would be governmental deadlock for awhile and then the people would have a chance to rectify and alter the situation with their pressure or with their votes in the next election. That separation-of-power arrangement worked reasonably well for more than 200 years, but Cheney and Rove and Bush much preferred a more authoritarian approach. They put democracy on hold and took matters into their own hands in order to push their domestic and foreign agendas. The Founding Fathers, and today's citizens, never imagined the scenario of "men with the quality of gangsters" in the Executive Branch amassing all control in their hands, and acting ruthlessly to maintain that stranglehhold on power by crushing all opposition. Short version: They relegated the then-minority opposition party, the Democrats, to non-entity status with the aim of making them irrelevant to government and, with the help of some electoral dirty-tricks and vote-manipulation, creating one-party rule for at least a generation or two. (The result of keeping all power in the hands of the Republicans was that virtually all bribes and lobbying money went to GOP politicians -- which, given the truth of Lord Acton's dictum, resulted in numerous corruption indictments of Republican office-holders a few years later.) Further, if any bills passed that didn't please CheneyBush 100%, Bush would attach a "signing statement" to the legislation saying he reserved the right to ignore or overturn those parts he didn't agree with. In effect, a permanent veto power outside the traditional way of quashing Congressional legislation. It's estimated that Bush has attached close to 1000 such "signing statements" to laws passed by Congress. Even more outrageous: CheneyBush got their legal counsels (David Addington/Scooter Libby, Alberto Gonzales) to devise a theory of governance that permitted Bush to violate the Constitution or Congressional laws whenever he claimed he was acting as "commander-in-chief" to protect the "national-security" interests of the American people. In short, under a cockamamie "unitary executive" theory of governance, Bush would be permitted to act as a dictator on all matters foreign and domestic. He warned the courts, which he has packed with his own ideological kinsmen, not to interfere with these prerogatives, and he essentially cut the Legislative Branch out of oversight of his behavior and/or ignored their occasional objections, in effect daring anybody to stop him. Few felt brave enough to question this misrule at the top, especially on the subjects of the lies used to invade and occupy Iraq, or on torture of suspected terrorists, or on the shredding of the 800-year-old tradition of habeas corpus along with Constitutional protections of the Bill of Rights. (Bush's near-police state included domestic spying without court warrants, rifling through one's computer, black bag jobs, "disappearing" citizens into military jails with no access to lawyers, etc.). With no effective opposition, and with most of the mass-media parrotting the White House spin, CheneyBush have had free reign to rampage through the law and threaten and invade around the globe. Hundreds of thousands have died or been maimed as a result -- American troops and Iraq/Afghanistan civilians -- and a new war is being planned for Iran. THE DEMOCRATIC "OPPOSITION PARTY" And how has the ostensible "opposition party" responded to the stop-me-if-you-can gauntlet thrown down by CheneyBush and their GOP supporters in Congress? The Democrats barely take on the issues that really matter: the ongoing Iraq war, the impending attack on Iran, the destruction of the Constitution. In 2006, the American people -- angry and turned off by CheneyBush's extremism, thorough-going incompetence, and corruption on so many levels -- voted the Republicans out of power in Congress and installed a slim but telling Democratic majority. Polls revealed that the voters were fed up with CheneyBush policies, especially with regard to the quagmirish Iraq war and the violation of their privacy rights, and that's why they gave the Democrats a mandate to clean out the stables. But the timid Dems forgot who put them into power and why, and continued to act as if they were still in the minority by rolling over on their backs whenever CheneyBush started calling them "soft on terrorism" or whatever. In effect, the Democrats have become enablers of the worst policies of the CheneyBush juggernaut, and now have blood on their hands. The logic of the Dems' easy and constant capitulations is baffling. Bush is now the most loathed president in modern history, even lower in approval ratings than Richard Nixon at his lowest, a mere 24%, and Cheney is even lower at 11% approval. The public is more than two-thirds opposed to CheneyBush's Iraq War and Occupation and feel the U.S., in general, is headed "in the wrong direction." And yet the Democrats behave as if they have to snap to it whenever the Administration looks at them the wrong way. Perhaps the best symbol of that timidity is their refusing to even consider impeachment of Cheney and Bush for a long list of high crimes and misdemeanors. Because of their wimpy behavior, on impeachment and Iraq, the Democrats in Congress are held in even less repute than CheneyBush. Indeed, elements of the Democratic activist base, the ones who worked so hard to get them into the majority in 2006, are threatening to abandon the party and are denouncing Dem leaders and many of the announced presidential candidates for the 2008 race. Many Dems are no longer sending donations to the Party coffers, and instead are restricting their giving to specific candidates who demonstrate moral strength and independence in their policy choices. In short, as Lord Acton would have known would happen, the ascension to Congressional majority status power has tended to corrupt the Democrats, and there is great suspicion that if they were given absolute power they would be only a little different from the morally-bankrupt CheneyBush Administration, with more wars of choice abroad and more willingness to misuse the expanded powers of the presidency against their perceived political enemies. HYPOCRISY IN PAKISTAN The situation in Pakistan is uber-serious. If a centrist/secular Pakisan government were to fall and militant Islamists got their hands on that country's nuclear missiles, there is no telling what kind of conflagration might occur in the Greater Middle East, or beyond. But certain lessons can be drawn from the situation there. And, lo and behold, Condi Rice and George W. Bush delivered some of them, calling for Musharaff (nudge nudge, wink wink) to return to democratic institutions, guarantee an honest voting process, support a free-wheeling investigatory press, respect an independent judiciary and oppositional elements, etc. Trouble is, the CheneyBush vision of what's wrong is sharp when it refers to Pakistan but they seem incapable of seeing the mote in their own eyes. You can't pretend to be an admirable democratic country when you violate your Constitution and deny citizens their rights, and you can't denounce torture and mistreatment of protesters and prisoners when you sanction such in your own behavior, and you can't decry a political leader also being the head of the military when your country operates that way, too. The American double-standard reeks. (Catch this quote from White House Press Secretary Dana Perino when asked about the situation in Pakistan. Question: "It is ever reasonable to restrict constitutional freedoms in the name of fighting terrorism?" Her unequivocal answer: "In our opinion, No." Oh, but I love the smell of hypocrisy in the morning.) LIMITED CHOICES IN PAKISTAN In a way, what's happening in Pakistan, with Musharraf proclaiming martial law and arresting his political enemies, is reminiscent of the era of Cold War politics. The U.S. supported with gobs of money and military aid any country that professed "anti-communism"; this policy meant that the U.S. lost popular international support around the globe because we were backing the worst sort of dictators who represssed their peoples (Marcos in the Phillipines, the Shah of Iran, the apartheid regime in South Africa, etc. etc.). And here we are again: If you claim you're anti-"terrorist," American will supply you with billions in cash, police "training," and loads of high-tech weaponry. Musharraf, who assumed office in a military coup, always has been in a delicate position with his own people. He has to mollify the U.S., his major benefactor, while not losing the support of his more nationalist, Islamic population. Eventually, of course, by being so tightly allied to Bush, he antagonized the nationalists and the Islamist extremists, the latter of whom began suicide bombing in Karachi, Islamabad and beyond. By stomping on his political opposition, Musharraf, who continued to head the military while serving as president, nearly-destroyed the moderate middle of the political spectrum. Now what does he do? (If he loses the election he promises to hold in January or February, and militant Islamists were to move into power, would the U.S. honor the democratic will of the Pakistani citizenry? Or, as happened in the Palestinian territories, would the U.S. denounce the result of the election and refuse to deal with the popularly-elected victors? For CheneyBush, democracy is a bitch when the "wrong" people get elected.) CheneyBush have few decent choices with regard to Pakistan. They could cut Musharraf loose and support Bhutto, but she has yet to demonstrate that she can command the allegiance of the people, that she can govern from the middle, that she would be any more welcome by fundamentalists in her country. How to arrange all this without greasing the tracks for the militant Islamists to ride into power -- that's the trick. A talented diplomatic magician is needed to help arrange this trick, and the U.S. should be in the thick of it. But Bush, Cheney and Rice (fixated as they are on the catastrophe they've unleashed in Iraq and now on how and when to attack Iran) have demonstrated time and time again over the past seven years that they are not skilled at the kind of nuanced diplomatic negotiations that are required. My guess is that we'd better prepare ourselves for what's about to hit the giant fan in South Asia. Break out the umbrellas. # Bernard Weiner, Ph.D, in government & international relations, has taught at universities in Washington State and California, worked as a writer/editor with the San Francisco Chronicle for two decades, and currently co-edits The Crisis Papers (www.crisispapers.org). For comment: crisispapers at comcast.net _________ http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/?q=node/28668 {Here Lindorf again reiterates his call for progressives to quit the Democratic party. DJ} This Revolution Could Be Televised On Fox Submitted by dlindorff on Tue, 2007-11-13 16:14. By Dave Lindorff Now even the New York Times is saying it. In an editorial on Oct. 20, the Times wrote, ?Every now and then, we are tempted to double-check that the Democrats actually won control of Congress last year.? Noting how the Democratic House and Senate had rolled over and given the president permission to massively spy on Americans without showing any probable cause, the Times concluded, ?It was bad enough having a one-party government when Republicans controlled the White House and both houses of Congress. But the Democrats took over, and still the one-party system continues.? There is no question about it. The Democrats, after persuading voters to hand over control of Congress to them last November, have been worse than failures. They have betrayed the trust of the voters. Although the party clearly has the power to end the Iraq War by simply refusing to approve funds for continuing the mayhem and madness, it has instead given the president every dollar he?s asked for to continue it, and then some. Although every leading Democrat admits that the president has been torturing the Constitution, not one member has submitted a bill calling for the president?s impeachment, and the one bill submitted calling for Cheney?s impeachment, submitted by Rep. Dennis Kucinich, has been pushed off on a siding by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and her gang of ?leaders.? More recently in the Senate, where 41 Democrats could stop any presidential appointment, 53 Democrats instead approved a new attorney general, Michael Mukasey, who refuses to say waterboarding is torture and illegal, and who, even worse, says that in his view the president has the power to ignore laws passed by the Congress. I would go the Times one step further. There is no need to check to see if Democrats won control of Congress. It doesn?t matter. The Democrats have simply ceased to be an opposition party. The party of Franklin D. Roosevelt is now simply a collection of incumbent hacks who are looking to their own re-election, and who stand for nothing. So what is to be done? Various left-leaning activist organizations, like Democrats for America and Progressive Democrats of America, and pseudo-progressive organizations like Move-On and DailyKos, argue that liberal Democrats need to work within the party to elect more progressive candidates and party officials. But this strategy is doomed for several reasons. First of all, the leadership of the Democratic Party doesn?t want real liberals or, heaven-forefend, lefties. It wants candidates who can appeal to the corporations that bankroll both parties. And second, the leadership undermines those liberals who do have a chance of replacing the hacks who currently hold Democratic seats in Congress. As I have written before, we have seen more than 50 years of betrayal of liberal and left voters and their issues by the Democratic Party, and despite the efforts of would-be reformers, the situation has been getting worse, not better. The answer, I submit, is to tell Democratic incumbents and party officials that we?ve finally had it. We are not going to be ignored or walked over or taken for granted any longer. How to do this? By mass resignations from the Democratic Party, at which it is made crystal clear that there are two reasons for the actions: Congress isn?t stopping the war funding, and Congress isn?t initiating impeachment hearings. I am proposing that left and progressive organizations, civil rights groups, Church groups, anti-war coalitions, labor unions and other progressive and liberal groups start organizing mass actions that involve marches to the local board of elections or voter registrar?s office, for collective de-registration from the Democratic Party. Here in Philadelphia, we could have a mass march from Independence Hall to the Board of Elections, for example. This is a strategy that would hit the Democratic Party leadership like a bucket of ice water?or a brick--in the face. The beauty of the idea is that it will garner enormous press coverage, even if the numbers are relatively small. Thanks to the overall pro-Republican bias of the media, news outlets like AP, CNN and especially Fox TV, will find the idea of Democratic activists marching on voter offices and quitting the Democratic Party irresistible. And as other groups across the country see these protest actions, they will want to join in. In no time, Democratic incumbents in Congress, at the DNC, and in city halls and Democratic clubs across the country will see their most loyal voting base eroding. If that should happen, they will be in a panic. Just watch how fast they start impeachment hearings and stop passing war funding appropriation bills! Now whenever I?ve suggested this scheme, after the wild applause subsides, there are always those who raise the question about voting for progressive candidates in primaries, and about electing progressives to party office. I agree these are important steps, and that they should be attempted, but mass party quitting doesn?t preclude doing them. In many states, first of all (CA, NH, VA, MA, and SC, for instance), you don?t need to be registered in a party to vote in that party?s primary. But even in those states like my own Pennsylvania, where you do need to be registered in a party to vote in its primary, it is an easy thing to re-register in time to qualify for the primary. Just check with your voter registrar and learn the deadline. Then, after you?ve voted, just quit again. The same for party caucuses. Those who are elected to positions like county committeeperson should stay in the party, where they can try (good luck!) to make change. The important thing is those mass quit events. The other thing I hear is the argument that people should not be just urged to quit; they should be urged to join a third party. I disagree. As soon as you start trying to get agreement about joining a third party, you are introducing division into a movement that should be narrowly focused on the two issues of getting the Democrats, now, to end funding for the war and to initiate impeachment hearings. Anything else is a diversion. Besides, getting significant numbers of progressive-minded people to cut their ties to the Democratic Party offers the potential of creating a new base out of which a genuine mass party of the left might come. The first step though, is for all of us, who have been tethered to the Democratic Party for most of our adult lives, to cut the leash. If desperate Democratic officials respond by according us the same attention and support that they regularly accord to hedge fund managers and health insurance companies, if they meet our demands to end the war and defend the Constitution, so be it. Maybe we will back them in November ?08. If they don?t, then we?re free to go somewhere else, or to found a new party. One thing is clear: If we don?t do this, we will no longer live in a democratic state. We will live in a one-party state. ______________________ DAVE LINDORFF is a Philadelphia-based investigative journalist and columnist. His latest book, co-authored by Barbara Olshansky, is ?The Case for Impeachment? (St. Martin?s Press, 2006 and now available in paperback). His work is available at www.thiscantbehappening.net {This excerpt is from a NYT review of the book THE SECOND CIVIL WAR How Extreme Partisanship Has Paralyzed Washington and Polarized America By Ronald Brownstein that gets at the same phenomenon from a slightly different angle} speaks of He points out the practical dangers of hyperpartisanship ? how it has prevented America?s leaders from agreeing on everything from a comprehensive immigration plan to a strategy for reducing the country?s dependence on foreign oil to a long-term plan for securing Social Security. And he reminds us that while the country itself is not more divided than it has been in the past (especially when compared, say, with the 1960s or the 1860s), the nation?s current political system accentuates differences instead of bridging them. In contemplating the possibility of building a political system that would be ?less confrontational and more productive than today?s,? Mr. Brownstein explores a host of suggestions, including term limits for Supreme Court justices, the opening of all party primaries to independents, and the formation of a viable third party. Some of these suggestions may seem unrealistic, given the current state of politics. But the low approval rates for both the Bush White House and the Democratic-controlled Congress, combined with a growing conviction that the country is now off-track (an ABC News/Washington Post poll this month showed that 74 percent of Americans say the country is headed in the wrong direction), attest to the public?s dissatisfaction with legislative gridlock and poisonous fights over national security, social issues and Supreme Court appointments. In the long term, Mr. Brownstein writes toward the end of this sobering book, ?the party that seeks to encompass and harmonize the widest range of interests and perspectives is the one most likely to thrive. The overriding lesson for both parties from the Bush attempt to profit from polarization is that there remains no way to achieve lasting political power in a nation as diverse as America without assembling a broad coalition that locks arms to produce meaningful progress against the country?s problems.? From JamBoi at Greens.org Tue Nov 13 09:44:25 2007 From: JamBoi at Greens.org (Drew Johnson) Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2007 09:44:25 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] New progressive 3rd party and the Greens place in multiparty democracy Message-ID: <2419.38.99.84.36.1194975865.squirrel@greens.org> While I don't feel certain of the details such as who, and when, as I've been saying this year I do feel certain that a new progressive 3rd party is likely to arise (one with lower standards than we Greens promote with our 10KV). The energy is there for it and people like Sheehan and Kucinich and other progressive Dems are likely adherents. While on one level I feel disappointment that we Greens haven't been ready to fully take advantage of the moment and be that party, I continue to think that in the long run we can turn the upcoming new multiparty landscape to our advantage to the extent we can live out our 10KV. And of course impeachment is late but not 'too late, nor is it 'too little'. True we can not save the hundreds of thousands of lives already lost or trillions flushed down the war toilet, but any life saved and resource redirected to peace is worth the effort of our struggle. Greens have including our newly minted Green Cynthia McKinney have been in the forefront of the impeachment movement all along and the investment in real leadership we've accomplished will stand us in good stead as we make impeachment happen and come into our own power in the new multiparty landscape. Green is Core! Drew Johnson GPCA Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2007 06:47:22 -0800 From: "Sanda Everette" Subject: Re: [usgp-dx] [usgp-nc] Delegate apportionment numbers To: "John Walsh" , "NatlComm Affairs" John, I totally agree with you. I was not a Green for Kucinich in 2004, but I was still shocked that after the primary, rather than sticking to his values, he endorsed in party's flag bearer. I was probably naive to even expect that of him. I continue to be amazed that progressives don't get that and think he is the savior of the Democratic party....which I guess he is alluding to giving up on after the 08 election. I am also amazed the way he is being celebrated now for introducing impeachment...too little, too late, when Cynthia was doing it years ago with no support from the Democrats. I have heard the statement, that the Democratic party is where progressive causes go to die. My limited political education was expanded when that concept was solidified for me after reading The Avocado Declaration by Peter Camejo. http://www.mvp-seattle.com/Pages/ExtraPages/pageAvocadoDelecaration.htm I knew that I could never again vote Democrat. Frankly, I was quite disappointed by the number of truly sophisticated progressives who joined the ABB camp in 2004. Yes, the Bush regime has been a nightmare of devastation for this country...and the world, but the lesser of two evils is still evil. (I debated betwen replying only to you or moving to discussion list. We are no longer relevant on the votes list.) On 11/13/07, John Walsh wrote: > > Kucinich - a new party? Even then I would not trust him after his > endorsement of Kerry in 2004. You mean after November, 2008? That is > far too late. > > As for the Green image being a detriment, I do not think so. It has > enormous appeal in the suburbs and among the white middle class and > upper middle class. We are basically a social democratic party and > such a party can gain more acceptance as Green. > But that is not enough. We in MA have coalesced with the original > Rainbow which was formed by Mel King and whose name was adopted later > by Jesse Jackson. We are the Green Rainbow Party, GRP, here in MA. > This gives us a base among the urbanites - especially the poor and > Black population. This is very powerful idea if we could implement it > properly, because it gives us the twin base that should be ours. > > Unfortunately there are problems in the propere implementation but the > idea is there. > john walsh (MA delegate) > > On 11/12/07, Sanda Everette wrote: > > John, > > snip > > > > > > I don't think you will see Cindy Sheehan jump in. Someone on her > campaign > > told me yesterday that after November, she and Dennis Kucinich are going > to > > start a new party. They think the Greens can't get past the image of > being > > environmentalists. Maybe they, like others, have us confused with > > Greenpeace. We need more visitbility, from a positive position of > > solidairy. Gee, sometimes I wish we were acting like environmentalist, > in > > harmony with each other and the earth. We barely can sustain an > eco-action > > committee. > > > > > Sanda, CA > > > > On 11/12/07, John Walsh wrote: > > >snip > > > > And then perhaps other national figures will jump in. Cindy Sheehan? > > > We wait. > > > john walsh (MA delegate) > > > From tnharter at aceweb.com Tue Nov 13 14:02:18 2007 From: tnharter at aceweb.com (Tian Harter) Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2007 14:02:18 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Fwd: Top 100 Ways Global Warming Will Change Your Life Message-ID: <473A1EEA.9060205@aceweb.com> By , Center for American Progress Posted on September 29, 2007, Printed on October 1, 2007 http://www.alternet.org/story/63895/ Say Goodbye to French Wines . Wacky temperatures and rain cycles brought on by global warming are threatening something very important: Wine. Scientists believe global warming will "shift viticultural regions toward the poles, cooler coastal zones and higher elevations." What that means in regular language: Get ready to say bye-bye to French Bordeaux and hello to British champagne. [ LA Times ] Say Goodbye to Light and Dry Wines . Warmer temperatures mean grapes in California and France develop their sugars too quickly, well before their other flavors. As a result, growers are forced to either a) leave the grapes on the vines longer, which dramatically raises the alcoholic content of the fruit or b) pick the grapes too soon and make overly sweet wine that tastes like jam. [ Washington Post ] Say Goodbye to Pinot Noir. The reason you adore pinot noir is that it comes from a notoriously temperamental thin-skinned grape that thrives in cool climates. Warmer temperatures are already damaging the pinots from Oregon, "baking away" the grape's berry flavors. [ Bloomberg ] Say Goodbye to Baseball. The future of the ash tree -- from which all baseball bats are made -- is in danger of disappearing, thanks to a combination of killer beetles and global warming. [ NY Times] Say Goodbye to Christmas Trees. The Pine Bark Beetle, which feeds on and kills pine trees, used to be held in control by cold winter temperatures. Now the species is thriving and killing off entire forests in British Columbia, unchecked. [ Seattle Post Intelligencer ] Say Goodbye to the Beautiful Alaska Vacation . Warmer weather allowed Spruce Bark Beetles to live longer, hardier lives in the forests of Kenai Peninsula in Alaska, where they killed off a section of spruce forest the size of Connecticut . [ Alaska Science Forum ] Say Goodbye to Fly Fishing. As water temperatures continue to rise, researchers say rainbow trout, "already at the southern limits" of their temperature ranges in the Appalachian mountains, could disappear there over the next century. [ Softpedia ] Say Goodbye to Ski Competitions . Unusually warmer winters caused the International Ski Federation to cancel last year's Alpine skiing World Cup and opening races in S?lden, Austria. Skiers are also hard-pressed now to find places for year-round training. Olympic gold medalist Anja Paerson: "Of course we're all very worried about the future of our sport. Every year we have more trouble finding places to train." [ NY Times ] Say Goodbye to Ski Vacations . Slopes on the East Coast last year closed months ahead of time due to warmer weather, some losing as much as a third of their season. [ Washington Post ] Say Hello to Really Tacky Fake Ski Vacations . Weiner Air Force and former House Majority Leader Dick Armey are building a year-round ski resort in Texas, with "wet, white Astroturf with bristles" standing in for snow to make up for all the closed resorts around the country. [ WSJ ] Say Goodbye to That Snorkeling Vacation. The elkhorn coral which used to line the floor of the Caribbean are nearly gone, "victims of pollution, warmer water and acidification from the greenhouse gas carbon dioxide seeping into oceans." [ Denver Post ] Say Goodbye to That Tropical Island Vacation. Indonesia's environment minister announced this year that scientific studies estimate about 2,000 of the country's lush tropical islands could disappear by 2030 due to rising sea levels. [ ABC News] Say Goodbye to Cool Cultural Landmarks. The World Monuments Fund recently added "global warming" as a threat in their list of the top 100 threatened cultural landmarks. "On Herschel Island, Canada, melting permafrost threatens ancient Inuit sites and a historic whaling town. In Chinguetti, Mauritania, the desert is encroaching on an ancient mosque. In Antarctica , a hut once used by British explorer Captain Robert Falcon Scott has survived almost a century of freezing conditions but is now in danger of being engulfed by increasingly heavy snows." [ AP ] Say Goodbye to Salmon Dinners. Get ready for a lot more chicken dinners: Wild pacific salmon have already vanished from 40 percent of their traditional habitats in the Northwest and the NRDC warns warmer temperatures are going to erase 41 percent of their habitat by 2090. [ ENS ] Say Goodbye to Lobster Dinners. Lobsters thrive in the chilly waters of New England, but recent numbers show that as those waters have warmed up, "the big-clawed American lobster -- prized for its delicate, sweet flesh -- has been withering at an alarming rate from New York state to Massachusetts." [ Bangor Times ] Say Goodbye to Discoveries of Sharks That Can Walk . Scientists recently revealed a "lost world" of marine life off the coast of Indonesia, including 20 new species of corals, 8 species of shrimp, a technicolor fish that "flashes" bright pink, yellow, blue, and green hues, and sharks that "walk" on their fins. (" Avon Lady. Candygram.") However, marine biologists warn the threats posed by global warming means millions of other crazycool sea creatures may become extinct before we ever discover them. [ ABC ] Say Goodbye to Meadows of Wildflowers. Scientists think global warming could wipe out a fifth of the wildflower species in the western United States. They'll be replaced by dominant grasses. [ National Wildlife Federation] Say Goodbye to Guacamole. Scientists from the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory predict hotter temps will cause a 40 percent drop in California 's avocado production over the next 40 years. [ Lawrence Livermore National Lab ] Say Goodbye to Mixed Nuts. Guess you'll have to start eating pretzels at the bar instead: Scientists from the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory predict hotter temps will cause a 20 percent drop in California 's almond and walnut crops over the next 40 years. [ Science Daily ] Say Goodbye to French Fries. Scientists from the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research say warmer temperatures are killing off wild relatives of potato and peanut plants, "threatening a valuable source of genes necessary to help these food crops fight pests and drought." [ AP ] Say Goodbye to Your Pretty Lawn . Thanks to global warming, dandelions will grow "taller, lusher, and more resilient." By 2100, the weed will produce 32 percent more seeds and longer hairs, which allow them to spread further in the wind. [ LA Times] Say Hello to More Mosquitoes . Get ready for more mosquitoes. Mosquitoes like to live in drains and sewer puddles. During long dry spells (brought on by higher temperatures) these nasty, stagnant pools become a vital source of water for thirsty birds ... which provide a tasty feast for the resident mosquitoes. At the same time, these dry spells "reduce the populations of dragonflies, lacewings, and frogs that eat the mosquitoes." [ Washington Post ] Say Hello to Poison Ivy . You're gonna need an ocean of calamine lotion. Increased CO2 levels cause poison ivy and other weeds to grow "taller, lusher, and more resilient." [ LA Times] Say Hello to Bulgarian Hooker Shortages. "Brothel owners in Bulgaria are blaming global warming for staff shortages. They claim their best girls are working in ski resorts because a lack of snow has forced tourists to seek other pleasures." [ Metro UK ] Global Warming Kills the Animals Species Disappear. The latest report from the World Conservation Union says that a minimum of 40 percent of the world's species are being threatened ... and global warming's one of the main culprits. [ Reuters ] Cannibalistic Polar Bears.... As longer seasons without ice keep polar bears away from food, they start eating each other. [ AP ] ...And Dying Polar Bears. A recent study completed by the U.S. Geological Survey shows that cannibalism -- while brutal -- may be the least of the bear's problems. Many are also drowning, unable to swim in the increased spaces between melting sea ice. Two-thirds of them may be gone by 2050. [ National Geographic ] [Mongo Bay ] More Bear Attacks. Earlier this year, Moscow warned its citizens to beware of brown bear attacks. In Russia, it's been too hot in the winter for bears to sleep. When bears can't hibernate, they get very grouchy and become "unusually aggressive."[ Der Spiegel ] Dying Gray Whales . Save the whales! Global warming is thwarting majestic gray whales' struggle to recover from their endangered status. In recent years, more gray whales have been washing up on beaches after starving to death. Culprit: Rising ocean temps, which are killing off their food supply. [ Washington Post ] Death March of the Penguins. Scientists blame global warming for the declining penguin population, as warmer waters and smaller ice floes force the birds to travel further to find food. "Emperor penguins ... have dropped from 300 breeding pairs to just nine in the western Antarctic Peninsula ." [ National Geographic ] [MSNBC ] Farewell to Frogs. An estimated two-thirds of the 110 known species of harlequin frog in Central and South America have vanished since the 1980s due to the outbreak of a deadly frog fungus ... brought on by global warming. Scientist J. Allen Pound: "Disease is the bullet killing frogs, but climate change is pulling the trigger." [ National Geographic ] Farewell to the Arctic Fox. The White Arctic Fox used to rule the colder climes, but as temperatures warm up, its more aggressive cousin, the Red Fox, is moving North and taking over. [ Wired] Farewell to the Walrus. Walrus pups rest on sea ice while their mothers hunt for food. A new study shows more and more abandoned pups are being stranded on floating islands as ice islands melt. Also, sadly, mother walruses are abandoning them to follow the ice further north. [ Mongo Bay ] Farewell to Cute Koala Bears. Australia's Climate Action Network reports that higher temperatures are killing off eucalyptus trees while higher levels of CO2 in the atmosphere are decreasing the nutritional value of the eucalyptus leaves Koala bears eat. They warn that the cute furry creatures could become extinct in the next few decades. [ Science] Jellyfish Attack. Ouch! At least 30,000 people were stung by jellyfish along the Mediterranean coast last year; some areas boasted more than 10 jellyfish per square foot of water. Thank global warming: Jellyfish generally stay out of the way of swimmers, preferring the warmer, saltier water of the open seas. Hotter temperatures erase the natural temperature barrier between the open sea and the shore. The offshore waters also become more saline, causing the stinging blobs of hurt to move in toward the coastlines (and your unsuspecting legs). [ BBC ] Giant Squid Attack. Giant squid -- an "aggressive predator" that grows up to 7 feet long and can weigh more than 110 lbs -- used to only be found in the warm waters along the Pacific equator. Hotter waters mean today they're invading the waters of California and even Alaska . [ ABC] Homeless Sheep, Goats, and Bears. Bighorn sheep, mountain goats, and grizzly bears are becoming homeless, due to the disappearance of the alpine meadows in Glacier National Park . [ AP ] Homeless Deer and Marsh Rabbits . The deer and marsh rabbits in the Florida Keys also face a housing crisis, as water levels rise and warmer temperatures destroy coastal prairies and freshwater marsh habitats. [ AP ] Gender-Bended Lizards. Scientists in Australia found warmer temperatures caused baby bearded dragon lizards to change from males to females while still in their eggs, making it harder for them to find mates. Trippy. [ ABC AU ] More Stray Kitties. Global warming has extended the cat-breeding season beyond spring, which is the usual time for a kitten boom. The kittens are often homeless and end up in animal shelters. And remember, "The trouble with a kitten is that/ Eventually it becomes a cat." [ NBC-10: Philadelphia ] [Ogden Nash ] Suffocating the Lemmings. Lemmings like to burrow under the snow when they hibernate for the winter. Warmer temperatures cause rain to fall during the winter months, where it freezes into a hard sheet of ice above the sleeping lemmings, who can't crack their way out come spring. [ Denver Post] Goodbye to Cod. Cod in the North Sea are dying out. The warmer waters kill off the plankton the cod eat, making those ones that survive smaller. The warmer waters also mean the poor dears have become "less successful at mating and reproducing." [ MSNBC] Birds around the World. Recent research found that "up to 72 percent of bird species in northeastern Australia and more than a third in Europe could go extinct due to global warming." [ Monga Bay ] Birds on the Coast. Hundreds of Pacific seabirds -- such as common murres, auklets, and tufted puffins -- washed ashore last year after starving to death. Scientists blame global warming which led to less plankton, which led to fewer small fish for the birds to eat. [ San Francisco Chronicle ] Birds in your Backyard. A report by the National Audubon Society found that birds such as the bobwhite and field sparrow are dying thanks to global warming, as higher temperatures mess with their migration schedules. With vital food stocks peaking earlier and earlier, many migratory birds get to the party too late and can't find enough to eat. [ CNN ] [ABC News ] Death to a Snail. The Aldabra banded snail is officially extinct. Existing only on an atoll 426 kilometers northwest of the northern tip of Madagascar , the snail died out after warmer weather cut the rainfall in its habitat. [ Monga Bay ] Global Warming Kills the Planet Greenland's Melting. Greenland is melting at a rate of 52 cubic miles per year -- much faster than once predicted. If Greenland 's entire 2.5 million cubic kilometers of ice were to melt, it would lead to a global sea level rise of 7.2 meters, or more than 23 feet. [ LA Times] Less Ice in the Arctic . The amount of ice in the Arctic at the end of the 2005 summer "was the smallest seen in 27 years of satellite imaging, and probably the smallest in 100 years." Experts said it's the strongest evidence of global warming in the Arctic thus far. [ Washington Post ] The Northwest Passage Becomes a Reality . Remember the " Northwest Passage "? For centuries, explorers were obsessed with the almost-mythical idea of northern sea route connecting the Atlantic and Pacific. Well...it's here. So much of the ice cover in the Arctic disappeared this summer that ships were able to take recreational trips through the Arctic, and scientists say so much of the ice cover will disappear in upcoming years that the passage could be open to commercial shipping by 2020. [ CNN ] Ice Shelf in Antarctica Bites the Dust . In 2002, a chunk of ice in Antarctica larger than the state of Rhode Island collapsed into the sea. British and Belgian scientists said the chunk was weakened by warm winds blowing over the shelf ... and that the winds were caused by global warming. [ ENS ] Ice Shelf in Canada Bites the Dust. In 2005, a giant chunk of ice the size of Manhattan broke off of a Canadian ice shelf and began free floating westward, putting oil drilling operations in peril. [ Reuters] Say Farewell to Glaciers. "In Glacier National Park, the number of glaciers in the park has dropped from 150 to 26 since 1850. Some project that none will be left within 25 to 30 years." [ AP ] The Green, Green Grass of Antarctica . Grass has started to grow in Antarctica in areas formerly covered by ice sheets and glaciers. While Antarctic hair grass has grown before in isolated tufts, warmer temperatures allow it to take over larger and larger areas and, for the first time, survive through the winter. [ UK Times ] The Swiss Foothills. Late last summer, a rock the size of two Empire State Buildings in the Swiss Alps collapsed onto the canyon floor nearly 700 feet below. The reason? Melting glaciers. [ MSNBC] Giant Seas in Africa. Global warming may unleash giant "sand seas" in Africa -- giant fields of sand dunes with no vegetation -- as a shortage of rainfall and increasing winds may "reactivate" the now-stable Kalahari dune fields. That means farewell to local vegetation, animals, and any tourism in the areas. [ National Geographic ] Florida's National Marine Sanctuary in Trouble . Global warming is "bleaching" the coral in the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary, killing the coral, tourism, and local fish that live among the coral for protection. [ Washington Post ] The Oceans are Turning to Acid . It sounds like a really bad sci-fi movie, but it's true: The oceans are turning to acid! Oceans absorb CO2 which, when mixed with seawater, turns to a weak carbonic acid. Calcium from eroded rocks creates a "natural buffer" against the acid, and most marine life is "finely tuned" to the current balance. As we produce more and more CO2, we throw the whole balance out of whack and the oceans turn to acid. [ CS Monitor ] Say Goodbye to the Great Barrier Reef . According to the U.N., the Great Barrier Reef will disappear within decades as "warmer, more acidic seas could severely bleach coral in the world-famous reef as early as 2030." [ CBC News] Mediterranean Sea? .Try the Dead Sea. Italian experts say thanks to faster evaporation and rising temperatures, the Mediterranean Sea is quickly turning into "a salty and stagnant sea." The hot, salty water "could doom many of the sea's plant and animal species and ravage the fishing industry." [ AP ] A Sacred River Dries UpThe sacred Ganges River in India is beginning to run dry. The Ganges is fed by the Gangotri glacier, which is today "shrinking at a rate of 40 yards a year, nearly twice as fast as two decades ago." Scientists warn the glacier could be gone as soon as 2030. [ Washington Post ] Disappearing African Rivers Geologists recently projected a 10 percent to 20 percent drop in rainfall in northwestern and southern Africa by 2070. That would leave Botswana with just 23 percent of the river it has now; Cape Town would be left with just 42 percent of its river water. [ National Geographic] Suddenly Vanishing Lakes . What happened to the five-acre glacial lake in Southern Chile ? In March, it was there. In May, it was ... gone. Scientists blame global warming. [ BBC News ] Goodbye to the Mangrove Trees. Next on the global warming hit list: Rising sea levels linked to climate change mean we could lose half of the mangrove trees of the Pacific Isles by the end of the century. [ UNEP ] Volcanoes Blow Their Tops . British scientists warn of another possible side effect of climate change: A surge of dangerous volcanic eruptions. [ ABC News Australia] More Hurricanes. Over the past century, the number of hurricanes that strike each year has more than doubled. Scientists blame global warming and the rising temperature of the surface of the seas. [ USA Today ] More Floods. During the summer of 2007, Britain suffered its worst flood in 60 years. Scientists point the finger directly at global warming, which changed precipitation patterns and is now causing more "intense rainstorms across parts of the northern hemisphere." [ Independent ] More Fires. Hotter temperatures could also mean larger and more devastating wildfires. This past summer in California , a blaze consumed more than 33,500 acres, or 52 square miles. [ ABC] [ AP] More Wildfires. Global warming has also allowed non-native grasses to thrive in the Mojave Desert , where they act as fast-burning fuel for wildfires. [ AP ] Thunderstorms Get Dangerous. Hurricanes aside, NASA scientists now say as the world gets hotter, even smaller thunderstorms will pose more severe risks with "deadly lightning, damaging hail and the potential for tornadoes." [ AP ] Higher Sea Levels. Scientists believe sea levels will be three feet higher by the end of the century than they are now. [ National Geographic ] Burning Poo. As "shifting rainfall patterns" brought on by global warming "have made northern Senegal drier and hotter," entire species of trees (like the Dimb Tree) are dying out, making it harder for natives to find firewood. As a result, more people are having to burn cow dung for cooking fires. [ MSNBC] A New Dust Bowl. Calling Mr. Steinbeck. Scientists this year reported the Southwest United States is "expected to dry up notably in this century and could become as arid as the North American dust bowl of the 1930s," a process which has already started. [ ABC News ] Global Warming Makes Us Sicker People Are Dying. 150,000: Number of people the World Health Organization estimates are killed by climate-change-related issues every year. [ Washington Post ] Heat Waves and Strokes. Authorities in China say warmer temperatures are responsible for an uptick in heat-wave associated deaths, such as strokes and heart disease. They calculated between 173 and 685 Chinese citizens per million die every year from ailments related to global warming. [ MSNBC] Death by Smog. Three words you really don't want in your obit: "Death by Smog." Yet Canadian doctors say smog-related deaths could rise by 80 percent over the next 20 years. And since warm air is a key ingredient in smog, warmer temperatures will increase smog levels. [ CBC News ] More Heart Attacks. Doctors warn global warming will bring more cardiovascular problems, like heart attacks. "'The hardening of the heart's arteries is like rust developing on a car,' said Dr. Gordon Tomaselli, chief of cardiology at Johns Hopkins University. 'Rust develops much more quickly at warm temperatures and so does atherosclerosis.'" [ MSNBC] More Mold and Ragweed= More Allergies, Asthma. A Harvard Study in 2004 showed higher concentrations of CO2 in the atmosphere is good news to allergens like mold and ragweed (they love the stuff). And that means higher rates of asthma attacks, especially in kids. [ Globe and Mail ] A Resurgence In Deadly Disease . "The World Health Organization has identified more than 30 new or resurgent diseases in the last three decades, the sort of explosion some experts say has not happened since the Industrial Revolution brought masses of people together in cities." Why? Global warming "is fueling the spread of epidemics in areas unprepared for the diseases" when "mosquitoes, ticks, mice and other carriers are surviving warmer winters and expanding their range, bringing health threats with them." Ick. [ Washington Post ] More Malaria in Africa . "A WHO report in 2000 found that warming had caused malaria to spread from three districts in western Kenya to 13 and led to epidemics of the disease in Rwanda and Tanzania ." [ Washington Post] Malaria Spreading in Western Europe . The World Health Organization warns warmer temperatures mean malaria-carrying mosquitoes are able to live in northern climes, which could lead to a surge in malaria outside the tropics (aka Europe ). [ BBC ] Malaria Spreading in South America . Thanks to global warming, "Malaria has spread to higher altitudes in places like the Colombian Andes, 7,000 feet above sea level." [ An Inconvenient Truth] Malaria Spreading in Russia . Russians found larvae of the anopheles mosquito, the malaria carrier, for the first time in Moscow last September. [ BBC ] Spread of Dengue Fever. Scientists predict warmer temperatures will allow mosquitoes carrying Dengue Fever to travel outside the tropics. Since people in cooler climes lack immunity from previous exposure, that means transmission would be extensive. You get a severe fever, you start spontaneously bleeding, you can die. There is no vaccine. [ Science Daily ] Death in the Time of Cholera. Cholera, which thrives in warmer water, appeared in the newly warmed waters of South America in 1991 for the first time in the 20th century. "It swept from Peru across the continent and into Mexico , killing more than 10,000 people." [ Washington Post ]Spread of Lyme DiseaseCold weather no longer kills ticks that carry Lyme Disease. Ticks recently began spreading along the coastlines of Scandinavia , which formerly was too cold for them to survive. Cases of Lyme Disease in the area have doubled since the late 1990s. [ MSNBC] West Nile Virus Home Invasion. Once confined to land near the equator, West Nile Virus is now found as far north as Canada . Seven years ago, West Nile virus had never been seen in North America; today, it has "infected more than 21,000 people in the United States and Canada and killed more than 800." [ Washington Post ] Global Warming Threatens Our National Security IISS: "A Global Catastrophe" For International Security. A recent study done by the International Institute for Strategic Studies has likened the international security effects of global warming to those caused by nuclear war. [ On Deadline ] U.N.: As Dangerous As War . United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki-moon said this year that global warming poses as much of a threat to the world as war. [ BBC] Center for Naval Analyses: National Security Threat. In April, a report completed by the Center for Naval Analyses predicted that global warming would cause "large-scale migrations, increased border tensions, the spread of disease and conflicts over food and water." [ Seattle Post-Intelligencer ] Genocide in Sudan . UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon charges, "Amid the diverse social and political causes, the Darfur conflict began as an ecological crisis, arising at least in part from climate change." [ Washington Post] War in Somalia . In April, a group of 11 former U.S. military leaders released a report charging that the war in Somalia during the 1990s stemmed in part from national resource shortages caused by global warming. [ Washington Post ] Starvation. A study by IISS found that reduced water supplies and hotter temperatures mean "65 countries were likely to lose over 15 percent of their agricultural output by 2100." [ Yahoo] Large-Scale Migrations. Global warming will turn already-dry environments into deserts, causing the people who live there to migrate in massive numbers to more livable places. [ MSNBC] More Refugees. A study by the relief group Christian Aid estimates the number of refugees around the world will top a billion by 2050, thanks in large part to global warming. [ Telegraph ] Increased Border Tensions. A report called "National Security and the Threat of Climate Change," written by a group of retired generals and admirals, specifically linked global warming to increased border tensions. "If, as some project, sea levels rise, human migrations may occur, likely both within and across borders." [ NY Times ] Famine. "Developing countries, many with average temperatures that are already near or above crop tolerance levels, are predicted to suffer an average 10 to 25 percent decline in agricultural productivity by the 2080s." [ Economic Times ] Droughts . Global warming will cause longer, more devastating droughts, thus exacerbating the fight over the world's water. [ Washington Post] The Poor Are Most at Risk. Although they produce low amounts of greenhouse gases, experts say under-developed countries -- such as those in sub-Saharan Africa -- have "the most to lose under dire predictions of wrenching change in weather patterns." [ Washington Post ] Your Checkbook. A report done last year by the British government showed global warming could cause a Global Great Depression, costing the world up to 20 percent of its annual Global Domestic Product. [ Washington Post] The World's Checkbook. A study by the Global Development and Environment Institute at Tufts University found that ignoring global warming would end up costing $20 trillion by 2100. [ Tufts ] This piece is from the Center for American Progress Action Fund's Mic Check Radio. ? 2007 Independent Media Institute. All rights reserved. View this story online at: http://www.alternet.org/story/63895/ -- Tian http://tian.greens.org Latest change: Added Saturday's Mountain View Steps It Up pictures. From JamBoi at Greens.org Tue Nov 13 15:22:02 2007 From: JamBoi at Greens.org (Drew Johnson) Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2007 15:22:02 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] [SC-SM] New progressive 3rd party and the Greens place in multiparty democracy In-Reply-To: <410331.17053.qm@web51109.mail.re2.yahoo.com> References: <410331.17053.qm@web51109.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <3524.38.99.84.36.1194996122.squirrel@greens.org> Hey Scott, If you read the part of the e-mail that you clipped off I believe you'll find that the time frame projected was AFTER the 2008 elections (ie. it talks about 'November') And BTW, several efforts are already underway. But I'm talking about general trends here, and the general trend is towards multiparty democracy. In multiparty democracy I see we Greens as holding a very significant leadership role. That is what my post was about. The demise of The Duopoly and new opportunities for Greens in this upcoming situation. And absolutely I agree that running all out is what we need to do to the best of our ability. Green is Core! Drew Johnson GPCA On Tue, November 13, 2007 10:41, Scott McLarty wrote: > Hi Drew > > I doubt very much that we'll see a new party > between now and November 2008. If a new > insurgency for another party were going to take > place before the next election, we'd be seeing > lots of evidence already. Organizing a new > political party requires a strenuous effort > involving lots of people, and it has to take > place early enough for the new party to get > ballot lines in as many states as possible. In > other words, if it were going to happen, it would > have happened months ago. > > Dennis Kucinich is no closer right now to leaving > the Dems for a new third party than he is to > leaving the Dems for the GP. Cindy Sheehan has > been outstanding as an antiwar leader and may > turn out to be an excellent independent > candidate, but she hasn't shown any interest in > the kind of political organizing associated with > founding a new party. > > The closest thing to what you describe is Unity > 08, which wants to locate a populist crack > between Democrat & Republican and use that as a > basis for a presidential campaign with a > bipartisan ticket. Of course, there is no such > 'between' -- the D & R parties overlap too much. > You can put a D and an R on the same ticket, but > they'll still be corporate party politicians. > > Furthermore, Unity 08 is built on the same > fallacy as Perot's Reform Party, that you can > establish an alternative party or movement with > an independent alternative presidential campaign. > > The GP, on the other hand, has built a national > infrastructure that has lasted more than one or > two elections because we don't put all our > resources & efforts behind the presidential race. > We're a grassroots party that runs candidates > at every level. Regardless of how we do in any > given presidential election, we still have lots > of other races, and Greens win some of them. > > This is an argument for running lots of strong > Green campaigns for local & state office in 2008, > especially for state legislatures, which we're > capable of winning. A strong list of Green > victories at the end of 2008 will demonstrate the > GP's permanence, that we're not going to go the > way of the Reform Party. > > Our objectives for 2008 should be (1) hold a > high-profile competition for the Green > presidential nomination with several strong > candidates, and then unite behind the nominees; > (2) run lots of candidates for local & state > office, with a concentrated effort to get Greens > into more city councils, mayors' seats, & state > legislatures (Brent McMillan's 2008 Challenge, > aiming for 1,000 Green candidates in 2008, is a > good basis for this, and the national GP should > offer our candidates as much assistance as > possible); and (3) work with other groups (other > political parties, when necessary) for reform of > ballot access rules, impeachment, withdrawal of > US troops from both wars, and other goals. > > That's how we'll establish a permanent Green > alternative to both two-party domination and > fly-by-night independent & third party efforts. > Conversely, if our goal is multi-party democracy > with a variety of options for voters, then the > first step in achieving it is giving America its > first permanent third party. > > Scott > > > --- Drew Johnson wrote: > >> While I don't feel certain of the details such >> as who, and when, as I've >> been saying this year I do feel certain that a >> new progressive 3rd party >> is likely to arise (one with lower standards >> than we Greens promote with >> our 10KV). The energy is there for it and >> people like Sheehan and >> Kucinich and other progressive Dems are likely >> adherents. While on one >> level I feel disappointment that we Greens >> haven't been ready to fully >> take advantage of the moment and be that party, >> I continue to think that >> in the long run we can turn the upcoming new >> multiparty landscape to our >> advantage to the extent we can live out our >> 10KV. >> >> And of course impeachment is late but not 'too >> late, nor is it 'too >> little'. True we can not save the hundreds of >> thousands of lives already >> lost or trillions flushed down the war toilet, >> but any life saved and >> resource redirected to peace is worth the >> effort of our struggle. Greens >> have including our newly minted Green Cynthia >> McKinney have been in the >> forefront of the impeachment movement all along >> and the investment in real >> leadership we've accomplished will stand us in >> good stead as we make >> impeachment happen and come into our own power >> in the new multiparty >> landscape. >> >> >> Green is Core! >> >> Drew Johnson >> GPCA >> > From JamBoi at Greens.org Tue Nov 13 23:07:38 2007 From: JamBoi at Greens.org (Drew Johnson) Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2007 23:07:38 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] 70%: Cheney abused powers, 52% committed impeachable; 64% Bush abused Message-ID: <1201.38.99.84.36.1195024058.squirrel@greens.org> http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/?q=node/28680 70% Say Cheney Has Abused His Powers, 52% He's Committed Impeachable Offenses, 43% Remove Him From Office Submitted by davidswanson on Tue, 2007-11-13 22:17. Impeachment Here's a new poll from American Research Group November 13, 2007 - Impeachment A total of 64% of American voters say that President George W. Bush has abused his powers as president. Of the 64%, 14% (9% of all voters) say the abuses are not serious enough to warrant impeachment, 33% (21% of all voters) say the abuses rise to the level of impeachable offenses, but he should not be impeached, and 53% (34% of all voters) say the abuses rise to the level of impeachable offenses and Mr. Bush should be impeached and removed from office. Question: Which one of these four statements do you agree with about President Bush: 1. President Bush has not abused his powers as president. 2. President Bush has abused his powers as president, but the abuses are not serious enough to warrant impeachment under the Constitution. 3. President Bush has abused his powers as president which rise to the level of impeachable offenses under the Constitution, but he should not be impeached. 4. President Bush has abused his powers as president which rise to the level of impeachable offenses under the Constitution and he should be impeached and removed from office. 11/12/07 #1 #2 #3 #4 All voters 36% 9% 21% 34% Democrats (39%) 16% 9% 25% 50% Republicans (35%) 64% 6% 12% 18% Independents (26%) 29% 11% 26% 34% Based on 1,100 completed telephone interviews among a random sample of registered voters nationwide November 9-12, 2007. The theoretical margin of error is plus or minus 3 percentage points, 95% of the time. A total of 70% of American voters say that Vice President Dick Cheney has abused his powers as vice president. Of the 70%, 26% (18% of all voters) say the abuses are not serious enough to warrant impeachment, 13% (9% of all voters) say the abuses rise to the level of impeachable offenses, but he should not be impeached, and 61% (43% of all voters) say the abuses rise to the level of impeachable offenses and Mr. Cheney should be impeached and removed from office. Question: Which one of these four statements do you agree with about Vice President Cheney: 1. Vice President Cheney has not abused his powers as vice president. 2. Vice President Cheney has abused his powers as vice president, but the abuses are not serious enough to warrant impeachment under the Constitution. 3. Vice President Cheney has abused his powers as vice president which rise to the level of impeachable offenses under the Constitution, but he should not be impeached. 4. Vice President Cheney has abused his powers as vice president which rise to the level of impeachable offenses under the Constitution and he should be impeached and removed from office. 11/12/07 #1 #2 #3 #4 All voters 30% 18% 9% 43% Democrats (39%) 6% 25% 6% 63% Republicans (35%) 61% 12% 6% 21% Independents (26%) 26% 16% 18% 39% Based on 1,100 completed telephone interviews among a random sample of registered voters nationwide November 9-12, 2007. The theoretical margin of error is plus or minus 3 percentage points, 95% of the time. From JamBoi at Greens.org Tue Nov 13 23:46:31 2007 From: JamBoi at Greens.org (Drew Johnson) Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2007 23:46:31 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] All Fifty States May Face Voting Machine Lawsuit Message-ID: <1676.38.99.84.36.1195026391.squirrel@greens.org> http://politics.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/11/13/1852206 All Fifty States May Face Voting Machine Lawsuit Posted by ScuttleMonkey on Tuesday November 13, @02:51PM according to an announcement made by activist Bernie Ellis at the premier of David Earnhardt's film "Uncounted [The Movie]" all fifty states could be receiving subpoenas in the National Clean Election lawsuit. The documentary film, like the lawsuit, takes a look at the issue of voting machine failure and the need for a solid paper trail. "The lawsuit is aimed at prohibiting the use of all types of vote counting machines, and requiring hand-counting of all primary and general election ballots in full view of the public. The lawsuit has raised significant constitutional questions challenging the generally accepted practices of state election officials of relying on "black box" voting machines to record and count the votes at each polling station, and allow tallying of votes by election officials outside the view of the general public." ___ http://www.clarksvilleonline.com/2007/11/13/fifty-states-face-voting-machine-lawsuits-uncounted-documents-dre-issues/ Fifty states face voting machine lawsuits; ?Uncounted? documents DRE issues By Christine Anne Piesyk | November 13, 2007 Business as usual will not be the norm over the next 48 hours as Secretaries of State in all fifty states will each receive subpoenas in the National Clean Election lawsuit, according to an announcement made Monday night by activist Bernie Ellis at the Belcourt Theatre in Nashville. There is still time, Ellis said, to require a paper trail for the 2008 election. The announcement was made in a panel discussion following the sold out Nashville premiere of the David Earnhardt film, Uncounted [The Movie], which ended with a standing ovation for its writer/director. The documentary film addressed the issue of voting machine error/failure, the need for a paper trail of votes, the political and business ties between government officials and manufacturers of these DRE (Direct Recording Electronic) voting machines, and the ease of tampering with such machine and ?flipping? votes that are electronically counted. ?I cannot think of anything more important than to save the core of our democracy ? the vote! ? David Earnhardt The film also reviewed extensive cases of mechanical errors, lost votes, voters turned away from polls, incomplete ballots and the installation of uncertified software into voting machine reported from across the nation. ?The lawsuit aims to establish that all computer systems (or other systems) which hide the ballots from the people for even a short period of time before the count is accomplished and the results are posted ? are unconstitutional ?The lawsuit argues persuasively that the use of computer and machine election systems violate each citizen?s right to vote, as defined at least twice by the Supreme Court of the United States. ? ? Jim Condit Jr., NetworkAmerica. The lawsuit is aimed at prohibiting the use of all types of vote counting machines, and requiring hand-counting of all primary and general election ballots in full view of the public. The lawsuit has raised significant constitutional questions challenging the generally accepted practices of state election officials of relying on ?black box? voting machines to record and count the votes at each polling station, and allow tallying of votes by election officials outside the view of the general public. In many cases, states have officially authorized voting ?systems? that leave virtually no paper trail from which to audit the vote. [We The People Foundation]. Ellis said that regardless of what voters are being told, there is still time to pass legislation that would mandate voter verifiable paper ballots in 2008. The Tennessee Voter Confidence Act of 2007 [Senate Bill 1363/House Bill 1256], sponsored by Senator Joe Haynes and Rep. Gary Moore, mandates a paper trail. ?Today in Tennessee, 93 of our 95 counties use nonverifiable, paperless touch-screen voting machines . In 2006, over one in every six Tennessee counties reported problems with this equipment. Our state is not alone, but (sadly) it is now one of the worst states for voting security and accountability in this nation.? ? Bernie Ellis What began as lawsuits in ten keys states including Iowa, Ohio, New York and Florida has burgeoned into a nationwide effort. Earnhardt?s film, which was ignored by corporate media during this world premiere, exposes the vulnerability in current technology of voting machines, or at least, the lack of oversight in acquiring and using them without hacking, flipping or under/overcounting votes, and other problems. Earnhardt asked why, when it is so easy to get a printed receipt from anything from an ATM machine to the drive-through register at a Krispy Kreme, it should be so difficult to get a verifiable voting machine receipt. The lawsuit seeks an Order from the Court prohibiting the use of all voting machines and to force election officials to instead utilize paper ballots and to count and total all votes by hand, always in full view of the public. Plaintiffs from all fifty states have signed on to the lawsuit. In the question and answer period following the screening, an Iraq veteran said he had pledged to protect his country ?from all enemies foreign and domestic? and viewed the issues of voting machines as a domestic threat to voters across the country. About Christine Anne Piesyk Email: womanspeak at yahoo.com From JamBoi at Greens.org Wed Nov 14 00:22:34 2007 From: JamBoi at Greens.org (Drew Johnson) Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2007 00:22:34 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Democrats Love Bush Message-ID: <2216.38.99.84.36.1195028554.squirrel@greens.org> http://www.blackagendareport.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=431&Itemid=1 Democrats Love Bush Wednesday, 14 November 2007 by Black Agenda Report (BAR) editor and senior columnist Margaret Kimberley When two Evils play tag team, the "Lesser of Two Evils" argument doesn't work anymore. Since George Bush took office, Democratic leadership has been his willing accomplice, smacking down every party member that dares to stand up. Dennis Kucinich's impeachment efforts are treated like an extraterrestrial invasion of Democrat-controlled Capitol Hill. Favored members give a pass to a future attorney general who claims not to understand the definition of torture. With each passing day, it appears the Democrats are more interested in inheriting Bush's mode of rule, than of ending it. "They want to be in power, but they do not want change of any significance." Freedom Rider: Democrats Love Bush by BAR editor and senior columnist Margaret Kimberley "Every Democrat who attempts to stand up is smacked down." The Democratic party is a gigantic cesspool of treachery, treachery towards its rank and file, treachery to the constitution, and treachery to international law. The party's leadership goes out of its way to continue its back stabbing, claiming an inability to stop the Bush reign of terror. Every Bush nominee is confirmed, every funding request for the occupation of Iraq is granted. Conversely, every Democrat who attempts to stand up is smacked down, dismissed as crazy and thwarted at every turn. Congressman Dennis Kucinich made good on his pledge to bring an impeachment resolution against Dick Cheney to the House floor. His efforts were necessary and noble, but the leadership made it clear they had no use for defending the Constitution. The House leadership worked with Republicans to send the resolution into a Judiciary committee black hole, and Kucinich made a personal plea to John Conyers, committee chairman. "I believe impeachment remains the only tool Congress has to prevent a war in Iran. This information relates directly to the Article III charges in the resolution. I urge your timely consideration." Kucinich will have better luck writing to Santa. "The House leadership worked with Republicans to send the Cheney impeachment resolution into a Judiciary committee black hole." Republicans are unflinching and relentless in promoting white supremacy, warfare, corporatism, sexism and government power over the individual. In short, they are very proud fascists. Republican presidential candidates outdo one another claiming to start new wars, torture more people and destroy what is left of constitutional rights. They are outspoken in their opposition to civil rights legislation, including affirmative action and abortion rights. Democrats claim to oppose what Republicans advocate, but you wouldn't know it from their actions. Democratic Senators joined Republicans in approving the Bush administration nominee for Attorney General, Michael Mukasey. Mukasey ducked and dodged and wouldn't give a straight answer when asked if he considered waterboarding to be torture and therefore illegal. Democratic Senators such as Charles Schumer and Dianne Feinstein were typical Democratic traitors. As members of the Judiciary committee they had a responsibility to lead the charge against Mukasey, instead they gave him the thumbs up. Feinstein has already confessed that she plans to support legislation giving immunity to the telecom corporations who went along with the illegal NSA spying scheme. It is comforting but foolhardy to believe that Bush alone is to blame for this sorry state of affairs. Complicit Democrats have aided and abetted his crimes from the first day he took office. The time has come to admit that Democrats won't stop Bush for the simple reason that they want to do what he is doing. They want to be in power, but only because they want some of what he has, namely powerful positions in Congress, top jobs for their friends, and lobbyists at their beck and call. They do not want change of any significance. "Complicit Democrats have aided and abetted Bush's crimes from the first day he took office." It isn't hard to see why they idolize Bush so much. He has basement level approval ratings, a party out of power, and yet he achieves one victory after another. Why wouldn't crooked, conniving politicians want some of what he has? George W. Bush has unleashed pent up fascistic fantasies. They lived below the surface, and were rarely expressed for fear of exposure. But he got away with all of his evil doing, and the copy cat Democrats have admitted their desire to be unashamedly evil too. Now they look on in admiration. Perhaps they too can keep unwanted voters away from the polls, ignore the wishes of party members, or start wars whenever they want. Maybe their corporate masters can make their lives comfortable and protect them from any accountability. Bush is living the sweet life as far as the pathetic Democratic wannabes are concerned. They are like envious children with their noses pressed against the candy store window, salivating and waiting for a time when they too can get all the goodies they want. "Democrats should be afraid of the rank and file, they should know that the worst traitors will face primary challenges." Democrats who do want change shouldn't waste time hoping for victory this time next year. All efforts should be focused on stopping the traitor party, the Democrats, right now. They should be afraid of the rank and file, they should know that the worst traitors will face primary challenges. If not, a Democratic victory will be little more than a bad sequel of the Bush regime. The Democrats may claim to be sheep, but they are wolves dressed in camouflage. We have two enemies in Washington, not just one. Democracy will be dead for good if that simple fact is not acknowledged and acted upon. That truth hurts, but denial hurts even more. Margaret Kimberley's Freedom Rider column appears weekly in BAR. Ms. Kimberley lives in New York City, and can be reached via e-Mail at Margaret.Kimberley(at)BlackAgandaReport.Com. Ms. Kimberley' maintains an edifying and frequently updated blog at freedomrider.blogspot.com. More of her work is also available at her Black Agenda Report archive page. Comments (0)add comment From alexcathy at aol.com Wed Nov 14 05:55:49 2007 From: alexcathy at aol.com (alexcathy at aol.com) Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2007 08:55:49 -0500 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Democrats Love Bush In-Reply-To: <2216.38.99.84.36.1195028554.squirrel@greens.org> References: <2216.38.99.84.36.1195028554.squirrel@greens.org> Message-ID: <8C9F4DD329FB817-68C-3CCB@webmail-md16.sysops.aol.com> Drew, thanks for posting this. Just goes to show there are some other well-informed Black progressives who aren't buying the? Hillary & Barack "reality show."? Alex Walker ________________________________________________________________________ Email and AIM finally together. You've gotta check out free AOL Mail! - http://mail.aol.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JamBoi at Greens.org Wed Nov 14 07:42:46 2007 From: JamBoi at Greens.org (Drew Johnson) Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2007 07:42:46 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Cynthia McKinney's Challenge to the war parties Message-ID: <2818.38.99.84.36.1195054966.squirrel@greens.org> http://www.thenation.com/blogs/campaignmatters?bid=45&pid=250721 CYNTHIA MCKINNEY'S CHALLENGE TO "THE WAR PARTIES"... Cynthia McKinney, who appears to be in the process of reversing an earlier decision to forego a 2008 presidential bid on the Green Party line, has in recent days taken a number of steps toward mounting an anti-war run against the Democratic and Republican nominees next year. The former Democratic congresswoman from Georgia has got a new website up -- www. runcynthiarun.org -- which seeks campaign contributions "so we can get on with the business of getting Cynthia on fifty-one ballots and reaching out to the voters of this nation who are ready for a Green alternative to the wars being waged both at home and abroad by the War Parties and their candidates." And McKinney is celebrating the success of supporters in getting her name placed on the ballot for the February 5 Green Party presidential primary in Illinois. McKinney, who in a September 10 a letter to the steering committee of the Green Party of the United States indicated that she would not seek the party's presidential nomination, began to reconsider that decision almost immediately. With steady encouragement from grassroots Greens, many of whom came to see the maverick House member as a political hero during her time in Washington, McKinney quit the Democratic Party in September and enrolled as a Green in October. On October 22, McKinney supporters filed paperwork with the Federal Election Commission to establish an exploratory committee for a Green Party presidential bid. McKinney is signaling that a formal declaration could come late in November. But she's already making appearances around the country for local Green parties and their candidates -- including visits to South Carolina, Maine and New York before last Tuesday's elections. And she is certainly sounding like a candidate. "We're going to have to do things we've never done before if we're to have things we've never had before," she wrote in a thank-you to Illinois supporters. "Democracy, authentic representation, human needs prioritized, universal access to health care, bringing our troops home, making peace with the world's nations, making peace with our home planet, making peace in our own communities, funding schools over jails... Each of these alone is something we've never known before. Anyone of them alone would be worth doing things we've never done before. And all of them can be achieved when we get engaged and make democracy our own." Posted by John Nichols at 11/10/2007 @ 10:32am | Email This Post From wrolley at charter.net Wed Nov 14 08:02:35 2007 From: wrolley at charter.net (Wes Rolley) Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2007 08:02:35 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Cynthia McKinney's Challenge to the war parties In-Reply-To: <2818.38.99.84.36.1195054966.squirrel@greens.org> References: <2818.38.99.84.36.1195054966.squirrel@greens.org> Message-ID: <473B1C1B.5060905@charter.net> Drew Johnson wrote: > http://www.thenation.com/blogs/campaignmatters?bid=45&pid=250721 > CYNTHIA MCKINNEY'S CHALLENGE TO "THE WAR PARTIES"... > Cynthia McKinney, who appears to be in the process of reversing an earlier > decision to forego a 2008 presidential bid on the Green Party line, has in > recent days taken a number of steps toward mounting an anti-war run > against the Democratic and Republican nominees next year. And this past weekend, she was in Seattle, and this week, she is in Oregon: Portland, Corvallis, Eugene, Ashland. http://www.pacificgreens.org/2007/11/07/cynthia-mckinney-visits-oregon/ Meanwhile, Kent Mesplay informs me that he has someone in court fighting an effort to have him thrown off the ballot in Illinois. Illinois, has 4 people currently named: Kent, Cynthia, Jared Ball and Howie Hawkins as a stand in for Nader. -- "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 JamBoi at Greens.org Wed Nov 14 09:15:30 2007 From: JamBoi at Greens.org (Drew Johnson) Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2007 09:15:30 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Anti-War Voters Lash Out at Democrats They Helped Put in Office Message-ID: <1342.38.99.84.36.1195060530.squirrel@greens.org> http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/?q=node/28691 Anti-War Voters Lash Out at Democrats They Helped Put in Office Submitted by davidswanson on Wed, 2007-11-14 05:12. By Nicholas Johnston, Bloomberg Nov. 13 (Bloomberg) -- When the Democratic Party called up recently to ask Myrna Burgess for a campaign contribution, she answered with an emphatic ``no.'' ``Nothing has been done as far as the war is concerned,'' said Burgess, 72, an Amtrak worker from Levittown, Pennsylvania. More than a year after anti-war voters like Burgess helped give Democrats control of Congress, there are more troops in Iraq, lawmakers have approved almost $100 billion in new war spending and congressional approval ratings are at record lows. Democrats now worry that their inability to make good on campaign promises to end or slow the war in Iraq will have consequences. The disaffection has already fueled at least four anti-war primary challenges to party incumbents, raising fears among some lawmakers of an intra-party fight that could drain momentum before next year's elections. ``They want someone to be held accountable,'' said Representative Lynn Woolsey of California, a leading anti-war Democrat in the House. For the moment, political analysts said polls show that Democrats are likely to keep or expand their congressional majorities. While only 22 percent of registered voters said they approve of the way Congress is handling its job in a Bloomberg/Los Angeles Times survey conducted last month, those voters are almost evenly split over which party is to blame. Blaming Republicans Voters are ``extremely frustrated'' about the absence of results, said freshman Democratic Representative Patrick Murphy, an Iraq veteran who was elected last year in Burgess's district on an anti-war platform. At the same time, he predicted that President George W. Bush's party would bear the brunt in next year's presidential and congressional elections. ``They will take out their frustrations on them and rightfully so,'' he said. Still, there are some trouble spots for Democrats, as groups across the country begin to try to harness the voter disapproval. In Washington state, the anti-war group MoveOn.org has produced ads condemning Democratic Representative Brian Baird for his refusal to support legislative timetables for a withdrawal from Iraq. The group is also polling members on whether to mount primary challenges against the lawmakers they consider ineffective in trying to end the war. Primary Challenge Already in Illinois, where congressional primaries have been moved up to Feb. 5, anti-war challengers have emerged to take on two House Democrats, Melissa Bean and Dan Lipinski. Both incumbents are expected to prevail easily, and Lipinski is in a safe Democratic seat. Bean's is one of the top Democratic seats being targeted by Republicans, however, and a primary battle could weaken her in the general election. In Maryland, a primary opponent has criticized Democrat Albert Wynn's early support of the war, and in California, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi faces a primary challenge from Cindy Sheehan, an anti-war activist who lost a son in Iraq and has led protests across the country. As primary filing deadlines approach, more anti-war candidates are likely to spring up, said Brandon Friedman, vice chairman of VoteVets.org, a group that recruits military veterans who oppose the Iraq war to run for Congress. ``The Democrats were elected in 2006 to end the war in Iraq, and that hasn't happened,'' he said. ``This frustration is going to manifest itself in a lot of different ways in the next year.'' That sentiment was evident in interviews in the Philadelphia suburbs last month with more than a dozen anti-war voters, who said Democrats hadn't used their congressional majority to thwart Bush's policies. `Disappointed' ``I am disappointed because I thought they would get a lot more accomplished,'' Harold Fisher, an 82-year old retiree from Levittown, said. Last year, these Philadelphia-area voters helped Democrats gain two new House seats, including the one held by Murphy, an Iraq war veteran who won by just 1,157 votes out of almost 250,000 cast. Anti-war rumblings haven't yet translated into a serious challenge for Murphy, 34, and Pennsylvania's other freshmen Democrats. Voters such as Joel Tenenbaum, a 58-year-old government employee from Levittown, say they want to give them more time, or wider majorities. ``They want to get this stuff done but they don't have the votes,'' Tenenbaum said. Democratic Edge Nationally, anti-war sentiment continues to give Democrats a strong ``edge'' next year, said Donald Kettl, director of the Fels Institute of Government at the University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia. ``Republicans are going to have a difficult time,'' he said. To mollify their critics, Democrats have pledged to continue to push for a change of course in Iraq. They plan to vote this week on a $50 billion war-funding bill that mandates troop withdrawals. The measure is expected to do no better than previous attempts, which have either died in the Senate or been vetoed by Bush. Democratic leaders acknowledge that these stalemates may be eroding their support with the party's anti-war wing, and say they are aware of the potential for a voter backlash. ``We haven't been effective in ending the war in Iraq,'' Pelosi told reporters Nov. 1. ``If you asked me in a phone call, as ardent a Democrat as I am, I would disapprove of Congress as well.'' To contact the reporter on this story: Nicholas Johnston in Levittown, Pennsylvania at njohnston3 at bloomberg.net From JamBoi at Greens.org Wed Nov 14 09:23:33 2007 From: JamBoi at Greens.org (Drew Johnson) Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2007 09:23:33 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Truth Rising: The American People are Beginning To Get It Message-ID: <1068.38.99.84.36.1195061013.squirrel@greens.org> http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/?q=node/28700 The American People are Beginning To Get It By Ernest Partridge, Crisis Papers ?To Bush & Co.... we the people owe no more allegiance than a child owes to the criminal who stole her from her home and now abuses her while posing as her father.? Mark Crispin Miller Propaganda is a sprinter, but truth is a long-distance runner. And at last, the truth may be overtaking the propaganda and the lies. In the new edition of his riveting book, Fooled Again, Mark Crispin Miller describes a public groundswell that should have Bush, Cheney and the Busheviks very worried. Truth, having been ground to earth, is rising again. Despite compelling statistical, circumstantial, anecdotal and eyewitness evidence that two presidential and numerous congressional elections have been stolen, this evidence has been discounted, ignored and ridiculed by the mainstream media and, amazingly, by the victimized Democratic Party and its defeated candidates and even by some progressive publications. Even so, a sizeable and growing portion of the American public isn?t buying the official and bi-partisan assurances that the US elections are, by and large, on the level, and that the Bush/Cheney regime is therefore legitimate. For example, an August, 2006 Zogby poll reports that only 45% of the population is ?very confident? that Bush and Cheney won re-election ?fair and square? in 2004. About a third were ?not at all confident.? In the ?Afterword? to Fooled Again, comprising one hundred pages of new material, Miller chronicles the determined and persistent resistance of ?official Democrats? to the very idea that they were the victims of massive election fraud. Astonishingly, progressive publications (yes, there are still a few), such as The Nation, Mother Jones, and the liberal websites, TomPaine.com and Salon.com, have all published caustic articles debunking thoroughly researched and scrupulously argued accusations of election fraud. Familiar ad hominem rebuttals are trotted out: ?get over it,? ?sore losers,? ?conspiracy theorists.? Far more often, the fraud issue is denied even the dignity of mention and rebuttal. With the noteworthy exception of Catherine Crier and Lou Dobbs, the issue is virtually ignored on cable ?news,? and, on network TV news, the embargo is total. Meanwhile, the evidence of fraud remains on record and it accumulates. Extreme exit poll anomalies, with final totals shifting to the GOP with statistical improbabilities of millions to one. The widespread use of unverifiable paperless ?touchscreen? voting machines, secretly programmed by GOP partisans. Unsecured access to these machines. Lost, uncounted, and illegally destroyed ballots. Precinct returns in excess of registrations. (For the specifics on all this and more, read Miller?s book and visit the numerous websites devoted to election fraud. Among them, bradblog.com, blackboxvoting.org, www.votetrustusa.org, and uscountvotes.org. Caution: be sure to order the second edition of Fooled Again. Amazon and Barnes and Noble are listing the first edition). Amazingly, despite the silence of the media and the Democratic Party regulars, the message of the stolen elections is getting to the public, thanks to the determined and independent efforts of numerous writers, scholars, bloggers, and film makers, and their creative use of new and evolving communications technologies such as the internet and the DVD. Mark Crispin Miller thus describes this grassroots groundswell. (For specific names and titles, see the book. pp. 355-8): The evidence [of election fraud] was always more convincing than the sophistries deployed against it... Throughout the months preceding the 2006 election, many of us lectured endlessly in schools and churches, rented halls and private homes, spoke out on independent radio and posted pieces all over the internet... Offline, meanwhile, there were independent voices on the air, their numbers growing as the story slowly spread throughout the nation... And the movement also had strong champions in the world of print... and online... All such effort gradually conveyed the truth about America?s election, and the crying need for genuine reform to an ever larger, ever more receptive audience ? which was, in fact, not just an audience but increasingly a citizenry mobilized to salvage and invigorate (or rather, realize) US democracy... And so the people got it, recognizing instantly the likelihood that (a) Bush & Co. stole its ?mandate? in 2004, and (b) that the regime was not above attempting it again. Accordingly, ignored by the mainstream media and by the immobilized Democratic Party, dismissed and even ridiculed by many presumably ?liberal? writers and publications, the issue of election fraud has nonetheless survived and prevailed among the general public. Consequently, the legitimacy of the Bush/Cheney regime is eroding. Meanwhile, with the ongoing exposure of Bushevik lies (e.g., the alleged Saddam-9/11 connection and other concocted justifications for the Iraq War), the credibility of the regime is also disintegrating. Bush?s and Cheney?s approval ratings are at an all-time low, and falling. The once-formidable GOP/MSM propaganda machine is sputtering and running out of fuel. ?Fool me once, shame on you, fool me ? you can?t get fooled again.? Truth, crushed to earth, is on the rise. Will another national emergency, with Dubya and bullhorn on the rubble pile, or in a flight suit on the carrier, once again mobilize support for "the commander guy" and bail out this poor excuse of an administration? Possibly, but don?t count on it. Re-runs fare poorly in both show biz and politics. In a January, 2006 review of Miller?s book, I wrote that ?if we are to restore the ballot box to the voters, we need a media, we need an opposition party, we need an aroused public, and we need a miracle. But take heart: history tells us that political crises have a way of producing miracles.? Since then, we?ve made great strides. Two of those conditions are being met, as an aroused and skeptical public is abandoning the mainstream media and is turning toward a new dissenting media in the internet. However, the Democratic Party remains dumb-frozen, even as millions of its traditional supporters are deserting the Party in disgust. In the United States today, there is among the public a huge, growing, but still leaderless mass of discontented citizens. These are the three-quarters of the population that tell the pollsters that ?the country is moving in the wrong direction.? These are the two-thirds that reject Bush and Cheney and their Iraq War, and that disapprove of the Democratic Congress in even greater numbers. These are the citizens who are well aware that their Constitutional rights have been abolished, their franchise nullified, their public treasury looted, their public infrastructure trashed, their social services impoverished, and the livelihood of millions of our workers "outsourced." While the Democratic Party was elected to Congress to address these crises, the party leaders act as if they are living in some other country: ?The Republic of Beltway.? If they persist in this delusion, they may manage to lose the next ?sure-thing? election, whether or not the GOP engineers another ?fix.? If the Democratic Party is to take charge and lead us out of the current swamp of corruption, exploitation and ignorance, it must take inventory of the present political and economic dangers, secure fair and accurate elections, change direction radically and immediately, and act decisively. The impeachment of Dick Cheney, and then of George Bush, would be an appropriate first step. As an anonymous French politician once said, ?the people are marching and I must follow, for I am their leader.? From gerrygras at earthlink.net Wed Nov 14 14:02:48 2007 From: gerrygras at earthlink.net (Gerry Gras) Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2007 14:02:48 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] [Fwd: 10,000 letter to Nancy IMPEACH CHENEY] Message-ID: <473B7088.2050801@earthlink.net> -------- Original Message -------- Subject: 10,000 letter to Nancy IMPEACH CHENEY Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2007 15:18:23 -0500 (EST) From: Gold Star Famlies For Peace Reply-To: gsfp at mail.democracyinaction.org To: gerrygras at earthlink.net House Resolution 333 for the impeachment of Vice President Dick Cheney is off the House floor, and has instead been sent to the Judiciary Committee for "further study." This maneuver, organized by Pelosi and the Democratic leadership, is consistent with their mantra that impeachment is "off the table." But, we are told Nancy Pelosi is reported to have replied to the question of impeachment that if she received 10,000 hand written letters she would proceed with it. What are we waiting for? Cindy Sheehan wrote this: Dear Friends Instead of sending your impeachment letters for Dick Cheney to Nancy Pelosi's office, send them to my office so we can get an official count. Please send them to: Nancy Pelosi c/o Cindy Sheehan RE: Impeach Dick Cheney 1260 Mission Blvd San Francisco, Ca 94103 Please pass this around and have them sent by Friday, November 16th and we will have them delivered to her office in San Francisco before Thanksgiving. Spread this far and wide so we can take sacks of letters to her. Don't include anything besides the letter. Love Cindy From j.m.doyle at sbcglobal.net Wed Nov 14 17:07:30 2007 From: j.m.doyle at sbcglobal.net (Jim Doyle) Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2007 17:07:30 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] holiday peace fair Message-ID: <473B9BD2.9010601@sbcglobal.net> I just spoke to Lois Fiedler. She told me she is not aware of having received an application for a table much less a check to cover the fee for the table. Was anyone designated to fill out the application and send in the check at the monthly meeting? Or at any other time? They, the organizers, are having a meeting this coming Saturday, the 17-th at the church where the Peace Fair will be held, which is at Moorpark and Leigh. Do we want a half table or a full table? Who will table there? At any rate I have asked Lois to send an application form to me per email. She also said there are other groups who have not been at the peace fair before who are waiting to be a part of the peace fair so we had better pay up by Saturday. Is anyone available to attend that meeting on Saturday? From jims at greens.org Wed Nov 14 20:03:18 2007 From: jims at greens.org (Jim Stauffer) Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2007 20:03:18 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] [Fwd: Action!] Message-ID: <473BC506.20305@greens.org> -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Action! Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2007 06:20:34 -0800 (GMT-08:00) From: Cindy Marcopulos Reply-To: Cindy Marcopulos Here's a great chance to have Pelosi "put her money where her mouth is" and bombard her with letters for impeachment of Cheney. She wants 10,000 handwritten impeachment letters--pls write one and send it by THIS FRIDAY...but send it to Cindy Sheehan so she can count them and then deliver them to Pelosi as soon as possible. *Please send them to: Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi* *c/o Cindy for Congress RE: Impeach Dick Cheney 1260 Mission St San Francisco, Ca 94103 Please pass this around and have them sent by Friday, November 16th and we will have them delivered to her office in San Francisco before Thanksgiving.* If you're not fighting for our democracy, then you're part of the problem. From wrolley at charter.net Wed Nov 14 20:53:34 2007 From: wrolley at charter.net (Wes Rolley) Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2007 20:53:34 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Presidential Candidate Visits Message-ID: <473BD0CE.5090301@charter.net> I have noted one event that centered around Cynthia McKinney. Since then, I have sent out a note trying to find someone interested in helping with setting up a visit for Dr. Jared Ball, who will also be on our ballot in CA. I have also heard from some that they would love to have Kent Mesplay put in an appearance. So far, I have not gotten any feedback. We have to schedule this on the date: December 15. Other dates on that weekend are already taken. Can anyone hold a house party, either afternoon or evening, for Jared? Let me know by telephone (408)778-3024 or email . Otherwise, I will inform the campaign that we should give up the time slot if they can find something productive to do. For those of you who are not familiar with Jared, you can find more information at the following sites. Jared Ball for President. http://www.jaredball.com/ YouTube of his appearance at the Reading, PA National Meeting. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-TBSSaaeR0c Interview with Jared Ball at the blackagendareport. http://www.blackagendareport.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=430&Itemid=34 -- "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 JamBoi at Greens.org Thu Nov 15 08:13:29 2007 From: JamBoi at Greens.org (Drew Johnson) Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2007 08:13:29 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Fwd: London, other UK cities ban plastic bags (Independent) Message-ID: <3227.38.99.84.36.1195143209.squirrel@greens.org> ---------------------------- Original Message ---------------------------- Subject: [usgp-media] London, other UK cities ban plastic bags (Independent) From: "Scott McLarty" Date: Wed, November 14, 2007 22:26 -------------------------------------------------------------------------- London joins national campaign to banish the curse of the plastic bag By Martin Hickman, Consumer Affairs Correspondent The Independent, 14 November 2007 http://environment.independent.co.uk/green_living/article3157780.ece British shops hand out a staggering 13 billion every year. But after a decision by 33 London councils yesterday, plastic bags could be soon be consigned to history, unmourned by anyone who cares about cleaning up the environment. Eighty villages, towns and cities, including Brighton and Bath, have introduced or are considering a ban on them since shops in the Devon market town of Modbury went "plastic bag- free". But yesterday represented the most significant move yet. The capital is now on board. All 33 authorities in the London Councils group voted for legislation to prevent shops in the capital handing out free plastic bags. In the next fortnight Westminster Council will present a private Bill to the House of Commons which would apply to every London shop from the humblest newsagent to Harrods. Shoppers clutching large numbers of bags in London's West End could become a thing of the past; instead they will be asked to use sturdy reusable plastic "bags for life" or cotton or string hold-alls. London's authorities said they needed to halt the environmental damage done by plastic bags, which use oil and landfill space and kill marine wildlife. The ban is likely to be opposed by big retailers such as Tesco which prefer encouragement rather than coercion to change behaviour. But campaigners point to international trailblazers that have already banned the bags, places as diverse as Tasmania and Tanzania, which this year were joined by Paris and San Francisco. London would be the biggest urban centre yet to take the plunge. Peter Robinson, director of Waste Watch, said: "We've seen successful action taken on carrier bags all across the world from Australia to Zanzibar, and now it's time for London to take a lead on this issue in the UK." Although the London ban could take years to come into force, the groundswell of opposition to free disposable bags is unmistakable ? and perhaps unstoppable. Major retailers have signed an agreement with the Government's waste body, Wrap, to reduce the environmental impact of plastic bag use by 25 per cent by the end of next year. They are making the bags more lightweight, exploring biodegradable options, and discouraging their routine distribution. Tesco says it has cut its use of carrier bags by 1 billion to 3 billion after a high-profile campaign to give loyalty points to shoppers reusing them. Today Sainsbury's will announce in its financial results that it has cut plastic bag use by 10 per cent as a result of having signs at the checkouts asking shoppers to consider the environment and promoting jute and cotton bags. Marks & Spencer is to chargeshoppers 5p a plastic bag after a trial in Northern Ireland that cut the number handed out by 66 per cent. The Government says it is monitoring the efforts in commerce, but is set against a plastic bag tax of the kind introduced five years ago in Ireland, where the number of carrier bags has fallen by 90 per cent. Officials claim there is evidence that Irish shoppers are using other types of plastic instead. The plastic revolution was started by a BBC camerawoman, Rebecca Hosking, from Modbury, after she had seen the deaths of albatross chicks that had eaten plastic. In the absence of government action, 43 traders in the town decided to start their own "plastic bag-free town" in May. The shops refused to give out free plastic bags, charging 5p for a cornstarch bag, 10p for a paper one or ?1.50 for a cotton carrier. Trade did not fall off, and the six-month experiment proved so successful that Modbury has made the change permanentand made the carrying of a plastic bag an antisocial activity. Other towns such as Hebden Bridge in West Yorkshire and Overton in Hampshire have followed suit, and the idea of going "plastic bag-free" is taking hold elsewhere, such as in Brighton, where councillors last month called on the city's retailers to stop giving out bags. The plastics industry insisted that such bans were environmentally harmful, arguing that re-use of plastic bags ? to line bins, wrap packed lunches and scoop up dogs' mess ? made them more environmentally friendly than cotton alternatives, and that the oil used to make the HDPE (high density polyethylene) bags came from a by-product of oil. Nonetheless, the industry says that unnecessary use of bags is a problem, and is calling on shoppers to consider whether they really need them. Peter Woodall, of the Packaging and Industrial Films Association, said: "We are losing the battle in terms of hearts and minds of the public, who now certainly believe that the plastic bag is a hazard to health and the environment and something we need to eradicate from society." Ms Hosking, who started the Modbury experiment, said that plastic bags were the start of a campaign against disposable consumer culture. "It's our consumption of everything ? whether it's petrol, water or consumer goods ? that is driving virtually every environmental problem on the planet and it needs to stop. We have shown that individual people can make a difference," she said. A local convenience, a global problem Anyone who has seen The Graduate, one of the great movie classics, will remember vividly the single-word piece of advice that Dustin Hoffman's confused young career-hopeful, Benjamin Braddock, receives from a well-meaning family friend: Plastics. Asked to clarify what exactly he means, the family friend, Mr McGuire, explains: "There's a great future in plastics." And in 1967, when the film was made, no doubt there was. Unfortunately, in the succeeding years, many aspects of what then seemed to be those oh-so-convenient, revolutionary, synthetic materials have come to appear not a blessing but a curse ? and plastic bags are high on the list. The trouble with them is that they have the vices of their virtues. They are incredibly cheap and light, and so are produced in astronomical, scarcely credible, numbers; and remarkably tough for their lightness, they are incredibly persistent in the environment once we have finished with them. Nobody knows exactly how many plastic bags are consumed annually worldwide, but a good estimate is between 500 billion and 1,000 billion, which comes out at more than a million a minute ? and then they're all thrown away. But as they do not biodegrade, huge numbers don't disappear. They have become the most ubiquitous item of litter. They are the icons of the throwaway society. In parts of Africa, there are so many blowing through the bush that a cottage industry has sprung up in harvesting windblown bags and using them to weave hats, or even more bags. But in some parts of the environment, they represent a lethal threat to wildlife, in particular in the oceans. According to the British Antarctic Survey, they have spread from Spitzbergen north of the Arctic Circle to the Falkland Islands at the other end of the globe. When floating they can resemble jellyfish, and so are often mistakenly eaten by sea turtles and other marine mammals and birds, with fatal results. No one denies plastic bags are satisfyingly convenient. But as Billy Joel sang, you pay for your satisfaction somewhere along the line. Michael McCarthy ____________________________________________________________________________________ Get easy, one-click access to your favorites. Make Yahoo! your homepage. http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs _______________________________________________ usgp-media mailing list usgp-media at gp-us.org http://lists.gp-us.org/mailman/listinfo/usgp-media From EVGreens at comcast.net Tue Nov 13 22:42:41 2007 From: EVGreens at comcast.net (East Valley Greens) Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2007 22:42:41 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] EV GREENS - Monthly Meeting 1/13/07 Message-ID: (Sorry, I lost Drew's tinyurl to Rob's.) This is a reminder that the East Valley Greens will be meeting at 7:00PM on Wednesday, 11/13/07 at 1421 Yellowstone Ave., Milpitas, CA 95035-6913 http://www.mapquest.com/maps/map.adp?formtype=address&addtohistory=&address= 1421%20Yellowstone%20Ave&city=Milpitas&state=CA&zipcode=95035%2d6913&country =US&geodiff=1 (mapquest link) Some of the exciting topics for discussion are: *Supporting the BAREC referendum *Our Green Social Planning *How can we get polyurethane out of Santa Clara Restaurants & Stores? *New and interesting social issues *Whatever you would like to talk about! We look forward to seeing you there! From JamBoi at Greens.org Thu Nov 15 11:59:48 2007 From: JamBoi at Greens.org (Drew Johnson) Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2007 11:59:48 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] SoCal ACLU Calls for Impeachment of Bush & Cheney -- Will National Follow? Message-ID: <1184.38.99.84.36.1195156788.squirrel@greens.org> Note that the National Lawyer's Guild has already signed on with a full campaign... http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/?q=node/28747 ACLU of Southern California Calls for Impeachment of Bush and Cheney -- Will National Follow? ACLU-SC Calls for Impeachment of Bush and Cheney The ACLU of Southern California has called for the impeachment of President George W. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney for High Crimes and Misdemeanors arising out of their abuse of power and numerous violations of the Constitution. The Board of Directors of the ACLU-SC voted on November 14, 2007 without objection (and one abstention) to call on Congress to promptly convene impeachment hearings. In March, 1971 and again in July, 1973 the ACLU-SC called for the impeachment of Richard M. Nixon. In September of 1973, the National Board of the ACLU joined the call for impeachment. The ACLU-SC will shortly release a report detailing the grounds for impeachment of Bush and Cheney. From JamBoi at Greens.org Thu Nov 15 12:16:37 2007 From: JamBoi at Greens.org (Drew Johnson) Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2007 12:16:37 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Idea for holiday social: Dec 15th Jared Ball for Prez gathering Message-ID: <1043.38.99.84.36.1195157797.squirrel@greens.org> How about we do a December 15th Jared Ball for Prez social at the Smoke Tiki??? Dr. Ball is a very hip African American PHd. Here's his info from Wes' previous posting: Jared Ball for President. http://www.jaredball.com/ YouTube of his appearance at the Reading, PA National Meeting. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-TBSSaaeR0c Interview with Jared Ball at the blackagendareport. http://www.blackagendareport.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=430&Itemid=34 Green is Core! Drew > On Thu, November 15, 2007 10:34, Cameron L. Spitzer wrote: >> >> I like the idea of combining the NV and EV meetings this month and next. >> Everybody is overbooked through new years. >> We used to do a holiday party instead of a business meeting in December. >> Maybe it's time to bring that back. From tnharter at aceweb.com Thu Nov 15 12:59:51 2007 From: tnharter at aceweb.com (Tian Harter) Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2007 12:59:51 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Idea for holiday social: Dec 15th Jared Ball forPrez gathering In-Reply-To: <1043.38.99.84.36.1195157797.squirrel@greens.org> References: <1043.38.99.84.36.1195157797.squirrel@greens.org> Message-ID: <473CB347.7040901@aceweb.com> That looks like a great idea! Drew Johnson wrote: > How about we do a December 15th Jared Ball for Prez social at the Smoke > Tiki??? Dr. Ball is a very hip African American PHd. Here's his info > from Wes' previous posting: > > Jared Ball for President. http://www.jaredball.com/ > YouTube of his appearance at the Reading, PA National Meeting. > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-TBSSaaeR0c > Interview with Jared Ball at the blackagendareport. > http://www.blackagendareport.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=430&Itemid=34 > > > Green is Core! > > Drew > > >> On Thu, November 15, 2007 10:34, Cameron L. Spitzer wrote: >>> I like the idea of combining the NV and EV meetings this month and next. >>> Everybody is overbooked through new years. >>> We used to do a holiday party instead of a business meeting in December. >>> Maybe it's time to bring that back. > > _______________________________________________ > sosfbay-discuss mailing list > sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org > http://lists.cagreens.org/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss > -- Tian http://tian.greens.org Justice. I see "just ice" in the word, meaning that cold hard stuff I remember from Illinois winters. From JamBoi at Greens.org Thu Nov 15 14:24:56 2007 From: JamBoi at Greens.org (Drew Johnson) Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2007 14:24:56 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Local Green was on NPR's all things considered re oil spill... Message-ID: <1030.38.99.84.36.1195165496.squirrel@greens.org> ---------------------------- Original Message ---------------------------- Subject: [SFGP CC] Was on npr's all things considered re oil spill... From: danielerenee at aol.com Date: Wed, November 14, 2007 19:38 -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hi there, Wondered if you could post 2 items in order to inspire regular citizens to action... My name is Daniele Erville and I am an active SF Green Party member. This past Friday, I crossed the yellow tape to get onto Baker Beach to see for myself the extent of the damage from the oil spill. Because I did this, I got on national public radio and was able to express my outrage at the regularity with which these oil spills happen at all, among other things. Here is the link to the story: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=16227357 It's also worth mentioning that I took it upon myself to organize 3 forums last month at the Bazaar Cafe in San Francisco for all the SF Mayoral Candidates in this past election. Thank you, Daniele Erville San Francisco 415 876-8449 ________________________________________________________________________ Email and AIM finally together. You've gotta check out free AOL Mail! - http://mail.aol.com _______________________________________________ San Francisco Green Party CC mailing list CC at sfgreens.org To unsubscribe or change options, go here: https://list.sfgreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cc From WB4D23 at aol.com Thu Nov 15 17:00:11 2007 From: WB4D23 at aol.com (WB4D23 at aol.com) Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2007 20:00:11 EST Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Fwd:[GPCA Official Notice] Announcements From CCWG -- Deadlines, Etc. Message-ID: In a message dated 11/14/2007 4:27:42 PM Pacific Standard Time, WSB3ATTYCA writes: In a message dated 11/9/2007 9:46:53 AM Pacific Standard Time, contacts2006 at lists.cagreens.org writes: GREEN PARTY COUNTY CONTACTS MESSAGE 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 stated in the email. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ANNOUNCEMENTS FROM CAMPAIGNS AND CANDIDATES WORKING GROUP Registration and Filing Deadlines for Partisan Office Candidates The California Elections Code requires that a candidate for partisan office must have been registered for one year before the candidacy filing deadline in the political party for which nomination is being sought. However, a person registered as ?Decline to State? one year before the filing date may change to a party registration and be eligible to run as a candidate of that political party if they have changed their registration at least 90 days before the filing deadline. All candidates for partisan office must be registered in the political party for which they are seeking nomination at least 90 days before the filing deadline to have their name included on the Primary Election ballot. Otherwise, anyone seeking nomination in a Primary Election must be certified as a write-in candidate. The deadline for declaration of candidacy for the June 2008 Primary Election is March 7, 2008. The deadline for a DTS registered voter to file a change of party registration to run as a Green Party partisan candidate is December 7, 2007. Anyone considering changing their registration to run as a GPCA candidate should be urged to file their change of voter registration BEFORE December 7th. The period for candidates to collect signatures in lieu of filing fees to qualify as candidates for the GPCA Primary Election ballot begins December 28, 2007 and ends February 21, 2008 (with an additional period ending March 7th to collect additional signatures to replace disqualified signatures). Collecting signatures to eliminate the need for (or at least reduce) the filing fee for State Senate, State Assembly and Congressional candidates can save a candidate hundreds to thousands of dollars. It is extremely important to inform potential candidates for partisan office about these deadlines and to support their signature gathering efforts. County Polling Starting Soon !!! County Polling on the three ballot measures appearing on the February 5, 2008 Election ballot is beginning soon!!! A separate announcement will be sent to this County Contacts list. It is critical for County GP?s to respond to the County Polling. Because there will be no General Assembly before the election, the County Polling is the only method for the GPCA to take positions on these ballot measures. Please also note that that there are four referenda challenging the most recent Indian Casino Compacts that are undergoing signatures review for certification to also appear on the February 5th ballot. Candidate Training Program Videos Available DVDs of the Candidate Basics training program held in Petaluma March 19, 2006 are available for distribution to County GP?s to use to recruit candidates and as a program resource. The program was designed for prospective GPCA candidates and campaign helpers who have no or little previous campaign experience. Topics include: Deciding to be a candidate; Initial filing requirements; Media basics; and Campaign finance issues. Program sessions are about an hour and can be shown in order or separately. Packets have been distributed to contacts in Alameda, Fresno, Humboldt, Kern, Los Angeles, Marin, Orange, Placer, Riverside, San Diego, San Joaquin, Santa Barbara, Santa Clara, Santa Cruz, Sonoma, Tulare and Ventura, For more information, contact Warner Bloomberg CCWG Coordinator at (408) 295-9353 or _wsb3attyca at aol.com_ (mailto:wsb3attyca at aol.com) Host(s) Sought For Spring 2008 Candidate Training Program and Strategy Meeting The CCWG currently is seeking a host for a one-day candidate training program in March or April 2008. Local Green Party members will need to identify a weekend date and location for the program and provide volunteers for helping with the program. The CCWG will provide speakers and materials. The program will build on the March 2006 Candidates Basics program by focusing in greater detail on selected topics. The CCWG also is seeking a host for a day-long strategy meeting to be held after the February 5th election. If a single host group is willing, the candidate training workshops and the CCWG strategy meetings can be held on the same weekend. For more information, contact Warner Bloomberg CCWG Coordinator at (408) 295-9353 or _wsb3attyca at aol.com_ (mailto:wsb3attyca at aol.com) CCWG County Contacts Needed The CCWG currently is seeking Green Party members to serve as county contacts. CCWG County Contacts have the responsibility to inform their local County Councils, locals, caucuses and general membership about CCWG programs and issues and to report back to the CCWG via the email list, monthly teleconference and at plenary meetings. More than one person can serve as the CCWG contacts for their County GP. To volunteer for these positions, contact Warner Bloomberg CCWG Coordinator at (408) 295-9353 or _wsb3attyca at aol.com_ (mailto:wsb3attyca at aol.com) _______________________________________________ Contacts2006 mailing list Contacts2006 at lists.cagreens.org http://lists.cagreens.org/mailman/listinfo/contacts2006 _______________________________________________ ************************************** See what's new at http://www.aol.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- An embedded message was scrubbed... From: WSB3ATTYCA at aol.com Subject: Fwd: [gpca-cocos] [GPCA Official Notice] Announcements From CCWG -- Registrat... Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2007 19:27:42 EST Size: 26645 URL: From WB4D23 at aol.com Thu Nov 15 17:13:31 2007 From: WB4D23 at aol.com (WB4D23 at aol.com) Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2007 20:13:31 EST Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Fwd: [GPCA Official Notice] Delegates to Nominating Convention Due December 7th Message-ID: In a message dated 11/13/2007 12:36:24 PM Pacific Standard Time, contacts2006 at lists.cagreens.org writes: GREEN PARTY COUNTY CONTACTS MESSAGE 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 stated in the email. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ County Contacts, Each active county has the opportunity to submit a slate of potential delegates to the 2008 National Presidential Nominating Convention. The deadline to submit delegates to the Delegate Selection Committee is December 7, 2007. Convention delegates will be allocated to vote for the candidates from the Primary election in equivalent proportions to the vote percentage each candidate received in the Primary. Candidates are being requested to provide a slate of delegates. The slates that come from counties will fill any gaps in the candidates' slates. The Diversity caucuses of the GPCA are also submitting delegate slates to ensure adequate representation of under-represented groups. The county slates along with the diversity caucuses' slates will comprise a pool of delegates from which the Delegate Selection Committee will select the delegates to complete the candidates' delegate slates if needed. Please note that a person can be on both a county slate and a candidate slate, but they can not be on more than one candidates' slate. Delegates must be GPCA members. GPCA members are either registered as Green or "ineligible to vote but have been extended GPC membership by their county." Prospective delegates need to submit the following: 1) Full name as registered to vote 2) Phone number 3) Email 4) Mailing address 5) County of residence 6) Gender and any minority diversity group of which they are part, in order to aid the selection of a gender-balanced and diverse delegation. Please reference Section 4 of the following document for the specific procedures regarding the delegate slates: http://cagreens.org/bylaws/proposals/pres_nom_delegates_ADOPTED.pdf The convention is July 10-13, 2008 in Chicago, Illinois. Please confirm that delegates are GPCA members, and then submit their names and information to the Delegate Selection Committee at gpca-dsc at cagreens.org . Thank you, Jane Rands Liaison to the Secretary of State for the GPCA jrands_liaison at earthlink.net _______________________________________________ Contacts2006 mailing list Contacts2006 at lists.cagreens.org http://lists.cagreens.org/mailman/listinfo/contacts2006 _______________________________________________ ************************************** See what's new at http://www.aol.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- An embedded message was scrubbed... From: WSB3ATTYCA at aol.com Subject: Fwd: [gpca-cocos] [GPCA Official Notice] Delegates to Nominating Convention D... Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2007 19:23:56 EST Size: 13728 URL: From tnharter at aceweb.com Thu Nov 15 18:09:39 2007 From: tnharter at aceweb.com (Tian Harter) Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2007 18:09:39 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Stock Market Gambling: Turning on a Dime Message-ID: <473CFBE3.7050205@aceweb.com> > Stanley Mazor > > Stock Market Gambling: Turning on a Dime > > > For years, when Stanley Mazor?s stock broker called him, he joked that > he was ?talking with his bookie.? Is buying stock investing? Or is it > a speculation -- a bet? After 40 years of ?investing? in stocks, Stan > decided to try ?gambling.? He used a short term trading scheme called > ?turning on a dime.? He bet on price wiggles, rather than trying to > spot a trend. Stan will describe his ?gambling? strategy in a talk > based on his new book, which is definitely not about investing. > > Stan Mazor has spoken previously to TASC on his French chateau > project-- that used styrofoam blocks, about "clocks and culture", and > about his experiences as a computer chip designer. > > Stanley Mazor has published more than 50 papers on integrated circuit > chip design and computer architecture over the years, as well as > written a book, A Guide to VHDL. He was awarded the Kyoto Prize, the > Ron Brown American Innovator Award, and the SIA Robert Noyce Award for > his work at Intel. He has also been inducted into the Inventor?s Hall > of Fame. What does a scientist/engineer know about gambling? His new > book gives a perspective. > Stan began his talk by saying a few words about investing. He said professionals would recommend that you have much less of your stock invested internationally than he does. However, the dollar has been going down and investing over seas makes sense in that environment. He controls risk in his international portfolio by only buying closed end mutual funds that pay dividends and are Morning Star rated. He has had good luck with Aberdeen Australia Fund, Asia Pacific Fund, Swiss Helvetica Fund, and some others. He has had bad luck with New Ireland Fund and some others. Over all he is ahead of where he would have been if he had invested in a standard instrument like T-bills. Then Stan explained that the rest of his talk would be about stock market gambling. He explained that you would be a fool to try these strategies if you really needed the money you were using. Sometimes they win, and sometimes they lose. He got up on a high horse and gestured. In a loud voice Stan declared "THIS IS GAMBLING!" and "YOU DO IT AT YOUR OWN RISK!". Then he put away the slides of microscopic text listing safe investments and brought out an easily read bell shaped bar graph. What Stan is looking for with the "turn on a dime" strategy is a boring company with a reliable product in an established niche in the marketplace. He used Ford as an example. They have been making cars for many years. They will be making cars for many years. If you chart the daily close over time the stock price looks like a bell curve, meaning most of the time it hovers around $8/share, occasionally going down as low as $6.80/share, and sometimes going as high as $9/share. The idea is to buy when the price is at the low end of the spread, and sell when it gets above the middle of the spread. In engineering terms, his concept is to trade on the noise, not the signal. Whatever Ford's stock is worth this week, they still sell cars. It is reasonable to expect the same thing to be true next week as well. We know that the price swings are often caused by news, but Stan doesn't care about that. His strategy works when that stuff evens out, which is often enough for his purposes. Stan warned us again that it is easy to lose your shirt, so don't gamble in the market with money you are going to need to eat and pay the bills. Stan calls it "turning on a dime" because a $3/share stock value drifts a dime when the stock price changes 3%. He showed us an example of a Silicon Valley company he traded in. (One of his rules is don't invest in Silicon Valley companies.) The stock fell. He bought some. The stock fell. He bought more. The stock rose. He sold. The stock rose more. He sold the rest. The net result: Stan pocketed some money and the stock broker also got something. He warned us again that this doesn't always work out that well. Sometimes the company goes bust. When that happens, you loose your investment. During Q&A a number of interesting things came up: The most Stan has made in the past year is $90/share on a $50/share stock. Sometimes it is difficult to say, because often he still has money in something, so it's not clear how it will work out yet. Other strategies he sometimes uses are commonly known as "weak sister" strategies and "fallen angel" strategies. A weak sister strategy involves buying a stock like the one that has fallen on news that fell because people connected the two and sold both. A fallen angel strategy involves investing money in a company that has fallen a lot because you think it will rebound. He cautioned that he lost money on Delta Airlines when it went bankrupt betting that it would rebound with that kind of strategy. -- Tian http://tian.greens.org Latest change: Added green festival recollections. Happy Thanksgiving! From wrolley at charter.net Thu Nov 15 19:59:22 2007 From: wrolley at charter.net (Wes Rolley) Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2007 19:59:22 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Idea for holiday social: Dec 15th Jared Ball for Prez gathering In-Reply-To: <1043.38.99.84.36.1195157797.squirrel@greens.org> References: <1043.38.99.84.36.1195157797.squirrel@greens.org> Message-ID: <473D159A.1080904@charter.net> Drew Johnson wrote: > How about we do a December 15th Jared Ball for Prez social at the Smoke > Tiki??? Dr. Ball is a very hip African American PHd. Here's his info > from Wes' previous posting: > Since this was the only response that I got, I will do the follow up tomorrow and find out what is available, costs, etc. Does anyone know how many we might expect there if we did set up an event? Is there any way to get a count? Since this venue was recommended, and I have never been there, was the intention to make this an open meeting with a public announcement? In that case, maybe we need to go to KDON 102.5 for the announcement. -- "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 17211 Quail Court, Morgan Hill, CA 95037 http://www.refpub.com/ -- Tel: 408.778.3024 From WB4D23 at aol.com Thu Nov 15 20:25:39 2007 From: WB4D23 at aol.com (WB4D23 at aol.com) Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2007 23:25:39 EST Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Save BAREC No on Mearsures A and B Committee launched Message-ID: Folks: The Save BAREC campaign committee for the February 5th election referenda has been started! The webpage is at _www.barec.org_ (http://www.barec.org) . The general education web page is _www.SaveBAREC.org_ (http://www.SaveBAREC.org) . Let me know if you want to volunteer for campaign activities or make a donation. Warner (408-295-9353) ************************************** See what's new at http://www.aol.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JamBoi at Greens.org Thu Nov 15 23:28:29 2007 From: JamBoi at Greens.org (Drew Johnson) Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2007 23:28:29 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Idea for holiday social: Dec 15th Jared Ball 4 Prez gathering In-Reply-To: <473D159A.1080904@charter.net> References: <1043.38.99.84.36.1195157797.squirrel@greens.org> <473D159A.1080904@charter.net> Message-ID: <2192.38.99.84.36.1195198109.squirrel@greens.org> Wes we have an 'inside connection' with the Smoke Tiki lounge through Iliad Rodriguez. Let's let him check out the possibilities... Yes, we could likely make a public announcement and draw a crowd, etc. Green is Core! Drew Johnson On Thu, November 15, 2007 19:59, Wes Rolley wrote: > Drew Johnson wrote: >> How about we do a December 15th Jared Ball for Prez social at the Smoke >> Tiki??? Dr. Ball is a very hip African American PHd. Here's his info >> from Wes' previous posting: >> > Since this was the only response that I got, I will do the follow up > tomorrow and find out what is available, costs, etc. > > Does anyone know how many we might expect there if we did set up an > event? Is there any way to get a count? > > Since this venue was recommended, and I have never been there, was the > intention to make this an open meeting with a public announcement? In > that case, maybe we need to go to KDON 102.5 for the announcement. > > > > -- > "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 > 17211 Quail Court, Morgan Hill, CA 95037 > http://www.refpub.com/ -- Tel: 408.778.3024 > > _______________________________________________ > sosfbay-discuss mailing list > sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org > http://lists.cagreens.org/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss > From kaisha_marie at comcast.net Fri Nov 16 07:08:08 2007 From: kaisha_marie at comcast.net (Kaisha Torres) Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2007 07:08:08 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Idea for holiday social: Dec 15th Jared Ball4 Prez gathering In-Reply-To: <2192.38.99.84.36.1195198109.squirrel@greens.org> Message-ID: I think that's a fantastic idea and so I am addressing this directly to Iliad in the hopes that he can check on the date for us. The area we were able to reserve before could seat about 25 people, I believe. If the 15th is not going to work for the Smoke Tiki Lounge, I am up for looking around at other venues. Because it's the holidays, we will need to move on this quickly to realize an event. Green is social! Kaisha -----Original Message----- From: sosfbay-discuss-bounces at cagreens.org [mailto:sosfbay-discuss-bounces at cagreens.org]On Behalf Of Drew Johnson Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2007 11:28 PM To: wrolley at charter.net Cc: sc-sm at lists.sonic.net; sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org Subject: Re: [Sosfbay-discuss] Idea for holiday social: Dec 15th Jared Ball4 Prez gathering Wes we have an 'inside connection' with the Smoke Tiki lounge through Iliad Rodriguez. Let's let him check out the possibilities... Yes, we could likely make a public announcement and draw a crowd, etc. Green is Core! Drew Johnson On Thu, November 15, 2007 19:59, Wes Rolley wrote: > Drew Johnson wrote: >> How about we do a December 15th Jared Ball for Prez social at the Smoke >> Tiki??? Dr. Ball is a very hip African American PHd. Here's his info >> from Wes' previous posting: >> > Since this was the only response that I got, I will do the follow up > tomorrow and find out what is available, costs, etc. > > Does anyone know how many we might expect there if we did set up an > event? Is there any way to get a count? > > Since this venue was recommended, and I have never been there, was the > intention to make this an open meeting with a public announcement? In > that case, maybe we need to go to KDON 102.5 for the announcement. > > > > -- > "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 > 17211 Quail Court, Morgan Hill, CA 95037 > http://www.refpub.com/ -- Tel: 408.778.3024 > > _______________________________________________ > sosfbay-discuss mailing list > sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org > http://lists.cagreens.org/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss > _______________________________________________ sosfbay-discuss mailing list sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org http://lists.cagreens.org/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss From JamBoi at Greens.org Fri Nov 16 08:52:53 2007 From: JamBoi at Greens.org (Drew Johnson) Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2007 08:52:53 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Conyers: Impeachment "Under Active Consideration", McGovern: grounds stronger than for Nixon Message-ID: <2670.38.99.84.36.1195231973.squirrel@greens.org> http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0711/S00262.htm Impeachment ?Under Active Consideration" - Conyers Thursday, 15 November 2007, 11:02 pm Article: Rosalea Barker Impeachment Resolution "Under Active Consideration" By The Judiciary Committee Following a discussion on ?War and the Fourth Estate?, held in the Ways and Means Committee hearing room on Wednesday night, Rep. John Conyers - Chair of the Judiciary Committee ? said that the impeachment resolution against Vice President Cheney is ?under active consideration?. However, he stopped short of giving any indication of a timeline, saying that he can?t ?telegraph? any information on what is ?the most sensitive matter before the nation?. His responses were in reply to questions asked by Scoop as he was leaving the discussion venue. During the discussion, which was organized by the Congressional Out of Iraq caucus headed by Rep. Maxine Waters, former Senator George McGovern, journalist Bob Woodward, and two other authors, Ron Suskind and Michael Isikoff, were asked by Rep. Stephen Cohen if ? politics aside ? they thought impeachment was warranted. Isikoff, author of ?Hubris?, suggested that Conyers should answer, but gave no answer himself. Woodward passed on the question of impeachment and said ?there?s abundant evidence that it?s a legal war.? McGovern stated that he didn?t think ?the mood of the country would carry it very far, but I do think misleading the Congress to get into the war is impeachable . The grounds for impeachment are stronger than the ones we had against Nixon.? Suskind, author of ?The One Percent Solution?, didn?t get the opportunity to answer, as Rep. Waters tried to move along the discussion. Conyers then said to the four panelists, ?Why is it all but one of you chose not even to speak to the issue? Every member up here is being besieged by people demanding an impeachment action be begun,? adding that ?this is the subject that governs what happens in 2008. This is the subject that people are coming to us asking ?if they don?t apply now, when will they ever apply????meaning the impeachment provisions. Woodward?s response was, ?You?ve just fortified me in my resolve NOT to answer. What is the job of a reporter? It is limited. It is not the job of a reporter to make a judgment.? He pointed out that he didn?t do so even during the Watergate investigations, instead presenting facts in a neutral way, as is the job of a reporter. ?To step out of that would be to cripple us. We need independent inquiry. We have a very limited role in this.? Isikoff said he agreed with everything Woodward said, but that ?there?s a lot we still don?t know.? On the question of whether it was a valid subject to be reporting, he thought Yes. Suskind responded that ?All of us are trying to find the right line on the rule of law.? Earlier he said he thought that politicians and officials no longer thought it was bad policy to lie to a reporter, and that ?you need to trust truth?. The discussion had been announced last week, and tonight it coincided with floor votes on whether to debate the Iraq supplemental (HR 4156) that ties funding to troop withdrawal timelines, whether to pass an anti child pornography measure, and the debate on HR 4156 itself. At one time during the discussion, the only member of the House remaining in the committee room asking questions of the four authors was Eleanor Norton Holmes, who is the Washington DC Delegate to Congress. (Delegates are allowed to vote in committees, but in the House can only vote on amendments, where their votes are thrown out if they constitute the margin of victory.) About twenty members of the public attended the event and the only daily media presence beside Scoop was a Fox cameraman. Although held in a committee room, it was not a formal committee hearing so was not recorded by the House. It ended after 8 pm. The 10pm vote in the House on the passage of HR 4156?which passed 218 to 203?is here: http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2007/roll1108.xml ************* rosalea.barker at gmail.com From WB4D23 at aol.com Thu Nov 15 17:08:31 2007 From: WB4D23 at aol.com (WB4D23 at aol.com) Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2007 20:08:31 EST Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Fwd: [GPCA Official Notice] GPCA COUNTY POLLING FOR FEBRUARY 5TH BALLOT MEASURES Message-ID: In a message dated 11/13/2007 12:36:41 PM Pacific Standard Time, contacts2006 at lists.cagreens.org writes: GREEN PARTY COUNTY CONTACTS MESSAGE 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 stated in the email. GPCA COUNTY POLLING FOR FEBRUARY 5, 2008 BALLOT MEASURES To: GPCA County Contacts List From: Warner Bloomberg Campaigns and Candidates Working Group Coordinator Subject: County Polling for Initiatives on the February 5, 2008 Election Ballot Below you will find instructions for GPCA County organizations to report County GP positions on the three initiatives that have been certified to appear on the ballot for the February 5, 2008 election. Immediately following those instructions, you will find reports that have been compiled describing those measures and suggesting positions. The recommendations are simply those of the people who wrote or compiled them and DO NOT constitute GPCA positions. GPCA positions on ballot measures occur in two ways: By decision of the delegates at a General Assembly or by County Polling. The next plenary is not scheduled until after the election, so County Polling is the only method for the GPCA to take a position on these issues. As in previous years, special thanks to everyone who contributed to the reports and to Greg Jan for collecting them; and thanks to Matthew Leslie for serving as the County Polling administrator and to Michael Borenstein for serving as his assistant. Any questions about the instructions should be addressed to Matthew as-indicated. Any other related questions can be directed to me via _wsb3attyca at aol.com_ (mailto:wsb3attyca at aol.com) . Warner Bloomberg CCWG Coordinator INSTRUCTIONS FOR GPCA STATEWIDE POLL OF COUNTIES INITIATIVES APPEARING ON THE FEBRUARY 5, 2008 ELECTION BALLOT The GPCA uses a poll of all recognized county Green Parties to determine GPCA positions on ballot measures as an alternative to making those decisions at a state meeting. Three initiatives have qualified for the next state election on February 5, 2008 (these do not include four referenda on Indian Casino Compacts that are still undergoing review for certification). Please be sure that your county participates by submitting votes by Sunday December 28, 2007. THE POLL: This poll contains a list of all initiatives that have qualified for the February 5, 2008 Election. Each initiative title is followed by a recommendation made by volunteers from the Green Party grassroots who have reviewed the measures. Of course, counties are free to agree or disagree with the recommended positions. Following the list of initiatives is an extensive list of arguments and resources for research about each. PROCESS: Please provide the Poll Coordinator (Matthew Leslie) and his assistant (Michael Borenstein) with vote results from your county in the following form for each ballot initiative: "Yes" for the GPCA to support the initiative "No" for the GPCA to oppose the initiative "No Position" for the GPCA to deliberately remain neutral on the initiative Votes may also be cast as "Abstain" if they do not wish to participate in the poll. Abstentions will be counted toward quorum. Vote on the initiative itself, not the recommendation. For example, if CCWG has recommended a position of "No," and your county wishes to agree and vote "No" on the initiative, then your county should vote "No" on the initiative, and not "Yes" on the recommended "No" position. PLEASE SUBMIT VOTES IN THE AMOUNT ALLOTED TO YOUR COUNTY FOR THE RIVERSIDE PLENARY. That list was published in the agenda packet for that state meeting held September 8-9, 2007. For example, if your county had 2 delegates, you would submit 2 votes in any combination of positions. (Votes from counties with more than one delegate vote need not be unanimous.) If you have any questions about the total number of votes that can be cast for any measure, contact the GPCA Coordinating Committee member(s) who represent your region. Your county should rely on its own internal processes to arrive at its positions. The poll has an 80% threshold. The default where the threshold or quorum is not met is ?No Position?. TIMELINE: The voting period begins on November 13, 2007, and ends on December 28, 2007 (11:59 PM PST). Votes received after the closing date and time will not be counted. Submit all votes to BOTH the Poll Coordinator and the Assistant Poll Coordinator at the following email addresses: Matthew Leslie mrl at greens.org , Michael Borenstein thebor at greens.org . Please submit any questions about the process of the poll to the same addresses. FEBRUARY 5, 2008 BALLOT INITIATIVES REPORTS Dear Greens, Below are the recommendations and reports (write-ups) on the three state propositions which will be on the February, 2008 ballot. (Note: There is a possibility that four referenda having to do with Indian Gaming may also qualify, but signature counting has not yet been completed on those.). As you will see, we are currently divided about Prop. 92, funding for community colleges. One write-up recommends that we endorse Prop. 92, while the other write-up recommends that we do not take a position on that initiative. (Note: Neither write-up recommends that we oppose Prop. 92). Also, I want to take a moment here to thank the Greens who worked on analyzing and authoring the write-ups for these propositions! We hope that you will find them informative and helpful. Sincerely, Greg Jan Oakland, CA Recommendations for the February, 2008 ballot: Prop. 91 -- Transportation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . NO Prop. 92 -- Funding of Community Colleges . . . Either "YES" or "No position" Prop. 93 -- Term Limits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . NO Note: The text of these propositions are available via the Secretary of State's website, at: http://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/elections_j.htm The draft voter pamphlet "pro and con" arguments and rebuttals will be available through Nov. 13, and perhaps after that date, via: http://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/vig_02052008.htm ************** Reports (Write-ups): Prop. 91 -- Transportation Recommendation: NO Write-up author: Jan Arnold, Alameda County This proposal has an unusual history. The "Transportation Funding Protection Act" (TFPA) was an initiative circulated by an alliance of construction companies and building trades unions who were frustrated by years of diversions (by the State legislature) of transportation money set aside under Proposition 42 (which passed in 2002). That measure dedicated most of the gas tax revenue to improving streets, highways, and transit systems. The proponents paid for about a million signatures. Legislative leaders got the message and placed Proposition 1A on the November 2006 ballot, covering the same issues, where it passed easily. The proponents of the TFPA turned in some, but not all, of their signatures, while they were keeping the conversation going with legislative leaders, but they were not intending to actually qualify the measure. Because of a higher than expected signature validity rate, the initiative qualified. Meanwhile, its proponents had decided Proposition 1A was good enough to support. In the space where we would expect to see an argument FOR Prop 91, there's a request that we vote No, as the TFPA is no longer needed. (Nobody submitted an argument against it.) But sometimes the original proponents are settling for less than an ideal solution and we Greens (who take our stand based on future focus) might actually want to pick up the banner that they have dropped. Could this be one of those times? The official Ballot Label says this measure, if passed, "increases stability of state funding for highways, streets, and roads and may decrease stability of state funding for public transit. May reduce stability of certain local funds for public transit." That suggests Greens and other advocates of transit funding should vote No. There's a general question about keeping some public funds in a "lockbox." In this case, both the existing law (1A) and this proposal allow for emergency exceptions, which is something we should accept. (If a family member had a serious emergency, you might raid your retirement fund despite your original plans.) Since transportation money is mostly going for roads, how serious are we about keeping it in a lockbox? (But it seems that when transportation money is raided, the FIRST to be raided is NOT the roads, but the transit stuff that we are really trying to get more of.) Although these issues are complex, one progressive non-profit transportation group that we are in touch with has told us they will likely be opposing it, and we have not heard of any progressive groups or individuals who are inclined to support it. In fact, we haven't heard of any significant organizations at all who are supporting Prop. 91. Therefore, in view of all of the above, we recommend a "No" vote on Prop. 91 Prop. 92 -- Funding of Community Colleges Recommendation: Either "YES" or "No position" Write-up author for "No position": Bill Balderston, Alameda County Write-up author for "YES": Information compiled by Susan Schacher, Alameda County Write-up for "No position" recommendation on Prop. 92: As the co-chair of the Green Party Caucus of the California Teachers Association (CTA) and as a long-time representative to CTA State Council (specifically sitting on the Financing Public Education Committee), I have great difficulty arguing either side for this proposition (Prop 92). On first glance it would appear to be an obvious advance as regards the rebuilding of our community college system and its student bodies. The more than doubling of student fees (from $11 to $26 per credit) in 2004 and the loss of considerable enrollment in this decade (over 300,000) would seem to mandate support for a law which would lower student fees and buuildup the system. Moreover, the proponents of 92 argue that this will be money well spent, both as regards the long-term income for individuals and the state (in the form of higher income taxes); students will also find this a more financially reasonable avenue than attending CSU or UC schools for the full four years (and will require less state subsidy at those schools). However, the coalition of which CTA is a part (and I have rarely hesitated to differ with CTA positions when I consider them misguided or even unprincipled) are opposing Prop 92 for both strong as well as less progressive reasons. First, there is the matter of the actual costs for implementation; this is estimated at $500,000,000. CTA always obsesses on any measure's impact on Prop 98 monies (which do also include most funding for community colleges as well as K-12); if you read Section 17 of the initiative, it says clearly that any increases in costs at specific community college sites that are not covered by local property taxes and student fees, will come out of the general fund (to which Prop 98 applies). There is no provision for progressive taxation (split roll or higher income taxes for the rich) which could, in part, be designated for this worthy goal (CTA and their allies don't mention this possibility in their arguements, but simply warn of additional taxation, which I think is a poor arguement, for like Prop 98, the question arises "for what are resources being designated?". Second, there is little specificity on how additional funds will be applied and/or accountability for the funds (by way of an audit or similiar means). Finally, the provision (in Section 19) that would require a 4/5ths vote in both houses of the State Legislature to amend the main features of the law is a very dangerous precedent. In conclusion, I cannot recommend support of this measure, but feel that a stance of neither supporting or opposing (with explanatory language) would be best. It is usually reckless to mandate a significant cost item (no matter how progressive) without even addressing the need for more resources. The question of the supermajority vote to alter the law may seem secondary to the substance involved, but it is also very serious and this alone could negate our supporting the initiative. Write-up for "YES" recommendation on Prop. 92: ?YES? ON PROP 92 ? THE COMMUNITY COLLEGE INITIATIVE What does Prop 92 Do? (1) Lowers community college student fees to $15 a unit & limits increases to the cost of living (2) Guarantees minimum funding for community college growth (3) Does not hurt K-12 funding (4) Does not raise taxes (5) Guarantees a system of independent community college districts Why Prop 92? Community College funding is currently based on K-12 enrollment under Prop 98, passed by voters 20 years ago. While K-12 enrollments are in decline, demand for community colleges is projected to increase?by some 100,000 students in the next three years alone. Prop 92 funds growth for these expected new students, opens access, and protects students from prohibitive fee increases. Under current Prop 98 funding formulas, 60% of these students will be shut out. Moreover, when there is a budget crunch in California, Sacramento always balances its budgets on the backs of college students and the poor. In 2004 and 2005 community college fees were increased by over 150%. The result? between 250,000 and 300,000 students were priced out of the system. Instead of a single funding stream for K-12 and community colleges, which is then ?split? between the two segments, Prop 92 provides each segment its own minimum funding guarantee. Passage of Prop 92 is the best opportunity to guarantee that all Californians will have access to an affordable and quality college education and be able to get ahead. This is the unmet promise of the State?s Master Plan for Higher Education. Who attends community colleges? 2.5 million students, mainly working class and low-income youth and adults. The average student is 28 year old. 60% of the student population is female. 30% of all Latinos in the U.S. who are attending college today are enrolled in a California Community College. And there are 90,000 more African American students in community colleges than in both the CSU and UC systems combined. 250,000 Californians from Asian and Pacific Islander backgrounds are enrolled in the Community Colleges. Community colleges give students who did not finish high school a second chance. 2/3rds of CSU graduates and 1/3rd of UC graduates begin their college careers at a community college. Prop 92 offers low-income and working class people access to education and a route to a decent standard of living. Prop 92 is a good investment of public dollars Community college students who earned an Associate degree or vocational certificate saw their wages jump from $25,600 to $47,571 three years after graduating. Research shows that for every dollar spent on community college education, California gets $3 back in taxes. The State spends much less in a year to educate a community college student than it spends in any of the other sectors: $8,133 per student in K-12 schools; $11,624 in the Cal State system, $18,203 in the UC system, compared to a mere $4,500 per student in the community colleges. The money needed to roll back student fees and provide a gateway to the middle class will continue to come from the state?s general fund. But Prop 92 does not call for new taxes or cause any other sector to suffer. The money to fund this proposition will come from the future growth in state revenue, including increased taxes paid by a more educated workforce. Prop 92 assures local governance of the community colleges Prop 92 guarantees local control of the community colleges -- to keep the "community" in community colleges ? by maintaining the governance structure administered by local elected Boards of Trustees. Prop 92 establishes the community colleges as a third higher education system in the California. The community colleges will no longer be an appendage of the K-12 system. The California Community Colleges system will finally have its own funding method, as do the Cal State and the UC systems. Endorsers include: (partial list, additions to be made) Peralta Federation of Teachers, California Federation of Teachers, Faculty Association of the California Community Colleges, California Community College Independents, Community Colleges Association of the CTA, California Federation of Labor, State Building and Construction Trades, Nicky Gonzales Yuen, etc., other Peralta Bd Members, etc., Wellstone Democratic Renewal Club Responding to ballot arguments against Prop 92 The ballot arguments against Prop 92 are signed by officers of the California Chamber of Commerce, the Small Business Action Committee, the California Taxpayers? Association, the California Roundtable, and the California Teachers Association. The ballot arguments against Prop 92 use familiar scare tactics to dissuade voters. They say Prop 92 will cause more problems than it solves. They say Prop 92 will lock in spending increases for community colleges which could lead to funding cuts for K-12 schools, state colleges and universities, health and public safety; and could result in higher taxes. Proponents say that these concerns are short-sighted. Funding for community college education is a crucial investment in our future. For each dollar the community colleges spend, the state eventually gets $3 back in taxes paid by a more educated workforce. Our community colleges provide vocational training and academic education for more than 2.5 million students per year, compared to 180,000 students at UC?s and 380,000 at CSU?s. Two-thirds of all CSU graduates and one-third of all UC grads began at community colleges. Under-funding and restricting access to community colleges is self-defeating. We must protect this vital investment in the future of our state and its people. Prop 92 goes a long way toward solving the problem of access to public higher education for every Californian, fulfilling the promise of the State?s Master Plan for Higher Education. If voters pass Prop 92, we'll be opening the doors to better economic prospects for more people and for the society as a whole. A better educated workforce is key. Prop 92 is the only current initiative to address the looming shortage of educated workers. The consequences of NOT assuring access to the education and job preparation provided by the community colleges will be dire for upcoming generations and California?s economy. Prop 92 is consistent with Green values of equity, fairness, and access. Greens will continue to call for more state resources for K-12 schools, state colleges and universities, healthcare, public safety, social services, AND community colleges. If increased state revenues are needed, all human services sectors must unite in advocating for a just tax system. Greens have always called for a just and progressive tax structure, and will continue to do so. Reasonable approaches include reinstating higher income tax rates (10% and 11%) for wealthier taxpayers and ending corporate tax breaks under Prop 13. Rather than implement tax increases which require a 2/3 majority vote, the legislature has ? by simple majority votes -- increased community college ? fees? (which technically are not ?taxes?) and cut community college funding. By passing Prop 92 we can end the legislature?s practice of balancing the state budget at the expense of the community colleges and their students. Prop 92 will protect the Community College system and its students against this corrupt and opportunistic budgeting. Proponents are concerned about CTA?s opposition to Prop 92 when its community college section, the Community College Association, is in support. Proponents are also concerned about the alliance between the CTA and business/conservative tax-payer interests. Proponents are surprised that the opponents appear not to recognize the value of the community colleges for the state?s economic growth. The community colleges train nurses, diesel mechanics, childcare workers, construction workers, computer technicians. They are the first step for thousands of students who go on to become teachers, physicians, engineers, social workers, planners, and business professionals. They prepare people for work in the expanding sector of green industry. The community colleges retrain workers experiencing job loss from injury, down-sizing, plant closures, export of jobs. The community colleges are an important alternative to the military?s economic draft. The opposing ballot argument claims that Prop 92 gives community colleges preferential treatment. But while Prop 98 (passed in1988) mandates that 10.93% of the K-14 education budget should go to community colleges, every year the legislature has suspended that requirement and cut the funding to an average of about 10.4%. Far from being ?preferential treatment,? this has resulted in funding cuts of almost $5 billion over the past 15 years. Community colleges are funded at a significantly lower rate than the other systems of higher education in the state: at a little more than one-third of what CSUs receive per student and at about one-fourth of what the UCs receive. The time is now to finally start investing in our community colleges. Prop 92 will enable the community colleges to have their own funding stream, and get away from the "Prop 98 split" entirely. Using another scare tactic, the opposing ballot argument claims that Prop 92 does not include audits, independent oversight, or measures to ensure money will ever get to college classrooms. Proponents point out that Prop 92 funds would be subject to the same controls that now apply to the community colleges. By law the community colleges must spend at least 50% of every dollar for classroom instruction. There is no need to duplicate existing controls with redundant laws that take dollars out of the classroom. Community colleges consistently get high marks for stretching their meager dollars very far. New funds will be invested wisely in our most precious resource -- the people of California. Opponents say that there are better ways to improve our community colleges. What are they? Advocates have been trying unsuccessfully for many years to address the under-funding of the community colleges. Generally, those opposed to Prop 92 support the mission and goals of the community colleges but they do not offer any way to finance them that will allow them to function effectively. Passage of Prop 92 will guarantee the community college system the resources it needs. The real issue is whether we will have a thriving community college system that successfully serves millions of youth and adults. Prop. 93 -- Term Limits Recommendation: NO Write-up author: Bob Marsh, Alameda County Proposition 93 -- The ?Keep Perata and Nunez in Office? Initiative: NO! NO! NO! This initiative is one of the most cynical ones to hit our ballot in years. The current President pro-tem of the California Senate, Don Perata, and Speaker of the Assembly, Fabian N??ez, are both ?termed-out? next year. They and their legislative cronies have created an extremely clever and deceptive plan to keep themselves in office for another four years. This measure masquerades as a way to shorten term limits, but in reality would allow both Senators and Assembly to stay in office for from four to six years longer! The legislature put this measure on the Presidential Primary ballot, cleverly taking advantage of our unusual 3-election year in 2008. If the measure passes in February, then all the legislators who would otherwise be at the end of their terms will be able to run in the certain-to-be-a-very-low turnout June State Primary. If it fails, they can?t run. If this initiative passes, term limits will only be shorter for those legislators who might be lucky enough to hold seats in both the Assembly and Senate. An Assembymember who stays in their completely safe seat (due to our totally corrupt and jerrymandered election system) will be able to stay in office twice as long, twelve years instead of the six now allowed. We find the proponents arguments flawed. They claim that studies have shown that legislators are now more likely to be fiscally irresponsible with shorter terms, but can anyone remember a time when our Demopublican/Republicrat legislature was responsible? They claim it takes many terms for legislators to understand how the system works? are our representatives so stupid that it takes longer than one year (let alone six) to learn how to do a job they?ve worked for years to get? In any case, virtually all research and voting decisions are determined by the Party caucuses and staff, and forced on legislature members by Party leadership. Looking at roll call votes on virtually any measure, there is very little sign of independent action or thinking by any individual member of either Party. Most vote results strictly follow Party lines. Perata and N??ez are behind the dangerous and deceptive mandatory health insurance proposal that is the Democrats' plan to sabotage true universal health care. Perata was the author of the bill that re-categorized publicly-owned Oakland shoreline to make it available to his greedy developer buddies. Perata has been under investigation by the FBI for some time for campaign practices and financing irregularities. Put Perata out to pasture. Nip N??ez's need for new power. Vote NO on 93! _______________________________________________ Contacts2006 mailing list Contacts2006 at lists.cagreens.org http://lists.cagreens.org/mailman/listinfo/contacts2006 ________________ ************************************** See what's new at http://www.aol.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- An embedded message was scrubbed... From: WSB3ATTYCA at aol.com Subject: Fwd: [gpca-cocos] [GPCA Official Notice] GPCA COUNTY POLLING FOR FEBRUARY 5, ... Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2007 19:22:30 EST Size: 87952 URL: From alexcathy at aol.com Sat Nov 17 08:26:43 2007 From: alexcathy at aol.com (alexcathy at aol.com) Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2007 11:26:43 -0500 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Our Weekly Cover Story -- "Open Borders" Message-ID: <8C9F74DC69B081C-A6C-1F44@FWM-M30.sysops.aol.com> Dear Green Friends. Our Weekly Los Angeles, an inner-city newspaper, published a cover-story on the so-called 'Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America' (SPP). It's been called 'NAFTA-Plus' and the first step toward an EU-style "North American Union." Gregg Reese interviewed me at some length about the position of the U.S. and Canadian Green Parties. I wrote a blog entry about the article with links and an image of the cover at: North American Union? -- Some Green Points The meat of the argument is the controversy over the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and views over the North American Alliance tend to reflect whether or not one thinks NAFTA has been a success.? Our Weekly was particularly interested in talking to an African-American member of the Green Party here in Los Angeles. I am not an expert on this subject, but I reviewed the information posted on the Canadian Green Party web sites (thanks to an assist by Wes Rolley) and tried to represent the Green position as best I could.? Anywhere, here is my long sound bite: Published by Our Weekly Los Angeles, November 15 - 21, 2007. Can Canada, Mexico, and the U.S. Become One United Community? by Gregg Reese .? .? . A "North American Alliance with a common currency and a regional government like the European Union would be terrible. Corporations could play the countries against each other while happily buying and selling U.S. Democrats and Republicans; Canadian Liberals and Conservatives; and Mexican PAN and PRI politicians. Corporations would be more powerful than governments. Minutemen and other U.S. conservatives, blinded by hatred for Mexicans, rightly criticize the idea, but for the wrong reasons with the wrong solution. Greens don't want to build a wall around America. U.S. Greens stand with Canadian Greens and Mexican Greens for Fair Trade...for everybody." - Green Party member Alex Walker The Green party, with incarnations throughout Europe, Africa, and the Americas, is devoted to concepts of environmentalism, decentralization, and autonomy which might be equated to the fears of losing sovereignty in this country as well our neighbors to the north and south. Greens in Canada and the U.S. are vocal about the "stealthy" manner in which negotiations are done with out the participation of Congress or Parliament. Walker speaks for many of his fellow Greens about the after effects of NAFTA: In the U.S. we've seen the loss of middle-class manufacturing jobs, stagnating wages, and larger trade deficits. In Mexico they've seen heavily-subsidized US corn and other farm products driving small Mexican farmers off the land. Wages along the Mexican border have actually been driven down by about 25 percent. It is an issue "below the radar" of the clueless MSM, but the potential impact is enormous. By the way, this is another example of an issue where the Green Party of the U.S., with an international perspective very different from the U.S. imperial Democratic and Republican parties, has a very important role to play as a progressive and inclusive political party. Read More at: http://www.greencommons.org/node/850 Alex Walker ________________________________________________________________________ Email and AIM finally together. You've gotta check out free AOL Mail! - http://mail.aol.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kaisha_marie at comcast.net Sat Nov 17 17:07:45 2007 From: kaisha_marie at comcast.net (Kaisha Torres) Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2007 17:07:45 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Idea for holiday social: Dec 15th Jared Ball4 Prez gathering In-Reply-To: <2192.38.99.84.36.1195198109.squirrel@greens.org> Message-ID: Group: I got a message from Iliad today meant for all of us but only sent to me so I include it below. In regards to hosting our event at the Smoke Tiki. As he states, if the 15th is the day, then we must find another venue. And not that my attendance is necessary for my participation in making this happen (at least up until that evening) but I am unable to attend that day/evening as well due to prior family obligations I was reminded of today. Regardless, I will assist to bring this event to fruition. This brings up a few questions though: 1. Is this a required event date? 2. If another venue is needed, what is the required location attributes? Can we hold this at an event center and bring in refreshments? sound system? entertainment? 3. If others have experience doing a fundraising Christmas social, what were the challenges and how were they met? 4. Is there any funds available to support hosting this event that could be recouped by donations at the door, etc? 5. It is easier to simply find a venue like the Smoke Tiki where everyone can purchase their own refreshments, entertainment is provided, etc but unless someone from the group has a contact, generally a location fee is required to reserve tables or a minimum ordering requirement is needed. For example, I held a fundraising at Rooster T Feathers and had food catered to the event by a local barbecue house. I asked for a 40 dollar donation which covered the comedy and food with a portion left over for donation to the group I was raising funds for. The event needed to have a certain number of attendees in order to cover the expenses but the club made it possible to achieve a profit on the ticket price, however, when we added the food and had poor attendance, we actually ended up with a loss. Better planning/marketing for greater attendance, cheaper food or none at all, would make it a great fundraising idea, if that was the kind of venue we went for. I was also allowed time to address the crowd between/after performances. I can't wait to hear what others have to say about this and I am excited to participate. Kaisha Iliad wrote on Saturday, November 17th, 2007: <<"Hey Guys- I think the social for the presidential candidate is a good idea, BUT I'm already hosting a lacrosse fund raising dinner that night, December 15th at....you guessed it, Smoke Tiki Lounge. Perhaps we could look into a different venue if you are solid on the 15th. Keep me in the loop. For information regarding San Jose Unified School District's project with Chevron Energy Solutions, have your school district officials contact Mr. Ty Williams, construction manager for the SJUSD. Did you guys catch "Green Week" on the History Channel? I recorded several of the shows and we might want to show some of them as part of one of our movie nights. They are excellent! Keep on greening, Iliad Rodriguez">> -----Original Message----- From: sosfbay-discuss-bounces at cagreens.org [mailto:sosfbay-discuss-bounces at cagreens.org]On Behalf Of Drew Johnson Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2007 11:28 PM To: wrolley at charter.net Cc: sc-sm at lists.sonic.net; sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org Subject: Re: [Sosfbay-discuss] Idea for holiday social: Dec 15th Jared Ball4 Prez gathering Wes we have an 'inside connection' with the Smoke Tiki lounge through Iliad Rodriguez. Let's let him check out the possibilities... Yes, we could likely make a public announcement and draw a crowd, etc. Green is Core! Drew Johnson On Thu, November 15, 2007 19:59, Wes Rolley wrote: > Drew Johnson wrote: >> How about we do a December 15th Jared Ball for Prez social at the Smoke >> Tiki??? Dr. Ball is a very hip African American PHd. Here's his info >> from Wes' previous posting: >> > Since this was the only response that I got, I will do the follow up > tomorrow and find out what is available, costs, etc. > > Does anyone know how many we might expect there if we did set up an > event? Is there any way to get a count? > > Since this venue was recommended, and I have never been there, was the > intention to make this an open meeting with a public announcement? In > that case, maybe we need to go to KDON 102.5 for the announcement. > > > > -- > "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 > 17211 Quail Court, Morgan Hill, CA 95037 > http://www.refpub.com/ -- Tel: 408.778.3024 > > _______________________________________________ > sosfbay-discuss mailing list > sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org > http://lists.cagreens.org/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss > _______________________________________________ sosfbay-discuss mailing list sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org http://lists.cagreens.org/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss From mkmusic at greens.org Sun Nov 18 02:14:27 2007 From: mkmusic at greens.org (Merriam Kathaleen) Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2007 02:14:27 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Join Impeachment Demonstration at Rep. Zoe Lofgren's S. J. office Mon. 11/19 Message-ID: <47401083.3090907@greens.org> Hi All, Join us this Monday 11/19 from 10:30am - 1:30pm for our Teach-in Demonstration at Rep. Zoe Lofgren's district office, 635 N. 1st St. (accross from the IHOP restaurant). Lofgren states that Cheney has not committed impeachable offenses. We will be having the Teach-in for Lofgren to show what Impeachable crimes have been committed. We will hold up our signs iin front of Lofgren's office for the public to see. These are our signs: TEACH-IN FOR ZOE LOFGREN CONSTITUTIONAL LAW 101 IMPEACH CHENEY FOR : CHENEY LIED TO CONGRESS ABOUT WMD'S IN IRAQ LYING ABOUT A LINK BETWEEN IRAQ & AL QAEDA TO GO TO WAR TORTURING DETAINEES AND DENYING HABEAS CORPUS RIGHTS WARRANTLESS WIRETAPPING OF AMERICAN CITIZENS THREATENING WAR WITH IRAN TELL ZOE LOFGREN TO ACT ON H. RES. 333/799 CALL HER NOW 271-8700 Rep. Lofgren is on the House Judiciary Committee and this Teach-in is the first in our lobbying her to support Dennis Kucinich's House Resolution 333/799 to impeach Cheney for high crimes and misdemeanors. We want to make sure Lofgren gets the message that Impeachment proceedings must start immediately. Help us hold up the signs listing Cheney's crimes. Help us pass out flyers informing Lofgren and the public why Cheney should be impeached. Please RSVP if you will be joining us. We want to have a large presence in front of her office and you being there will help us do that. If you can't be there for the 3 hours please come for part of the time. Thanks, Merriam Silicon Valley Impeachment Coalition (svimpeach.org) From wrolley at charter.net Sun Nov 18 19:24:38 2007 From: wrolley at charter.net (Wes Rolley) Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2007 19:24:38 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Idea for holiday social: Dec 15th Jared Ball4 Prez gath... In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <474101F6.4020502@charter.net> Kaisha Torres wrote: Kaisha, There have been several emails, not all in the same string. My first email (from which Drew cut and pasted a portio) explained it better. Jared is going to be in the San Francisco Bay Area for 3 days. Craig Peterson (Contra Costa County) is coordinating things for all counties for this trip. Based on other commitments, that is the day that we can have it. The other days are being scheduled in other counties. Also, I specifically asked if there was anyone who might be interested in holding a house party. No response to that one. I know that Warner was checking another facility. I am not sure what result he had. I know that I could get the amphitheater at the Community and Cultural Center in Morgan Hill for that time. However, that is not where most of the population and Green Party members are. I am pretty sure we would have better turnout in San Jose, especially close to the colleges. I am running out of ideas and contacts. Wes > > After speaking again to Iliad, it is confirmed that we cannot hold the > event on Saturday the 15th during the day. He did mention having it at > the Smoke Tiki Lounge from 8pm until 10pm. > I've reviewed the email string again and I don't see anything saying > why the 15th was suggested (if that is the only date that Mr. Ball is > available) other than that is falls within the timeframe of his > visit. Who is in charge of coordinating this event with Mr. Ball? If > it's a day event, what is wrong with the 16th? > > Thanks, > Kaisha > > -----Original Message----- > *From:* WB4D23 at aol.com [mailto:WB4D23 at aol.com] > *Sent:* Saturday, November 17, 2007 6:59 PM > *To:* kaisha_marie at comcast.net; JamBoi at Greens.org; wrolley at charter.net > *Cc:* iliad_rodriguez at yahoo.com > *Subject:* Re: [Sosfbay-discuss] Idea for holiday social: Dec 15th > Jared Ball4 Prez gath... > > I thought we were looking at a Saturday afternoon event. Warner > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > See what's new at AOL.com > and Make AOL Your > Homepage . -- "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 17211 Quail Court, Morgan Hill, CA 95037 http://www.refpub.com/ -- Tel: 408.778.3024 From kaisha_marie at comcast.net Sun Nov 18 21:24:40 2007 From: kaisha_marie at comcast.net (Kaisha Torres) Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2007 21:24:40 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Idea for holiday social: Dec 15th Jared Ball4 Prez gath... In-Reply-To: <474101F6.4020502@charter.net> Message-ID: Thanks for the clarification. I would gladly host a house party but as I said, I am not going to be available the 15th and I'm fairly certain my fianc? would be reluctant for me to sign him up to host a party in my absence. However, I do have some other ideas that I can work on the next couple days. I saw something about the Voodoo Lounge. Did anything come of that or is it still a pending option? To state my understanding of the event, we need a place to hold a fundraising/social event with room for 20-50. We are looking to hold a daytime event. A facility with food services would be ideal, however, it is not required. Don't give up yet, Kaisha -----Original Message----- From: Wes Rolley [mailto:wrolley at charter.net] Sent: Sunday, November 18, 2007 7:25 PM To: kaisha_marie at comcast.net; Green Discuss Subject: Re: [Sosfbay-discuss] Idea for holiday social: Dec 15th Jared Ball4 Prez gath... Kaisha Torres wrote: Kaisha, There have been several emails, not all in the same string. My first email (from which Drew cut and pasted a portio) explained it better. Jared is going to be in the San Francisco Bay Area for 3 days. Craig Peterson (Contra Costa County) is coordinating things for all counties for this trip. Based on other commitments, that is the day that we can have it. The other days are being scheduled in other counties. Also, I specifically asked if there was anyone who might be interested in holding a house party. No response to that one. I know that Warner was checking another facility. I am not sure what result he had. I know that I could get the amphitheater at the Community and Cultural Center in Morgan Hill for that time. However, that is not where most of the population and Green Party members are. I am pretty sure we would have better turnout in San Jose, especially close to the colleges. I am running out of ideas and contacts. Wes > > After speaking again to Iliad, it is confirmed that we cannot hold the > event on Saturday the 15th during the day. He did mention having it at > the Smoke Tiki Lounge from 8pm until 10pm. > I've reviewed the email string again and I don't see anything saying > why the 15th was suggested (if that is the only date that Mr. Ball is > available) other than that is falls within the timeframe of his > visit. Who is in charge of coordinating this event with Mr. Ball? If > it's a day event, what is wrong with the 16th? > > Thanks, > Kaisha > > -----Original Message----- > *From:* WB4D23 at aol.com [mailto:WB4D23 at aol.com] > *Sent:* Saturday, November 17, 2007 6:59 PM > *To:* kaisha_marie at comcast.net; JamBoi at Greens.org; wrolley at charter.net > *Cc:* iliad_rodriguez at yahoo.com > *Subject:* Re: [Sosfbay-discuss] Idea for holiday social: Dec 15th > Jared Ball4 Prez gath... > > I thought we were looking at a Saturday afternoon event. Warner > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > See what's new at AOL.com > and Make AOL Your > Homepage . -- "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 17211 Quail Court, Morgan Hill, CA 95037 http://www.refpub.com/ -- Tel: 408.778.3024 From the_alliance47 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 20 11:56:10 2007 From: the_alliance47 at yahoo.com (Edward) Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2007 11:56:10 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] LGB(T) Community Message-ID: <899311.60192.qm@web54303.mail.re2.yahoo.com> There is some debate among progressives about the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA), because it would only prohibit discriminating against gays, lesbians, and bisexuals, not including transgendered. Do we support it even though it does not protect all in the LGBT community or do we say all-or-nothing, no compromise with moderates? In theory, I think baby steps are necessary to get to the end goal, but in reality, the government often takes one baby step...and that's it. I'm sure there are several examples just within the past 30 years, and this is potentially another one to add to the list. --------------------------------- Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From edenw at gal3.com Tue Nov 20 12:21:24 2007 From: edenw at gal3.com (eden) Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2007 12:21:24 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] LGB(T) Community In-Reply-To: <899311.60192.qm@web54303.mail.re2.yahoo.com> References: <899311.60192.qm@web54303.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On Nov 20, 2007 11:56 AM, Edward wrote: > There is some debate among progressives about the Employment > Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA), because it would only prohibit discriminating > against gays, lesbians, and bisexuals, not including transgendered. Do we > support it even though it does not protect all in the LGBT community or do > we say all-or-nothing, no compromise with moderates? I can't remember where i read this analysis, so i am open to correction, but my understanding is that among the current bill's compromises are some definitions of behavior. I believe that the current definitions prohibit discrimination against homosexual behavior but that effeminate men and "tomboys" may be discriminated against because they are expressing "gender" not "sexuality". The question remains whether a man with earrings or a woman not feminine "enough" whether homosexual or heterosexual will be protected. So, as the argument goes, if you don't protect gender expression, you are not actually protecting sexual expression (since most people don't actually express sexuality in public). I suppose that there are gay men and lesbians who "pass as straight" who will claim a victory because they will now be able to publicly proclaim their sexuality and then go back to work. But those who are in need of protection, "creative" or "different" people, seem to have gained nothing. > In theory, I think baby steps are necessary to get to the end goal, but in > reality, the government often takes one baby step...and that's it. I'm sure > there are several examples just within the past 30 years, and this is > potentially another one to add to the list. I agree. The baby step of "freeing the slaves" was followed by more baby steps, about 100 years later, with Voting Rights, etc. It doesn't seem to be a particularly "progressive" stand to support this flawed "compromise" bill, since it doesn't actually seem to protect anyone that needs protecting. I'd be happy to hear other opinions. -- eden From j.m.doyle at sbcglobal.net Tue Nov 20 15:27:46 2007 From: j.m.doyle at sbcglobal.net (Jim Doyle) Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2007 15:27:46 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] sidebar on venue for Jared Ball Message-ID: <47436D72.5010208@sbcglobal.net> I called the African American Community Center. They are booked for Saturday December 15-th. For future reference they charge $250 for the large room, kitchen use included $50 for the smaller room, additional $10 for kitchen use. From j.m.doyle at sbcglobal.net Tue Nov 20 15:33:12 2007 From: j.m.doyle at sbcglobal.net (Jim Doyle) Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2007 15:33:12 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] call for agenda items Message-ID: <47436EB8.4040101@sbcglobal.net> Please submit your Agenda items for Thursday December 6-th. Thus far I suggest Treasurer's report: balance, FPPC, calendar year 2008 budget Barec: talking points, call lists Fundraising: tools, methods, goals Recruitment: tools, methods, goals By-laws amendment re regional representative From JamBoi at Greens.org Wed Nov 21 10:30:00 2007 From: JamBoi at Greens.org (Drew Johnson) Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2007 10:30:00 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] McClellan's bombshell & CheneyBush's impeachment Message-ID: <2374.38.99.84.36.1195669800.squirrel@greens.org> http://www.thenation.com/blogs/thebeat?bid=1&pid=253417 Posted 11/21/2007 @ 12:33pm Will McClellan Be John Dean to Bush's Richard Nixon? Scott McClellan's admission that he unintentionally made false statements denying the involvement of Karl Rove and Scooter Libby in the Bush-Cheney administration's plot to discredit former Ambassador Joe Wilson, along with his revelation that Vice President Cheney and President Bush were among those who provided him with the misinformation, sets the former White House press secretary as John Dean to George Bush's Richard Nixon. It was Dean willingness to reveal the details of what described as "a cancer" on the Nixon presidency that served as a critical turning point in the struggle by a previous Congress to hold the 37th president to account. Now, McClellan has offered what any honest observer must recognize as the stuff of a similarly significant breakthrough. The only question is whether the current Congress is up to the task of holding the 43rd president to account. What McClellan has revealed, in a section from an upcoming book on his tenure in the Bush-Cheney White House, is a stunning indictment of the president and the vice president. The former press secretary is confirming that Bush and Cheney not only knew that Rove, the administration's political czar, and Libby, who served as Cheney's top aide, were involved in the scheme to attack Wilson's credibility -- by outing the former ambassador's wife, Valerie Plame, as a Central Intelligence Agency analyst -- but that the president and vice president actively engaged in efforts to prevent the truth from coming out. "The most powerful leader in the world had called upon me to speak on his behalf and help restore credibility he lost amid the failure to find weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. So I stood at the White house briefing room podium in front of the glare of the klieg lights for the better part of two weeks and publicly exonerated two of the senior-most aides in the White House: Karl Rove and Scooter Libby," writes McClellan in an excerpt from his book, What Happened, which is to be published next April by Public Affairs. "There was one problem," the long-time Bush aide continues. "It was not true. I had unknowingly passed along false information. And five of the highest ranking officials in the administration "were involved in my doing so: Rove, Libby, the vice President, the President's chief of staff, and the president himself." Much has been made about the fact that outing Plame as a CIA operative was a felony, since knowingly revealing the identity of an intelligence asset is illegal. And much will be made about the fact that McClellan's statement links Bush and Cheney to the cover-up of illegal activities and the obstruction of justice, acts that are themselves felonies. But it is important to recognize that a bigger issue is at stake. If the president and vice president knowingly participated in a scheme to attack a critic of their administration -- Wilson had revealed that the White House had been informed that arguments Bush and Cheney used for attacking Iraq were ungrounded -- they have committed a distinct sort of offense that the House Judiciary Committee has already determined to be grounds for impeachment. In the summer of 1974, Democrats and Republicans on the committee voted overwhelmingly to recommend the impeachment of President Richard Nixon for having "repeatedly engaged in conduct violating the constitutional rights of citizens, impairing the due and proper administration of justice and the conduct of lawful inquiries, or contravening the laws governing agencies of the executive branch and the purposed of these agencies." That second article of impeachment against Nixon detailed the president's involvement in schemes to use the power of his position to attack political critics and then to cover up for those attacks. The current chairman of the Judiciary Committee, Michigan Democrat John Conyers, voted for the impeachment of Nixon on those grounds. Conyers and his colleagues need to recognize that, despite House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's aversion to presidential accountability, McClellan's statement demands the sort of inquiry and action that Dean's statements regarding Nixon demanded three decades ago. As former Common Cause President Chellie Pingree notes with regard to Bush, "The president promised, way back in 2003, that anyone in his administration who took part in the leak of Plame's name would be fired. He neglected to mention that, according to McClellan, he was one of those people. And needless to say, he didn't fire himself. Instead, he fired no one, stonewalled the press and the federal prosecutor in charge of the case, and lied through his teeth." Pingree, a savvy government watchdog who is bidding for an open House seat representing her native Maine, argues that the Judiciary Committee must subpoena McClellan as part of a renewed investigation of the Wilson case. She is right about that. She is right, as well, when she concludes that, if what McClellan says is true "it will call into question the legitimacy of the entire administration. And we may see a changing of the guard at the White House sooner than expected." That changing of the guard -- via the Constitutional process of impeachment and trial for their various and sundry high crimes and misdemeanor -- is long overdue. --------------------------------------------------------------------- John Nichols is the author of THE GENIUS OF IMPEACHMENT: The Founders' Cure for Royalism. Rolling Stone's Tim Dickinson hails it as a "nervy, acerbic, passionately argued history-cum-polemic [that] combines a rich examination of the parliamentary roots and past use of the 'heroic medicine' that is impeachment with a call for Democratic leaders to 'reclaim and reuse the most vital tool handed to us by the founders for the defense of our most basic liberties.'" From JamBoi at Greens.org Wed Nov 21 10:36:28 2007 From: JamBoi at Greens.org (Drew Johnson) Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2007 10:36:28 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] First Green Congressional Campaign Committee election coming soon Message-ID: <2399.38.99.84.36.1195670188.squirrel@greens.org> ---------------------------- Original Message ---------------------------- Subject: [usgp-nc] First Green Congressional Campaign Committee election coming soon From: "brent white" Date: Wed, November 21, 2007 05:18 To: natlcomvotes at green.gpus.org -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hi all, Just so you know, the Green Senatorial Campaign Committee has sent the Steering Committee a call for nominations for and election of the first Green Congressional Campaign Committee. I don't know what timeline, if any, that the SC has set, but that election will either be simultaneous with, or will shortly follow, the election of the Coordinated Campaign Committee. The GSCC and GCCC, as their names suggest, focus on federal races. The Coordinated Campaign Committee, from my experience on that body, focuses on small, local races. The GSCC and CCC are both places where work gets done, in a very collegial manner. They are also both intricately involved in fundraising aspects of the party. The GSCC raises its own money, and the GCCC will do likewise. An important element of the CCC's work is building new fundraising lists for GPUS. I can't vouch for the collegiality of the GCCC, since it hasn't been elected yet. Sorry for any confusion between the two acronyms: CCC for Coordinated Campaign Committee and GCCC for Green Congressional Campaign Committee. If you are considering running for the GCCC, please let me know, and I can provide you more details. --Brent White Secretary, GSCC For other information about the Coordinating Committee, see: http://gp.org/committees/nc/ From JamBoi at Greens.org Wed Nov 21 20:26:41 2007 From: JamBoi at Greens.org (Drew Johnson) Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2007 20:26:41 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Wolman: The Treason of CheneyBush Message-ID: <1360.38.99.84.36.1195705601.squirrel@greens.org> This from Green candidate for congress in CA Dist 1, Carol Wolman http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_carol_wo_071121_are_bush_and_cheney_.htm November 21, 2007 at 18:43:17 Are Bush and Cheney guilty of treason? by Carol Wolman US Constitution Article 3 Section 3. Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court. On Sept 20th, 2001, George W. Bush announced a "war on terror". "Our war on terror begins with al Qaeda, but it does not end there. It will not end until every terrorist group of global reach has been found, stopped and defeated." http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2001/09/20010920-8.html If we are engaged in a war on terrorist groups, then anyone who gives aid and comfort to terrorist groups is an enemy. One major aim of terrorist groups is to get hold of weapons of mass destruction, in order to better terrorize a target population, such as the people of the US. At the time Bush gave his speech, Valerie Plame was an undercover CIA agent, running an international ring of CIA assets, whose job was tracking WMD's through world black markets and preventing them from falling into the hands of terrorists. Two years later, her undercover identity was leaked to the press. Her outing did serious and lasting damage. Several intelligence officials described the damage in terms of how long it would take for the agency to recover. According to their own assessment, the CIA would be impaired for up to "ten years" in its capacity to adequately monitor nuclear proliferation on the level of efficiency and accuracy it had prior to the White House leak of Plame Wilson's identity. http://rawstory.com/news/2005/Outed_CIA_officer_was_working_on_0213.html In other words, the outing of Valerie Plame made it much easier for "every terrorist group of global reach" to acquire WMD's. Thus, the outing of Valerie Plame gave aid and comfort to terrorist groups. In other words, whoever "leaked" her undercover CIA identity to the press gave aid and comfort to terrorist groups, by making it easier for them to acquire WMD's. OUTING VALERIE PLAME WAS AN ACT OF TREASON. "Scooter" Libby took the fall for the administration on the Plame outing, after being convicted of perjury and obstruction of justice by Patrick Fitzgerald's grand jury. Bush suspended his sentence, so he did no jail time. Now Scott McClelland, who was presidential spokesman at the time, tells us that both Bush and Cheney were directly involved into misleading him, Scott McClelland, into telling the press that no one in the White House did the outing of Plame. In other words, Bush and Cheney are co-conspirators in the outing of Plame, or at least in the coverup and obstruction of justice. They have both committed treason. If Congress does not impeach them immediately, then the whole Congress is guilty of treason. When the 2008 election comes around, We the People should turn out of office any Representative who has not cosponsored HR 333/799- to impeach Cheney. We're forming a New Broom Coalition, for a clean sweep of Congress. If you, or someone you know, is running for Congress on an impeachment platform, please contact us through our website: http://sances.info/newbroom/ Take action -- click here to contact your local newspaper or congress people: impeach Bush and Cheney http://www.usalone.net/cgi-bin/oen.cgi?qnum=3032 Click here to see the most recent messages sent to congressional reps and local newspapers http://www.usalone.net/cgi-bin/transparency.cgi?qnum=oen3032 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qTowK03sr7Q Carol S. Wolman, MD is a psychiatrist in Northern California. A lifelong peace activist, she has written extensively on the psychology of our times. She is a cochair of Bay Area Impeach Bush-Cheney. You can join or form a local group at http://impeachbush.meetup.com/ She ran for Congress in '06, and is now a Green candidate for Congress in CA district 1. She is a coordinator of The New Broom Coalition, for a clean sweep of Congress. From wrolley at charter.net Thu Nov 22 08:01:50 2007 From: wrolley at charter.net (Wes Rolley) Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2007 08:01:50 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] California Delegates for a California Candidate Message-ID: <4745A7EE.1010004@charter.net> If you believe, as I do, that our presidential candidate needs to represent the full range of Green values, then we need to support the only candidate who does, California's Kent Mesplay. Kent needs delegates committed to his vision of the future of this party. Any registered member of the Green Party in California who shares that vision and who would like to be a delegate to the 2008 Presidential Nominating Convention in Chicago, should provide the following information: You should email this to me: wrolley at charter.net with a copy to your county organization. I you support Kent, but can not attend the convention, please forward to those you know who might attend. Name: Telephone: Email Address: Mailing Address: County: Information needed to provide diversity among delegates: Gender ____ Ethnicity _____ Other consideration: e.g. disabled ________ -- "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 17211 Quail Court, Morgan Hill, CA 95037 http://www.refpub.com/ -- Tel: 408.778.3024 From JamBoi at Greens.org Thu Nov 22 08:34:57 2007 From: JamBoi at Greens.org (Drew Johnson) Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2007 08:34:57 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Tomorrow is International Buy Nothing Day Message-ID: <2672.38.99.84.36.1195749297.squirrel@greens.org> ---------------------------- Original Message ---------------------------- Subject: Re: [G-C-F] Fw: Buy Nothing Day From: "Ginny-Marie Case" -------------------------------------------------------------------------- I got tired of buying useless crap for my friends and family. Now I just get them cows, stoves, and Microloans...for other people. http://www.alternativegifts.org/ Happy Thanksgiving! Ginny On Nov 21, 2007 10:46 PM, Roger H. Gray wrote: > Facing the usual post-Thanksgiving Christmas crush of consumerism > this Friday with increasing dread? Consider handing a few of these out at > the local mall . . . . see http://adbusters.org/metas/eco/bnd/ for details > and bigger posters . . . > > [image: Buy Nothing Day Classic Red] -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: BNDRed_23rd.sm.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 17335 bytes Desc: not available URL: From JamBoi at Greens.org Fri Nov 23 03:10:35 2007 From: JamBoi at Greens.org (Drew Johnson) Date: Fri, 23 Nov 2007 03:10:35 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Vote Stealing: Houston officials shocked to learn how easy it is Message-ID: <2153.38.99.84.36.1195816235.squirrel@greens.org> http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/front/5299827.html Nov. 14, 2007, 3:02PM Election fixes stir worries on ballot security Some fearful computer codes are vulnerable By ALAN BERNSTEIN Copyright 2007 Houston Chronicle {Resources: See the steps taken to correct the ballot error} Johnnie German admitted he was nervous as he used high-security codes to tap into the Harris County elections computer system last week and change some of the results manually. The system was in good hands as the votes were counted from the sprawling Nov. 6 contests. German is the county's respected administrator of elections, and there were witnesses present as he corrected the vote totals on a sales tax referendum for a fire/ambulance district in the Cypress-Fairbanks area of northwest Harris County. But German's late-night deed, said by officials to be a first-time event in the six years Harris County has used the eSlate voting system, has rekindled the debate about whether the newest electronic methods for counting votes should be trusted. What German graphically demonstrated was that with the proper physical and informational access, one person can alter the results of an election in a county of 1.8 million registered voters. The adjustments also highlighted the fact that, with multiple election boundaries snaking through precincts to separate city voters from county voters and municipal utility districts from emergency services districts, there usually are flaws that put voters in front of the wrong ballot screens. Which is what happened in Emergency Services District No. 9, where 293 voters went to the polls early but never got to express an opinion on the issue as they voted on state and county bonds and other items because the tax vote didn't appear on their screens. (The tax proposal lost by 3,233 votes.) The omission of the tax proposal on ballots in parts of three precincts was discovered thanks to an alert from a voter, and Harris County Clerk Beverly Kaufman's staff was able to get the tax question on the right ballots for Election Day ? but it was too late to have those votes recorded on the main computer. Instead, they were recorded separately and later added to the totals. Voters in the emergency district, which includes 11 fire stations serving 250,000 people, never were notified that some of them missed the referendum during early voting or that Election Day votes were segregated. Regardless, it was up to German and assistant Randy Roberts to combine the segregated totals, printed on computer paper, into the county's final electronic vote tallies after the polls closed on Election Day. Shocking observation The county Web site already showed that all precinct totals had been counted; three sheriff's deputies who guarded the counting process on the fourth floor of the County Administration Building in downtown Houston had been sent home. Also in the locked, glass-walled room were Republican Kaufman and John R. Behrman, a computer expert and longtime election observer representing the Democratic Party. He said he considers Kaufman's staff the most knowledgeable election computer administrators on the continent and does not question their motives. But Behrman said he was shocked when he saw German use a series of passwords and an "encryption key" ? a series of numbers on a nail file-size computer memory storage device ? to reach a computer program that said "Adjustment." "A hundred percent of precincts reporting, and everything had been distributed to the press," he said. "Then and only then did I see how they were going to do this, and frankly I never thought it was possible. "Basically it turns out, without regard to any ballots that have been cast, you can enter arbitrary numbers in there and report them out in such a way that, unless you go back to these giant (computer) logs and interpret the logs, you wouldn't know it has been done." In the two hours it took to enter the 326 segregated votes, the election duo made and corrected keystroke errors, Behrman said. Computer scientist Daniel Wallach, who started Rice University's Computer Security Lab and was on the task force that recently studied California's electronic voting systems, is skeptical about the eSlate system supplied to Harris County at a cost of $12 million by Austin-based Hart InterCivic. The "encryption key" code could be extracted from voting equipment at each precinct, according to Wallach, who studied the company's systems in California. County officials and Hart InterCivic, which also provides its state-certified voting equipment in Fort Bend County and Austin and Fort Worth, said the system merits public confidence because it has multiple layers of secret access codes. Flexibility needed "You have to have a system that is flexible enough to deal with those errors," Hart InterCivic spokesman Peter Lichtenheld said. In the fire/ambulance sales tax election, voters first were left out because information supplied to election officials from Tax Assessor-Collector Paul Bettencourt's staff covered added streets and other changes only through 1993. Bettencourt aides said the emergency services district never gave it updated data; the district's lawyer Howard Katz said otherwise. Either way, county voter registration official Ed Johnson said, "There are always little bitty problems in every election." alan.bernstein at chron.com From j.m.doyle at sbcglobal.net Fri Nov 23 12:23:03 2007 From: j.m.doyle at sbcglobal.net (Jim Doyle) Date: Fri, 23 Nov 2007 12:23:03 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] button making material Message-ID: <474736A7.2070508@sbcglobal.net> Our next shipment of button blanks, front and back, and mylar disks has arrived. We will have plenty available for the next tabling date which is Saturday December 1-st at the Holiday Peace Fair. Jim Doyle From alexcathy at aol.com Sat Nov 24 07:30:21 2007 From: alexcathy at aol.com (alexcathy at aol.com) Date: Sat, 24 Nov 2007 10:30:21 -0500 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Australia - John Howard, Bush Lap Dog, Ousted Message-ID: <8C9FCC60F34B00C-13B0-51C1@webmail-de07.sysops.aol.com> Australian Prime Minister John Howard, one of U.S. President George W. Bush's biggest lap dogs, has been ousted. See excerpts from Bloomberg and The Wall Street Journal.? Rudd Ousts Howard in Australia With Climate, Troops Out Pledges By Gemma Daley Nov. 25 (Bloomberg) -- Kevin Rudd's Labor Party won Australia's election, ending John Howard's 11-year rule after promising to tackle climate change, restore workers' bargaining power and withdraw Australian troops from Iraq. Howard Government Suffers Defeat In Australian Parliamentary Election By Partrick Barta and Rachel Pannett SYDNEY -- Australian Prime Minister John Howard suffered a humiliating defeat in national elections Saturday, according to preliminary results, most likely ending the political career of one the Asia-Pacific region's most enduring conservative leaders and a key ally of U.S. President George W. Bush in the region. Voters were ready to hand control of the government to Australia's opposition Labor party, headed by former diplomat Kevin Rudd, who has promised to boost relations with China, pull some troops from Iraq, and re-make Australia as a leader in the global effort to stop global warming. Evidently, there were some sleazy local issues that helped bring down the arrogant John Howard, who has apparently lost his own seat in the Australian Parliament. The new Labor leader, Kevin Rudd, sounds like a Clintonian "New Liberal" so our friends in the Australian Green Party has their work cut out for them. Fantastic! Bushies beware! ? ? ? ? ? ________________________________________________________________________ Email and AIM finally together. You've gotta check out free AOL Mail! - http://mail.aol.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JamBoi at Greens.org Sat Nov 24 12:48:19 2007 From: JamBoi at Greens.org (Drew Johnson) Date: Sat, 24 Nov 2007 12:48:19 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] December 1st Deadline -- Please sign petition to GPUS that you agree that Elaine Brown should be considered a national draft candidate for the GPUS presidential slot Message-ID: <2887.38.99.84.36.1195937299.squirrel@greens.org> I'm proud to have Elaine Brown run for our nomination for president. I'll be happy to sign her petition for GP-US nomination consideration! As Henry points out signing this petition doesn't commit you. I recall that Greens are able to sign multiple (think the max is 5) GP-US petitions for candidates, so I encourage all who want to healthy competition for our presidential nomination to sign onto this and other petitions of Green candidates for GP-US presidential nominee. Green is Action! Drew Johnson ---------------------------- Original Message ---------------------------- Subject: [G-C-F] December 1st Deadline -- Please sign petition to GPUS that you agree that Elaine Brown should be considered a national draft candidate for the GPUS presidential slot From: "henry duke" Date: Sat, November 24, 2007 11:39 To: cal-forum at cagreens.org -------------------------------------------------------------------------- "What Elaine Brown writes is so astonishing, at times it is even difficult to believe she survived it. And yet she did, bringing us that amazing light of the black woman's magical resilience, in the gloominess of our bitter despair." -Alice Walker . ACTION BACKGROUND December 1st Deadline: Green Party Peoples/Friends/Fellow Travelers/Comrades, Please send me your name and your state where you are a green party member in good standing so that we can have by December 1st 100 names from at least five different states who, while not necessarily endorsing Elaine Brown for GPUS president, at least feel that the GPUS should consider her as a draft candidate for our nomination. -Henry Duke ACTION The petition you will attach your name to will be to this effect: We the undersigned -- all green party members in good standing from our respective states -- request that the GPUS consider Elaine Brown, former Green Party Member for Mayor of New Brunswick Georgia, an official draft candidate for the US presidential nomination and/or endorsement for this same office. 1. Henry Duke, Green Party of California 2. Matthew Freiberg, Green Party of California 3. Drew Johnson, Green Party of California BACKGROUND Elaine Brown amoungst top-runners Ralph Nader (4% national polling) and Cynthia McKinney (0%) national polling, is the only serious GPUS draft candidate for president who has both #1)a long consistent public record of working for the public interest and against the racist prison- and military-industrial complex and #2)an enduring green party membership of Georgia and the US for over 3 years now, having run as a green party candidate for the mayorship of Georgia's major port city of Brunswick before coming under attack by the good ole boy network -- a network historically of the democratic party -- and having her name removed from the ballot in the white controlled but Black-majority town. Here in Orange County, California we have been distributing her autobiography of her experience in shaping the Black Panther party which led ultimately to becoming the first Womyn chair of that organization and to several local campaign runs, and it is a book which electrifies young people and student leaders committed to peace, feminism, and social justice who see Elaine as an embodiment of these values both inside and outside of electoral politics which so many of our younger, working, and oppressed people feel rightly disenfranchised from and cynical towards. The book is A Taste of Power, A Black Woman's Story Kirkus Reviews called it: "A stunning picture of a black woman's coming of age in America. Put it on the shelf beside The Autobiography of Malcolm X" -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JamBoi at Greens.org Sat Nov 24 17:19:56 2007 From: JamBoi at Greens.org (Drew Johnson) Date: Sat, 24 Nov 2007 17:19:56 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Tasers a form of torture, says UN Message-ID: <2105.38.99.84.36.1195953596.squirrel@greens.org> Tasers a form of torture, says UN http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/story/0,22049,22814674-5001028,00.html?from=public_rss From WB4D23 at aol.com Sun Nov 25 17:56:49 2007 From: WB4D23 at aol.com (WB4D23 at aol.com) Date: Sun, 25 Nov 2007 20:56:49 EST Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] call for agenda items Message-ID: In a message dated 11/20/2007 3:32:48 PM Pacific Standard Time, j.m.doyle at sbcglobal.net writes: Please submit your Agenda items for Thursday December 6-th. Thus far I suggest Treasurer's report: balance, FPPC, calendar year 2008 budget Barec: talking points, call lists Fundraising: tools, methods, goals Recruitment: tools, methods, goals By-laws amendment re regional representative GPSCC nominees for GPUS presidential nominating convention delegates and alternates; GPCA County Polling on ballot measures; Failures by County Council to forward GPCA County Contacts messages; Status of Jared Ball visit plans Please also note that the full text of the Bylaws Amendment proposal re Silicon Valley Region GPCA Coordinating Committee member and alternate(s) was supposed to have been published for review and discussion on this email list (by the County Council). Warner **************************************Check out AOL's list of 2007's hottest products. (http://money.aol.com/special/hot-products-2007?NCID=aoltop00030000000001) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From gerrygras at earthlink.net Sun Nov 25 19:10:59 2007 From: gerrygras at earthlink.net (Gerry Gras) Date: Sun, 25 Nov 2007 19:10:59 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Notes from 11/1 meeting Message-ID: <474A3943.2010808@earthlink.net> Notes for GPSCC Business Meeting - 11/01/07 Facilitator - Drew Johnson Notetaker - Gerry Gras Timekeeper - Dana St. George Vibeswatcher - (none?) Attending - Warner Bloomberg, Gerry Gras, Drew Johnson, Dana St. George, Cameron Spitzer, Jim Stauffer Announcements: Drew announced result of Kucinich introduction of H. Res. 333 to House floor (short version: the attempt to table failed, then it was sent to Judiciary Committee Possible January Retreat - by Warner - there may be a SC/WG retreat in January and the GPSCC may be asked to host it... Saturday only, about 50 people New Interim Treasurer (is Jim Doyle) - by CC - Gerry will inform GPCA Treasurer of new Treasurer Junior Statesmen event - planning for it Green Pages Catalog - Jim Stauffer will order 5 to 10 copies of 2007 and/or 2008 editions depending on info from publisher about availability Iran Resolution - agreed to proposal as is, but with 2 addendums, 1) Iran excerpt from El Baradei report to UN, and 2) recent IAEA press release Bylaws Amendment - Drew will rerelease latest version Save Barec Update - by Warner - Warner is Treasurer, ballot statement required soon Jared Bell - will be in Bay Area soon, does GPSCC want to host an event for him? ... yes, if possible From JamBoi at Greens.org Mon Nov 26 01:01:40 2007 From: JamBoi at Greens.org (Drew Johnson) Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2007 01:01:40 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] New Broom Coalition seeks proimpeachment candidates, asks Fitzgerald to reopen the Plame case Message-ID: <3172.38.99.84.36.1196067700.squirrel@greens.org> November 26, 2007 at 01:16:57 New Broom Coalition asks Fitzgerald to reopen the Plame case by Howard Burbank II (Posted by Carol Wolman) FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE NEW BROOM COALITION ASKS PATRICK FITZGERALD TO REOPEN THE PLAME CASE FOLLOWING NEW ALLEGATIONS THAT BUSH AND CHENEY WERE INVOLVED A national coalition of pro-impeachment candidates for the 2009 US Congress is asking US Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitgerald to reopen his investigations of President George W. Bush, Vice President Richard Cheney, former Bush chief of staff Andrew Card, Karl Rove and Scooter Libby. We are responding to allegations by former White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan that President Bush was directly involved in the outing of CIA officer Valerie Plame. McClellan says in his forthcoming book, "What Happened" that he " unknowingly passed along false information. And five of the highest ranking officials in the administration were involved in my doing so: Rove, Libby, the Vice President, the President's chief of staff, and the President himself." The congressional hopefuls in the New Broom Coalition have already begun local campaigns to sweep from Congress those incumbents who refuse to hold the Bush administration accountable by impeachment. Bush and Cheney need to be held accountable for the lies told to sell the Iraq war and occupation, and to out Ms. Plame. Ms. Plame was a CIA agent assigned to tracking nuclear weapons development, when her undercover identity was revealed by administration leaks to journalist Robert Novak and others. US Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald investigated the case for almost a year before winning a conviction against Cheney aide "Scooter" Libby, whose sentence was commuted by Bush. Fitzgerald personally interviewed Bush for 70 minutes during that investigation, with Bush's criminal attorney present. The New Broom Coalition is composed of Democrats, Greens and independent candidates for Congress from across the nation. (Republicans who accept our mission statement http://sances.info/newbroom/?q=mission are also free to join.) We are outraged by the crimes of the administration in prosecuting the war and occupations of Afghanistan and Iraq, by threats to national security in the case of outing Valerie Plame, and by the malfeasance of Congress in its repeated failures to uphold and defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic, evinced by these policies and actions. The Coalition meets regularly on the internet to discuss issues, policies, and strategies to achieve its goals. The Coalition's call to Special Prosecutor Fitzpatrick is our first joint public statement on its intentions to try to return the nation to sane foreign policy, constitutional government based on the rule of law. We believe that further investigation of Scott McClellan's statements and beliefs will provide a legal basis for prosecution of the Bush administration for threatening the national defense by exposing its undercover CIA agents. Some have called it a treasonous offense. drafted by Attorney Harold Burbank 84 N. Mountain Rd. Canton, CT 06019 Ph: 860-693-2687; Cell 860-205-0102 email: hburbankii at att.net The New Broom Coalition is seeking candidates for Congress. If you are challenging an incumbent Representative, and agree with our mission statement http://sances.info/newbroom/?q=mission , please contact our webmaster at http://sances.info/newbroom/?q=contact ____ November 24, 2007 at 00:48:37 ANNOUNCING THE NEW BROOM COALITION by Carol Wolman Page 1 of 2 page(s) http://www.opednews.com Tell A Friend ANNOUNCING THE NEW BROOM COALITION FOR A CLEAN SWEEP OF CONGRESS SEEKING CANDIDATES We are a group of challengers for Congressional seats currently held by people who won't support impeachment. http://sances.info/newbroom We are Democrats, Greens, independents, from around the country, who believe that most of the current Congress is craven and corrupt, complicit with the crimes of the Bush administration. We are seeking like-minded candidates. Our goal is to have challengers in every Congressional district, both in the primaries and in the general election; thus we can have up to two challengers per district. We believe that by next November, we can put enough of our candidates into Congress to change the direction of this country, no matter who is elected president. To join, a candidate must subscribe to our mission statement- see below. If you are a candidate, or know a suitable candidate, please contact us through our website http://sances.info/newbroom Or email me directly, at cwolman at mcn.org MISSION STATEMENT 1) We believe Bush and Cheney have committed many impeachable offenses. If elected, we will work to impeach them in the first two opening weeks of the 111th Congress, and will continue the process after they leave office. We will get rid of precedents they have set, and make them subject to criminal proceedings, which will strip them of the perks and protections that ex- executives usually receive. We will restore the rule of law, and bring lawbreakers to justice. 2) We will seek to restore the Constitution, especially the balance of powers among the branches, and the Bill of Rights. 3) We will work to restore paper ballots and ensure the integrity of the election process. 4) We will work for withdrawal from occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan, stop threatening Iran, and seek a negotiated peace with these countries, on a fair basis. We will work actively for world peace, and put an end to endless war. 5) We will make it priority to address global concerns such as global warming, and to work with other nations on the basis of leadership, not military might. We will put planetary survival and restoration of ecological balance above private profit. 6) We will seek to control nuclear weapons by restoring the nuclear NonProliferation Treaty, pressuring Israel, India and Pakistan to join it, and start the process of disarmament of nuclear nations mandated by Article VI. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qTowK03sr7Q Carol S. Wolman, MD is a psychiatrist in Northern California. A lifelong peace activist, she has written extensively on the psychology of our times. She is a cochair of Bay Area Impeach Bush-Cheney. You can join or form a local group at http://impeachbush.meetup.com/ She ran for Congress in '06, and is now a Gteen candidate for Congress in CA district 1. She is a coordinator of The New Broom Coalition, for a clean sweep of Congress. From JamBoi at Greens.org Mon Nov 26 10:53:14 2007 From: JamBoi at Greens.org (Drew Johnson) Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2007 10:53:14 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Idea for holiday social: Dec 15th Jared Ball4 Prez gath... In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1251.38.99.84.36.1196103194.squirrel@greens.org> I wonder if we could hold it at the San Jose Peace Center in the evening? Green is Core! Drew On Sun, November 18, 2007 21:24, Kaisha Torres wrote: > Thanks for the clarification. I would gladly host a house party but as I > said, I am not going to be available the 15th and I'm fairly certain my > fianc? would be reluctant for me to sign him up to host a party in my > absence. However, I do have some other ideas that I can work on the next > couple days. > > I saw something about the Voodoo Lounge. Did anything come of that or is > it > still a pending option? > > To state my understanding of the event, we need a place to hold a > fundraising/social event with room for 20-50. We are looking to hold a > daytime event. A facility with food services would be ideal, however, it > is > not required. > > Don't give up yet, > Kaisha > > -----Original Message----- > From: Wes Rolley [mailto:wrolley at charter.net] > Sent: Sunday, November 18, 2007 7:25 PM > To: kaisha_marie at comcast.net; Green Discuss > Subject: Re: [Sosfbay-discuss] Idea for holiday social: Dec 15th Jared > Ball4 Prez gath... > > > Kaisha Torres wrote: > > Kaisha, > > There have been several emails, not all in the same string. My first > email (from which Drew cut and pasted a portio) explained it better. > > Jared is going to be in the San Francisco Bay Area for 3 days. Craig > Peterson (Contra Costa County) is coordinating things for all counties > for this trip. Based on other commitments, that is the day that we can > have it. The other days are being scheduled in other counties. > > Also, I specifically asked if there was anyone who might be interested > in holding a house party. No response to that one. I know that Warner > was checking another facility. I am not sure what result he had. > > I know that I could get the amphitheater at the Community and Cultural > Center in Morgan Hill for that time. However, that is not where most of > the population and Green Party members are. I am pretty sure we would > have better turnout in San Jose, especially close to the colleges. > > I am running out of ideas and contacts. > > Wes >> >> After speaking again to Iliad, it is confirmed that we cannot hold the >> event on Saturday the 15th during the day. He did mention having it at >> the Smoke Tiki Lounge from 8pm until 10pm. >> I've reviewed the email string again and I don't see anything saying >> why the 15th was suggested (if that is the only date that Mr. Ball is >> available) other than that is falls within the timeframe of his >> visit. Who is in charge of coordinating this event with Mr. Ball? If >> it's a day event, what is wrong with the 16th? >> >> Thanks, >> Kaisha >> >> -----Original Message----- >> *From:* WB4D23 at aol.com [mailto:WB4D23 at aol.com] >> *Sent:* Saturday, November 17, 2007 6:59 PM >> *To:* kaisha_marie at comcast.net; JamBoi at Greens.org; wrolley at charter.net >> *Cc:* iliad_rodriguez at yahoo.com >> *Subject:* Re: [Sosfbay-discuss] Idea for holiday social: Dec 15th >> Jared Ball4 Prez gath... >> >> I thought we were looking at a Saturday afternoon event. Warner >> >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> See what's new at AOL.com >> and Make AOL Your >> Homepage . > > > -- > "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 > 17211 Quail Court, Morgan Hill, CA 95037 > http://www.refpub.com/ -- Tel: 408.778.3024 > > > > _______________________________________________ > sosfbay-discuss mailing list > sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org > http://lists.cagreens.org/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss > From JamBoi at Greens.org Mon Nov 26 11:10:56 2007 From: JamBoi at Greens.org (Drew Johnson) Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2007 11:10:56 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Support locally owned fair trade store, Pages in Color Message-ID: <1343.38.99.84.36.1196104256.squirrel@greens.org> Sisters and Brothers, when thinking about holiday shopping, may I suggest the Pages In Color store. The business had a very tough year, John Thielking told me this morning and narrowly averted shutting down. John is deeply involved in community activism and his store really deserves our support. You can access the store in person or on-line. 408-924-0846 888 E Santa Clara St, San Jose, CA 95116. Check out these fair trade items which are just a few of the kinds of items you can find at the pagesincolor store: http://www.pagesincolor.giftswithhumanity.com/ Peace, Drew http://www.pagesincolor.com/storepickup.html Store Pickup Of Special Orders Of Any Of Over 5000 Fair Trade Craft Items Now Available Any item from the websites listed below can be special ordered by calling 408-924-0846 or by visiting the retail store at 888 E Santa Clara St, San Jose, CA 95116. These are the web sites where the items you can order are displayed: http://www.globalcraftsb2b.com/catalog/ This is the wholesale site for Global Crafts that is used to order stuff for the retail store from. Call 408-924-0846 for price quotes for this site. Please note that on this site only there may be discrepancies in color between the picture of the item and the actual item received, as some items are made out of scrap material of various colors. http://www.pagesincolor.giftswithhumanity.com/ This site is the retail site for Global Crafts, customized for Pagesincolor.com. Note there are some items that are different than on the wholesale site. All the colors of the items on this site should match exactly between the pictures and the items delivered. http://www.ufwstore.com This is the official United Farm Workers web site. All adult UFW T-shirts are discounted to $15 instead of $18, when you special order them by calling 408-924-0846 or when you visit the Pagesincolor retail store. There are some 3"x3" mini UFW flags, not shown on the UFW store web site, that are available from the Pagesincolor retail store for $7 instead of $8. The UFW store website may have other items on sale, but Pagesincolor is not matching those sale prices at this time. http://www.tenthousandvillages.com Ten Thousand Villages sells fair trade handcrafts from around the world. As a retail store or special order customer, you avoid paying the 10% shipping charge that Ten Thousand Villages normally charges retail customers, when you call 408-924-0846 or visit the Pagesincolor retail store. Find the items that you want, write down their item #'s and web sites and then call 408-924-0846 to place your special order, or come by the store at 888 E Santa Clara St, San Jose, CA 95116 to place your special order or to see what we have in stock. Please allow 2-3 weeks for delivery. Thank you. Note that Pagesincolor.com is a member of the Better Business Bureau. Pagesincolor.com 1346 The Alameda, Suite 7-318 888 E Santa Clara St. San Jose, CA 95126 USA 408-924-0846 info at pagesincolor.com From j.m.doyle at sbcglobal.net Mon Nov 26 21:37:09 2007 From: j.m.doyle at sbcglobal.net (Jim Doyle) Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2007 21:37:09 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] agenda items for December meeting Message-ID: <474BAD05.60106@sbcglobal.net> Please submit your Agenda items for Thursday December 6-th. Thus far we have Treasurer's report: balance, FPPC, calendar year 2008 budget Barec: talking points, call lists Fundraising: tools, methods, goals Recruitment: tools, methods, goals By-laws amendment re regional representative Delegates and alternates for GPUS presidential nominating convention GPCA County Polling on ballot measures Forwarding GPCA County Contacts messages Status of Jared Ball visit plans Use of web site From mkmusic at greens.org Tue Nov 27 04:01:41 2007 From: mkmusic at greens.org (Merriam Kathaleen) Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2007 04:01:41 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] 2nd Impeachment Demonstration at Rep. Lofgren's office this Wed. 11/28 Message-ID: <474C0725.4040005@greens.org> /Hi All, //This is the 2nd week of our ongoing weekly Impeachment demonstration at Lofgren's district office. This week we will be at Lofgren's office on Wed.11/28 from 3:00pm - 5:00pm. We have all the signs we just need all of you to be there to hold up the signs to uphold our Constitution and to show Lofgren YES, CHENEY HAS COMMITTED IMPEACHABLE CRIMES!!! As a member of the House Judiciary Committee, Rep. Zoe Lofgren is key to initiating impeachment proceedings against Cheney. This "KEY" is in our own backyard and we must demand that she honor her oath of office and urge the Judiciary Committee to start proceedings. (On Nov. 6 Dennis Kucinich's H. Res. 333: Impeaching Dick Cheney for high crimes and misdemeanors, was sent to the House Judiciary Committee) TELL LOFGREN WE DEMAND SHE INSISTS THE HOUSE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE BEGINS IMPEACHMENT PROCEEDINGS IMMEDIATELY!!! Wed. 11/28 3-5pm 635 N. 1st St., San Jose (across from the IHOP restaurant/Light Rail stop is corner of Jackson St on 1st St.) Please let me know if you can be there. Thanks, Merriam mkmusic03 at aol.com 408-482-6032 (Cell)/ P.S. The following is a report on our first demonstration at Lofgren's office last Mon. 11/19. We had 17 - 22 demonstrators throughout our 3-hr action at Lofgren's office last Monday, 11/19. Our demonstration was a coalition of people from several groups. Joe Cernac was there representing Veterans For Peace with their huge wooden sign. Carol Brouillet with Community Currency and Northern California 911 Truth Alliance was there with her "Impeach The Terrorists" banner and her sound system. The Green Party of Santa Clara County was represented by Drew Johnson, Brian Good, Carol Brouillet and myself. Lois, a friend of Carol's, was from WILPF. Constituents of Lofgren were there, concerned citizens non-constituents were there and our Silicon Valley Impeachment Coalition team was there. Our large group presented an impressive presence in front of Lofgren's office building. Our 10' IMPEACH banner was hung between two trees. We received a very positive response from the cars driving by as well as from people walking by us. People walking by stopped to talk about impeaching Dick Cheney. One man came across the street from the IHOP restaurant to take pictures and talk with us about the need for impeaching Dick Cheney. Some of Lofgren's staff came out to talk to us as we were setting up the demonstration. They were very cordial, introduced themselves and told us that their office was open to us if we needed anything such as drinks, restroom etc. Though they were very pleasant and gracious in offering the use of their office facilities, the one item we most desired, LOFGREN INSISTING THE HOUSE JUDICIARY BEGIN IMPEACHMENT PROCEEDINGS, was not offered to us. Therefore WE WILL BE BACK!!!!. We are going to demonstrate in front of Lofgren's office every week. Please check out our Silicon Valley Impeachment Coalition website, svimpeach.org for pictures of our demonstration. Merriam From j.m.doyle at sbcglobal.net Tue Nov 27 12:25:36 2007 From: j.m.doyle at sbcglobal.net (Jim Doyle) Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2007 12:25:36 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] prop 92 meeting Message-ID: <474C7D40.8070504@sbcglobal.net> Join Community College District Chancellors Rosa Perez, Martha Kanter, and Stan Arterberry, the Board of Trustees from the Foothill-DeAnza, West Valley-Mission, and San Jose-Evergreen CommunityCollege Districts, and Student, Union, Business, and Academic Senate Leaders in Support of Proposition 92 on the Feb. 5 Ballot! * Overview of Prop 92 * Why Business Supports Prop. 92 * Why Labor Supports Prop. 92 * Why Educators Support Prop. 92 * Why Students Support Prop. 92 * Q&A * Discussion, Information, Networking, Planning *TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 27^TH * * 5:00-6:30 pm* * UFCW Hall-240 Market Street, San Jose * Prop 92 gives EVERY Californian the chance to go to college! ? Lowers fees to $15 a unit ? Limits future increases ? Ensures stable funding ? Keeps our community college system independent from state politics From wrolley at charter.net Tue Nov 27 13:00:29 2007 From: wrolley at charter.net (Wes Rolley) Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2007 13:00:29 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Global Warming in the South Bay. Message-ID: <474C856D.1090609@charter.net> We have heard a lot about the threat of sea level rise and the impact on the Delta Levees near Stockton. The Stockton Record today has a good article on that subject. You can read it here: http://www.recordnet.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071127/A_NEWS/711270325 That article provide a link to a "sea level rise map" from the University of Arizona. The maps can be viewed at tinyurl.com/ca73h. It is a very interesting exercise to look at the maps and zoom in on the S. End of San Francisco Bay. Noted areas include built up areas in Milpitas as well as Alviso. Basically, West of Coyote Creek and N. of CA 237. Is there not an issue that Greens should be raising with our media, our local governments as to what they should be doing? 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 17211 Quail Court, Morgan Hill, CA 95037 http://www.refpub.com/ -- Tel: 408.778.3024 From JamBoi at Greens.org Tue Nov 27 17:09:15 2007 From: JamBoi at Greens.org (Drew Johnson) Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2007 17:09:15 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Fwd: Meet Dr. Jared Ball, Green presidential candidate Message-ID: <3296.38.99.84.36.1196212155.squirrel@greens.org> ---------------------------- Original Message ---------------------------- Subject: [G-C-F] Meet Dr. Jared Ball, Green presidential candidate, in LA Dec. 17-20 From: "Linda Piera-Avila" Date: Mon, November 26, 2007 14:28 To: cal-forum at cagreens.org -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Dr. Jared Ball, one of our Green Party presidential candidates, {visiting the Bay Area Dec 14-16th}, coming from Washington D.C. Dr. Jared Ball is a professor of African American and Media Studies at the University of Maryland at College Park and Frostburg State University. Every Monday Jared Ball hosts "Jazz and Justice," a radio show on Washingon DC's Pacifica station WPFW 89.3 FM. Dr. Ball would very much like to meet with Green locals in the {Bay Area}. Folks are encouraged to contact his manager, Head-Roc, to set something up while he's here. Head-Roc's email is noys25 at head-roc.com His phone number is 301 891 3095. SNIP Thanks to the Humboldt Greens and Bay Area Greens who have extended their hospitality to him. Other candidates appearing on the CA Green Party Presidential primary ballot: http://cagreens.org/elections/index.shtml#_prescand _____________________________________________________________ Statement of Candidacy for the Green Party Nomination for President Greetings, My name is Jared Ball and I am currently running for the Green Party?s presidential nomination. I have accepted an invitation to do this for several reasons. First among them are the horrendous and entirely unacceptable conditions of a majority of the people of this nation and world. To best address those conditions a new party is needed, a new style of politics is needed and we are developing just that kind of campaign. While looking to bring something new we are also looking to do so on the basis of some old and forgotten (or suppressed) politics. First among them are those of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. whose genuine goals have long been forcibly hidden beneath the frozen and isolated description of a dream. But 2008 being the 40th anniversary of his assassination demands that we run such a campaign on the basis of King?s truly revolutionary positions of calling for radical political organization around an end to systems which reproduce white supremacy, militarism and gross inequalities in wealth and access to society?s benefits. That campaign is here. I have long been disillusioned with electoral politics and since 1992 only voted for members of the Green Party or those whose unaffiliated status necessitated that I write them onto the ballot. I joined the DC Statehood/Green Party several years ago specifically because it was the only electoral political party overtly, as clear by name, in favor of statehood for those colonized in the nation?s capitol and a broader platform which speaks to the continuing needs of a majority of the nation and world. I am not running to further bolster the mythology of the vote as panacea. I am not running for simple symbolism. I am running because the true majority of women, the poor, Black, Latino and Indigenous people need organization, need a place to cohere and the Green Party is the structure with the expressed platform that can provide just that kind of liberated space and I am the candidate that can properly articulate such a need. The party?s freedom from corporate dominance, its commitment to social justice and redistribution of society?s wealth and service and its call for diversity are far more substantive that those false claims of such made with varying degree by other parties. It is time to build a genuine populist party, one built on the proper politics of those who, like Kwame Ture once made clear, are no longer willing to accept the lesser of evil because, ?we will not vote for evil, period.? To that end we are developing a campaign which seeks to break convention by centering attention and focus on culture, those most oppressed and those who have long since given up on the vote and are looking for a new politics and new organizations. We are working with ?the mayor of DC hip-hop? Head-Roc and others to provide a hip-hop and progressive artist tour which will reach out to the Indigenous, Black, Latino and poor communities who will help us develop new bases of support for the Green Party. This style of campaign will be brash and powerful representing the necessarily unorthodox politics we need and which are represented best by the Green Party. We are not targeting Democrats, Republicans or others to ?steal? votes. We are not engaged in an effort to upset one or another major party candidacy as we do not see either as being able to legitimately represent the needs of the true majority and, therefore, see no reason to assist in the sabotage or ascendance of one or the other. And while we are not expecting to ?win? the presidency we are expecting to help build a party to build community, society and a new world. We are looking to build the original and genuine Rainbow Coalition of Fred Hampton, a coalition that breaks racial barriers and fosters unity along real material needs as opposed to the empty rhetoric of hate and division. Success in this case will be additional membership for the Green Party from the tens of millions of eligible but dormant voters. Success will be in demonstrating the difference of the party through the radical difference in our presentation and campaign approach. Voting or not voting are actions which by themselves, while equally political, are also equally insufficient for change. Real change can only come from organization on the basis of a truly radical platform such as offered by the Green Party. This is why I am running. For more information, visit voxunion.com where video of my initial statement of candidacy can be found along with future campaign updates and methods of contact. Thank you for your time and support. Your party and politics are here. As Fred Hampton said, to you I say peace, if you are willing to fight for it. Jared A. Ball From WB4D23 at aol.com Tue Nov 27 20:07:29 2007 From: WB4D23 at aol.com (WB4D23 at aol.com) Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2007 23:07:29 EST Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] agenda items for December meeting/RRep Bylaw Message-ID: In a message dated 11/26/2007 9:37:23 PM Pacific Standard Time, j.m.doyle at sbcglobal.net writes: By-laws amendment re regional representative Would whoever had the last GPSCC version of the proposed bylaw amendment for selecting region GPCA Coordinating Committee member and alternate PLEASE publish it to this email list. Thank you! Warner **************************************Check out AOL's list of 2007's hottest products. (http://money.aol.com/special/hot-products-2007?NCID=aoltop00030000000001) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From WB4D23 at aol.com Tue Nov 27 20:10:00 2007 From: WB4D23 at aol.com (WB4D23 at aol.com) Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2007 23:10:00 EST Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] agenda items for December meeting/County Polling Message-ID: In a message dated 11/26/2007 9:37:23 PM Pacific Standard Time, j.m.doyle at sbcglobal.net writes: GPCA County Polling on ballot measures Please read the ballot measures reports previously published on this email list and be prepared to discuss them at the Thursday December 6th GPSCC membership meeting. Warner **************************************Check out AOL's list of 2007's hottest products. (http://money.aol.com/special/hot-products-2007?NCID=aoltop00030000000001) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From WB4D23 at aol.com Tue Nov 27 20:32:13 2007 From: WB4D23 at aol.com (WB4D23 at aol.com) Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2007 23:32:13 EST Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Request for nomination as GPSCC delegate to GPUS prez nominating convention Message-ID: Folks! The deadline for County GP's to nominate backup delegates and alternates to the GPUS presidential nominating convention scheduled to be held in Chicago, Illinois July 10th-13th is Friday December 7th. Our GPSCC general membership meeting is Thursday December 6th. Candidates in the February 5th GPCA presidential preference Primary Election have the same deadline to submit lists of GPCA registered voters as their delegates nominees. To the extent candidates do not collectively fill all delegate and alternate positions, County GPs need to have nominated additional delegates and alternates. You can be on a candidate's list as well as seek nomination from your County GP. The total delegation is intended to be geographically balanced, gender balanced, diversified, etc. Although we do not know the total number of California nominating convention delegates, a good guess is between 150-200 -- so each County GP can nominate at least twice its General Assembly delegates allocation (GPSCC 4 x 2 = 8; x2 for alternates = 16). We can expect that some volunteers to be nominating convention delegates will not actually attend. As a member of the California GPUS National Committee delegation -- which is a two year position separate from being a delegate of the nominating convention -- I am expected to attend the GNC annual meeting... which will be held within the nominating convention schedule (not sure exactly how this works). I would like to make the same trip for both purposes. For diaclosure purposes, I have volunteered to be included in the Kent Mesplay delegates slate, but there is no certainty what percentage of the Primary vote he or any other candidate will receive, and it is the percentage of that vote that determines how many persons from any candidate's slate will be delegates (or alternates). The California nominating convention delegates are required to cast votes in proportion to the primary election results on the first ballot of the convention regardless of who any individual candidate supports. PLEASE NOTE: Registration, travel and lodging costs for these meetings are probably going to be in the $600-$1,000 range. The amount of any subsidy from the GPCA budget is unknown at this time. The GPSCC will need to consider at some point whether it wants to contribute to the expenses of GPSCC members who attend the GPUS nominating convention. Regardless, we need to make our County nominations at the next meeting. Warner **************************************Check out AOL's list of 2007's hottest products. (http://money.aol.com/special/hot-products-2007?NCID=aoltop00030000000001) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From wrolley at charter.net Tue Nov 27 21:39:35 2007 From: wrolley at charter.net (Wes Rolley) Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2007 21:39:35 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] California Property Owners and Farmland Protection Act Message-ID: <474CFF17.20807@charter.net> Today's Morgan Hill Times had a column by Lisa Pampuch (one time city editor for Gilroy Dispatch) that was a clarion call for supporting the California Property Owners and Farmland Protection Act. This is an initiative that has not yet been qualified, but for which over 1,000,000 signatures were submitted when 694,000 were required. It is likely to be approved for June 2008. The following was my response. Letter to the editor for publication ???? __ It is very difficult to level a criticism at someone with who I agree fairly frequently, but I believe that I have to respond to Lisa Pampuch's column today, headlined "Ban eminent domain on behalf of private developers." If it were only so. It is particular vexing because I fully agree with the sentiment expressed in that headline. For government to take private property in order to enrich another through the intervention of the state should be made illegal in every state, not just California. However, the vehicle by which this admirable goal is being pursued, euphemistically named the California Property Owners and Farmland Protection Act, is even more seriously flawed than Proposition 90 that we defeated in 2006. The more proper name for this act might have been the California Big Property Owners and Developers Protection Racket. While it does ban the use of eminent domain proceedings to transfer ownership of private property from one private owner to another with government being the broker, it would also ban a long list of very beneficial actions on the part of government. This would start with removing all rent control on apartments and mobile homes. It is generally seniors who are residing in rent control apartments and many can not afford to move in to other housing. What are we to do, blame the seniors for not being richer? Section 19(b)(3)(ii) would prohibit even the use of eminent domain to acquire land or water rights for use by a public water agency. At a time when the Governor wants to build more dams for water, I am sure that he would hate to see this pass. If those who collected these signatures. were to separate the "takings" issue from the specific case of eminent domain abuse, I would be at the head of the line to support it. As it stands, I urge you all to take Lisa's advice.. "Inoculate yourself with the facts so you won't become infected by the germs of half-truths, spin, and fear that will spewed by powerful, wealthy, well-connected opponents of eminent domain reform." You won't find the full truth from Californians for Property Rights Protection. I suggest that you start with the Legislative Analysts Office review. http://www.lao.ca.gov/laoapp/ballot_source/BalDetails.aspx?id=603 -- "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 17211 Quail Court, Morgan Hill, CA 95037 http://www.refpub.com/ -- Tel: 408.778.3024 From j.m.doyle at sbcglobal.net Wed Nov 28 10:33:07 2007 From: j.m.doyle at sbcglobal.net (Jim Doyle) Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2007 10:33:07 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] delegates to national convention Message-ID: <474DB463.70002@sbcglobal.net> This from the Gren Party contacts list. Jim Doyle GREEN PARTY COUNTY CONTACTS MESSAGE This is an announcement from the GPCA Contact List. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dear Greens, The deadline to sign up for selection as an official California delegate to the Green Party's 2008 national Presidential nominating convention is rapidly approaching. *** DUE DATE *** By December 7, all Presidential candidates and county parties must submit their slates to the Delegate Selection Committee, at: gpca-dsc at cagreens.org *** DELEGATE ALLOTMENTS *** California will likely be alloted about 170 delegates to the 2008 convention. The number of delegates that should come from each active California county is therefore approximately one and a half to two and a half times the usual number of delegates alloted to your county for state plenary meetings. So, if your county receives 3 delegates to the state plenary, about 5 to 8 convention delegates should hail from your county next year. Since first priority for delegate selection is given to the Presidential candidates' delegate slates, some (or even most) of your county's allotment may be filled by Green Party members from your county asking to be on the candidates' delegate slates. Delegates are chosen from candidate slates in proportion to the percentage of the vote received by each candidate in the California Green Party primary. So if Candidate X wins 50% of the primary vote on February 5, half of California's delegates are chosen from X's delegate slate. County slates are a backup for the candidate slates -- to fill convention delegate seats when candidates have provided insufficient names to cover the percentage of delegates they have won in the primary. *** RECRUITING DELEGATES *** You can help the GPCA Delegate Selection Committee achieve the formidable task of balancing the representation of the primary vote with county representation, diversity and gender balance by recruiting delegates for your county slate and by helping to connect prospective delegates in your county with the candidate of their preference. (Please see details below.) To help you recruit delegates, we've written a sample email below that you can forward to your listserves and email lists. (Please add any other contact info. for your county party though, if needed). PLEASE SEND OUT THIS EMAIL RIGHT AWAY (or your own version of it) so that the Greens in your county can have at least 5 or 6 days to decide about becoming a delegate! Also, we strongly encourage you to make phone calls to the Greens in your county who will most likely be interested in attending! Please help California send a full delegation to next year's national Green Party convention! Please circulate the email below right away (and also make phone calls) -- in order to try and meet (or exceed!) your county's "delegate goal", per the above! Thank you in advance for helping us recruit California delegates to next year's national convention! Sincerely, Delegate Selection Committee Green Party of California -------------------------------------------------------------------- PLEASE FORWARD THIS MESSAGE TO YOUR LOCAL LISTS [Subject line: ASAP!: Can you be a California Green delegate to next summer's Chicago national convention of the Green Party?! ] Dear Greens, This coming February's California Green Party ballot is currently scheduled to feature seven Presidential candidates. Following the official February election results, an allocation of national convention delegates for each candidate will be made (in proportion to the number of February votes that the candidates receive) -- for California Green delegates to attend the July 10 through July 13 Green Party national convention in Chicago, Illinois. According to rules passed by the Green Party of California state plenary meeting (also known as the "general assembly" meeting), this coming December 7, 2007 is the deadline for Presidential candidates, and also for Green Party of California county groups, to submit the names of California Greens to attend next summer's national convention in Chicago. Therefore, if you would like to represent a particular Green Party Presidential candidate, PLEASE CONTACT THEIR CAMPAIGN IMMEDIATELY (as listed below), as most campaigns want to start finalizing their delegate slates starting on approximately Tuesday, December 4! (Note: you can only be on one candidate's slate and you will generally be expected to support that candidate unless and until that candidate is eliminated from the running). In addition, everyone (including "candidate delegates") can also be a "county delegate". (This is recommended, since those candidates who do not have enough of their own delegates will then draw from the county-delegate pool to fill out their lists). To be a "county delegate", please contact your local county Green Party RIGHT AWAY -- by replying to this message! If you're not absolutely sure at this point whether you'll be able to attend, but you are interested in attending, please contact the campaign of your choice and/or your county Green Party and just let them know about your situation. That way you'll be prioritized now, so that you'll have a much better chance of being a delegate should everything work out for you next year! Please help the Green Party of California send a full delegation to next year's Green Party national convention in Chicago! Please volunteer to be a delegate -- now! Sincerely, Delegate Selection Committee Green Party of California ---------------------------------------------------- From j.m.doyle at sbcglobal.net Wed Nov 28 10:35:01 2007 From: j.m.doyle at sbcglobal.net (Jim Doyle) Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2007 10:35:01 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] delegates to national convention (2) Message-ID: <474DB4D5.10606@sbcglobal.net> Oops, left off the contact list: FORM TO APPLY FOR CANDIDATE, COUNTY, OR DIVERSITY CAUCUS SLATES: Please complete the information below and send to one of the contacts for a specific candidate and/or to your county party for inclusion on your county's slate. * full name: * phone: * email: * mailing address: * county of residence: * gender (to provide gender balance): * racial/ethnic group (to provide diversity, e.g., African American, European American, Asian American, etc.) * other diversity factors (LGBT, Disabled, Senior, etc.): ********************************** PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE CAMPAIGN CONTACTS: (Thanks to Sanda Everette for the descriptive info. below, on the candidates): JARED BALL (DC) http://www.jaredball.com/ jbforpresident at gmail.com College Professor and freelance journalist from the District of Columbia. ELAINE BROWN (GA) http://www.elainebrown.org/ sistaelaine at gmail.com Former Black Panther Party leader, noted author, community and prison justice activist JESSE JOHNSON (WV) jesse at mtparty.org Filmmaker, and 2006 Senate candidate & 2004 gubernatorial candidate for the Mountain Party from West Virginia. CYNTHIA MCKINNEY (CA) California Contacts: Sanda Everette: sanda at greensolutions.org John Morton: jlm108 at yahoo.com http://www.allthingscynthiamckinney.com/ Former U.S. Congressmember from Georgia KENT MESPLAY (CA) http://www.mesplay.org/ info at mesplay.org Biomedical engineer who sought Green presidential nomination in 2004 from California. RALPH NADER (CT) CA Contact: Tinker Dominguez at tink at cruzio.com . http://www.draftnader.org/ Consumer advocate; 1996 and 2000 Green presidential nominee; 2004 independent presidential candidate. KAT SWIFT (TX) http://www.votekat.info/ prezkat at bexagreens.org Texas state party Co-Chair, progressive activist and newspaper credit manager _______________________________________________ Contacts2006 mailing list Contacts2006 at lists.cagreens.org http://lists.cagreens.org/mailman/listinfo/contacts2006 From JamBoi at Greens.org Wed Nov 28 15:30:42 2007 From: JamBoi at Greens.org (Drew Johnson) Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2007 15:30:42 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] McClellan revelations demand immediate impeachment, say Greens Message-ID: <3370.38.99.84.36.1196292642.squirrel@greens.org> http://www.gp.org/press/pr_2007_11_28.shtml McClellan revelations demand immediate impeachment, say Greens GREEN PARTY OF THE UNITED STATES http://www.gp.org For Immediate Release: Wednesday, November 28, 2007 Contacts: Scott McLarty, Media Coordinator, 202-518-5624, mclarty at greens.org Starlene Rankin, Media Coordinator, 916-995-3805, starlene at gp.org Special Counsel Patrick J. Fitzgerald must probe new evidence in Plame case; Democrats and Republicans who refuse to hold Bush and Cheney accountable are complicit in White House crimes WASHINGTON, DC -- Green Party leaders called impeachment an urgent necessity after former White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan's revelation that President Bush and Vice President Cheney were involved in the conspiracy to expose the identity of CIA undercover operative Valerie Plame. "Evidence of high crimes and misdemeanors from the White House are staring us in the face. What will it take for the Democratic Party to move on impeachment? By refusing to impeach, House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer [D-Md.], Rep. Nancy Pelosi [D-Calif.], Sen. Harry Reid [D-Nev.], and other Democratic leaders are aiding and abetting crimes committed by President Bush and Vice President Cheney," said Peter Thottam, Green Party member, attorney, and Executive Director of the Los Angeles National Impeachment Center . Greens called it absolutely imperative that US Department of Justice Special Counsel Patrick J. Fitzgerald investigate Mr. McClellan's assertions about the role of Mr. Bush and Mr. Cheney in an illegal attempt to discredit Ambassador Joseph Wilson after Mr. Wilson revealed that the President's 2003 State of the Union claim about an Iraqi nuclear weapons material deal was based on a known forgery. The Green Party of the United States called for impeachment in July 2003 after President Bush ordered the invasion of Iraq, which Greens called an act of military aggression outlawed under the US Constitutional and international law, and lied to the American people about the reasons for the invasion. Since 2003, White House crimes have continued to mount: detention without trial, surveillance of US citizens without warrant, approval for torture, "signing statements" purportedly allowing the President to disregard laws passed by Congress, violation of international laws and treaties signed by the US, inaction and racist response to environmental emergencies (Hurricanes Katrina and Rita), endangering public health by tampering with scientific research on global warming. Greens supported former Rep. Cynthia McKinney's (D-Ga.) impeachment motion in December 2006 and have praised Rep. Dennis Kucinich's (D-Ohio) recent introduction of an impeachment resolution, which was tabled by House Democratic leaders. In recent months, several Green Party activists have protested and committed acts of civil disobedience to persuade Rep. John Conyers (D-Mich.) and other Congress members to impeach the President and Vice President. "If we had some Greens in Congress right now, we'd already be seeing impeachment and possible criminal prosecution. Greens would not only lead on impeachment, their very presence would drive top Democrats and perhaps some Republican to support it. It's time to replace two-party collusion with multi-party competition," said David J. Kalbfleisch, Green Party candidate for the U.S. House in Illinois (10th District) . MORE INFORMATION Green Party of the United States http://www.gp.org 202-319-7191, 866-41GREEN Fax 202-319-7193 Green Party News Center http://www.gp.org/newscenter.shtml Green Party Speakers Bureau http://www.gp.org/speakers Green candidate database for 2007 and other campaign information: http://www.gp.org/elections.shtml "Democrats, retreating on troop withdrawal, impeachment, don't deserve votes in 2008" Green Party press release, July 26, 2007 http://www.gp.org/press/pr_2007_07_26.shtml ~ END ~ From JamBoi at Greens.org Wed Nov 28 16:32:56 2007 From: JamBoi at Greens.org (Drew Johnson) Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2007 16:32:56 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Idea for holiday social: Dec 15th Jared Ball4 Prez gath... In-Reply-To: <1251.38.99.84.36.1196103194.squirrel@greens.org> References: <1251.38.99.84.36.1196103194.squirrel@greens.org> Message-ID: <3457.38.99.84.36.1196296376.squirrel@greens.org> I put a call into the SJ Peace Center to see if this would work for Saturday night the 15th. The holiday party idea is A-OK although Catherine asked that we refrain from alcohol consumption there. I told her I didn't think that would be a problem. I asked her if it would be kosher to have Dr. Ball speak there. She's going to get back to me on that. I called Wes and Craig Peterson to let them know that I'd inquired about that venue. Green is Essential! Drew On Mon, November 26, 2007 10:53, Drew Johnson wrote: > I wonder if we could hold it at the San Jose Peace Center in the evening? > > > Green is Core! > > Drew > > On Sun, November 18, 2007 21:24, Kaisha Torres wrote: >> Thanks for the clarification. I would gladly host a house party but as I >> said, I am not going to be available the 15th and I'm fairly certain my >> fianc? would be reluctant for me to sign him up to host a party in my >> absence. However, I do have some other ideas that I can work on the next >> couple days. >> >> I saw something about the Voodoo Lounge. Did anything come of that or is >> it >> still a pending option? >> >> To state my understanding of the event, we need a place to hold a >> fundraising/social event with room for 20-50. We are looking to hold a >> daytime event. A facility with food services would be ideal, however, it >> is >> not required. >> >> Don't give up yet, >> Kaisha >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Wes Rolley [mailto:wrolley at charter.net] >> Sent: Sunday, November 18, 2007 7:25 PM >> To: kaisha_marie at comcast.net; Green Discuss >> Subject: Re: [Sosfbay-discuss] Idea for holiday social: Dec 15th Jared >> Ball4 Prez gath... >> >> >> Kaisha Torres wrote: >> >> Kaisha, >> >> There have been several emails, not all in the same string. My first >> email (from which Drew cut and pasted a portio) explained it better. >> >> Jared is going to be in the San Francisco Bay Area for 3 days. Craig >> Peterson (Contra Costa County) is coordinating things for all counties >> for this trip. Based on other commitments, that is the day that we can >> have it. The other days are being scheduled in other counties. >> >> Also, I specifically asked if there was anyone who might be interested >> in holding a house party. No response to that one. I know that Warner >> was checking another facility. I am not sure what result he had. >> >> I know that I could get the amphitheater at the Community and Cultural >> Center in Morgan Hill for that time. However, that is not where most of >> the population and Green Party members are. I am pretty sure we would >> have better turnout in San Jose, especially close to the colleges. >> >> I am running out of ideas and contacts. >> >> Wes >>> >>> After speaking again to Iliad, it is confirmed that we cannot hold the >>> event on Saturday the 15th during the day. He did mention having it at >>> the Smoke Tiki Lounge from 8pm until 10pm. >>> I've reviewed the email string again and I don't see anything saying >>> why the 15th was suggested (if that is the only date that Mr. Ball is >>> available) other than that is falls within the timeframe of his >>> visit. Who is in charge of coordinating this event with Mr. Ball? If >>> it's a day event, what is wrong with the 16th? >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Kaisha >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> *From:* WB4D23 at aol.com [mailto:WB4D23 at aol.com] >>> *Sent:* Saturday, November 17, 2007 6:59 PM >>> *To:* kaisha_marie at comcast.net; JamBoi at Greens.org; wrolley at charter.net >>> *Cc:* iliad_rodriguez at yahoo.com >>> *Subject:* Re: [Sosfbay-discuss] Idea for holiday social: Dec 15th >>> Jared Ball4 Prez gath... >>> >>> I thought we were looking at a Saturday afternoon event. Warner >>> >>> >>> >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>> See what's new at AOL.com >>> and Make AOL Your >>> Homepage . >> >> >> -- >> "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 >> 17211 Quail Court, Morgan Hill, CA 95037 >> http://www.refpub.com/ -- Tel: 408.778.3024 >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> sosfbay-discuss mailing list >> sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org >> http://lists.cagreens.org/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss >> > > > _______________________________________________ > sosfbay-discuss mailing list > sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org > http://lists.cagreens.org/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss > From JamBoi at Greens.org Wed Nov 28 16:39:50 2007 From: JamBoi at Greens.org (Drew Johnson) Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2007 16:39:50 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Idea for holiday social: Dec 15th Jared Ball4 Prez gath... In-Reply-To: <1251.38.99.84.36.1196103194.squirrel@greens.org> References: <1251.38.99.84.36.1196103194.squirrel@greens.org> Message-ID: <3507.38.99.84.36.1196296790.squirrel@greens.org> I put a call into the SJ Peace Center to see if this would work for Saturday night the 15th. The holiday party idea is A-OK although Catherine asked that we refrain from alcohol consumption there. I told her I didn't think that would be a problem. I asked her if it would be kosher to have Dr. Ball speak there (ie. to double check whether it was okay to have a partisan political presentation there at the Peace Center). She's going to get back to me on that. I called Wes and Craig Peterson to let them know that I'd inquired about that venue. Green is Essential! Drew On Mon, November 26, 2007 10:53, Drew Johnson wrote: > I wonder if we could hold it at the San Jose Peace Center in the evening? > > > Green is Core! > > Drew > > On Sun, November 18, 2007 21:24, Kaisha Torres wrote: >> Thanks for the clarification. I would gladly host a house party but as I >> said, I am not going to be available the 15th and I'm fairly certain my >> fianc? would be reluctant for me to sign him up to host a party in my >> absence. However, I do have some other ideas that I can work on the next >> couple days. >> >> I saw something about the Voodoo Lounge. Did anything come of that or is >> it >> still a pending option? >> >> To state my understanding of the event, we need a place to hold a >> fundraising/social event with room for 20-50. We are looking to hold a >> daytime event. A facility with food services would be ideal, however, it >> is >> not required. >> >> Don't give up yet, >> Kaisha >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Wes Rolley [mailto:wrolley at charter.net] >> Sent: Sunday, November 18, 2007 7:25 PM >> To: kaisha_marie at comcast.net; Green Discuss >> Subject: Re: [Sosfbay-discuss] Idea for holiday social: Dec 15th Jared >> Ball4 Prez gath... >> >> >> Kaisha Torres wrote: >> >> Kaisha, >> >> There have been several emails, not all in the same string. My first >> email (from which Drew cut and pasted a portio) explained it better. >> >> Jared is going to be in the San Francisco Bay Area for 3 days. Craig >> Peterson (Contra Costa County) is coordinating things for all counties >> for this trip. Based on other commitments, that is the day that we can >> have it. The other days are being scheduled in other counties. >> >> Also, I specifically asked if there was anyone who might be interested >> in holding a house party. No response to that one. I know that Warner >> was checking another facility. I am not sure what result he had. >> >> I know that I could get the amphitheater at the Community and Cultural >> Center in Morgan Hill for that time. However, that is not where most of >> the population and Green Party members are. I am pretty sure we would >> have better turnout in San Jose, especially close to the colleges. >> >> I am running out of ideas and contacts. >> >> Wes >>> >>> After speaking again to Iliad, it is confirmed that we cannot hold the >>> event on Saturday the 15th during the day. He did mention having it at >>> the Smoke Tiki Lounge from 8pm until 10pm. >>> I've reviewed the email string again and I don't see anything saying >>> why the 15th was suggested (if that is the only date that Mr. Ball is >>> available) other than that is falls within the timeframe of his >>> visit. Who is in charge of coordinating this event with Mr. Ball? If >>> it's a day event, what is wrong with the 16th? >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Kaisha >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> *From:* WB4D23 at aol.com [mailto:WB4D23 at aol.com] >>> *Sent:* Saturday, November 17, 2007 6:59 PM >>> *To:* kaisha_marie at comcast.net; JamBoi at Greens.org; wrolley at charter.net >>> *Cc:* iliad_rodriguez at yahoo.com >>> *Subject:* Re: [Sosfbay-discuss] Idea for holiday social: Dec 15th >>> Jared Ball4 Prez gath... >>> >>> I thought we were looking at a Saturday afternoon event. Warner >>> >>> >>> >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>> See what's new at AOL.com >>> and Make AOL Your >>> Homepage . >> >> >> -- >> "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 >> 17211 Quail Court, Morgan Hill, CA 95037 >> http://www.refpub.com/ -- Tel: 408.778.3024 >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> sosfbay-discuss mailing list >> sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org >> http://lists.cagreens.org/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss >> > > > _______________________________________________ > sosfbay-discuss mailing list > sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org > http://lists.cagreens.org/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss > From JamBoi at Greens.org Wed Nov 28 20:27:38 2007 From: JamBoi at Greens.org (Drew Johnson) Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2007 20:27:38 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Fwd: Looking for continued support for Cynthia. Message-ID: <1164.67.116.237.93.1196310458.squirrel@greens.org> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Sanda Everette Date: Nov 28, 2007 8:04 PM Subject: Looking for continued support for Cynthia. Santa Clara county did such a nice job supporting Cynthia McKinney when she was here in October. Why are we not hearing from anyone in Santa Clara to be a delegate for her at the nominating convention? I would hope you have received all the information on how to be a delegate for a candidate or an undeclared county delegate. Cynthia needs to get her names in by December 7, but I am trying to get them to her a bit earlier as she wants to contact everyone personally. With wishful thinking, Sanda -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From WB4D23 at aol.com Thu Nov 29 11:27:29 2007 From: WB4D23 at aol.com (WB4D23 at aol.com) Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2007 14:27:29 EST Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Sample Phone Script to Contact Greens About Save BAREC -- Comments Welcome Message-ID: MODEL SCRIPT AND NOTES FOR BAREC CAMPAIGN TELEPHONE CALLS Below is a model telephone script to invite GPSCC members to volunteer and donate to the Save BAREC No on Measures A and B campaign. This is an outline for talking points, but remember to be yourself when you leave a voicemail message or talk to someone. Please keep track of all responses or non-responses and provide that information to Warner Bloomberg (e.g., wrong number; moved; or volunteers information). This is an experiment to try to contact people who usually don?t hear from us, to ask them to help with the referenda campaign, and to update our registered Greens information.. ****************************************************************************** TELEPHONE "SCRIPT" FOR SAVE BAREC CONTACTS / SANTA CLARA GREENS Hello: Is _ (Name of Person)_there (or at home)? [If voicemail; start here after "Hello".] I'm calling to ask [name of person] to help the Save BAREC campaign for No votes on Measures A and B in Santa Clara in the February 5th election. The Green Party of Santa Clara County has endorsed the Save BAREC campaign and we are asking our members to get involved by posting lawn signs, distributing leaflets, making phone calls, donating money and voting NO on Measures A and B. [Next: If talking to someone.] Would you be willing to help the campaign to save this open space? [Continue or give closing information depending on response.] [Next: If voicemail or another person is taking message.] You can reach the campaign by calling 888-227-3280 or at _www.barec.org_ (http://www.barec.org) ************************************************************************ Answers To Some Frequently Asked Questions: (If you are asked a question you can?t answer, write it down and tell the person you will try to have someone call back with the information. Be sure to get the question, and person?s name and telephone number to someone for the call back, or do it yourself after getting the information.) How did you get this telephone number? Answer: All political parties are allowed to get a copy of the registered voters list and use it to contact its members. What does ?BAREC? mean? Bay Area Research and Extension Center -- about 17 acres of open space near Winchester and Stevens Creek Boulevards near the southern boundary of the City of Santa Clara -- used for agricultural research by the University of California until it was declared ?surplus property? available for sale. City of Santa Clara activists challenged the general plan amendment and rezoning decisions by getting enough signatures to force a vote on whether a market rate housing development should be built over this open space. The Green Party of Santa Clara County has endorsed the Save BAREC campaign since March 2005. You can find more information at the education page at _www.SaveBAREC.org_ (http://www.SaveBAREC.org) . What if I want to make a campaign donation? There is a Paypal button at _www.barec.org_ (http://www.barec.org) if you want to pay by credit card. Or you can send a check made payable to SaveBAREC PAC, at PO Box 1029, Santa Clara, CA 95052, but in either case California law requires that you provide your address, occupation and employer name. Do I have to live in Santa Clara? Only to vote NO on Measures A and B. If you have friends who might be interested in helping with the campaign, please share this information. What else is the local Green Party doing? We are working on a candidates event for one of the Green Party presidential candidates on December 15th. We hold our monthly business meeting on the first Thursday of the month at the San Jose Peace Center. We have two local chapters that hold other meetings. Some of our me,bers are very involved in impeachment and anti-war rallies. [Ask: What kinds of Green Party things would you be interested in helping with?] The local webpage is at cagreens.org/sclara What are Green Party positions on ballot measures on the February Election? The state party is expected to announce its positions in early January. **************************************************** **************************************Check out AOL's list of 2007's hottest products. (http://money.aol.com/special/hot-products-2007?NCID=aoltop00030000000001) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JamBoi at Greens.org Thu Nov 29 11:44:59 2007 From: JamBoi at Greens.org (Drew Johnson) Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2007 11:44:59 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Bylaw proposal for Regional Representatives Election Message-ID: <3410.67.116.237.93.1196365499.squirrel@greens.org> Here's another try on harmonizing our bylaw's style and Warner and Jonathan Lundell's proposed alternative election process for Regional Representatives. Please send your comments. The only significant question I have is about the the stipulation in 9.5 that if the counties come to different decisions we would retake the decision until agreement is reached. I guess my question is whether we would want to delegate to the County Councils the ability to sort it out since otherwise it could potentially stretch out the process for some months given the requirement to have additional RR Election Meetings until agreement is reached. Green is Life! Drew Johnson GP of Santa Clara Co Councilor ______ ARTICLE 9 ELECTION OF REGIONAL REPRESENTATIVES (RR), ALTERNATES 9.0 Definitions in GPCA bylaws Regional Representation on the GPCA Coordinating Committee is defined by the GPCA bylaws, sections 6, 7 and elsewhere. This bylaws article constitutes an alternative election process as provided for in the GPCA bylaws section 7-1.5. 9.1 RR Election Meeting The terms ?RR Candidate Presentation Meeting' and ?RR Election Meeting? in these bylaws shall be qualified only if the following requirements are met: 1) the election is authorized and called by the County Council 2) the meeting is open to all county party Members and all Members present can vote in the election, 3) the election has been publicly announced on county party email lists at least 15 days in advance of the election meeting and 4) where the RR Election is a preannounced agenda item for the meeting. 9.2 Declaring Candidacy Candidates shall declare their candidacy on the email lists of the counties of the region prior to the RR Candidate Presentation Meetings at which a vacancy or replacement is considered. Note also that the state bylaws stipulate that N.O.C. (?No Other Candidate?, AKA "None of the Above") shall be considered an acceptable candidate. 9.3 RR Candidate Presentation Meeting The RR Candidate Presentation Meeting agenda item will include time for the candidates to present themselves in person to describe their qualifications, goals, and to answer questions. 9.4 RR Election Meeting Election of a representative will be a decision item at a qualified RR Election Meeting that follows the RR Candidate Presentation Meeting. 9.5 Regional Coordination A candidate must be approved by all of the county parties of the region. If different candidates are approved by the county parties the decision(s) shall be retaken by the county parties until agreement on candidates between the county parties is reached. 9.6 Representational Balance in the Region It shall be an objective to have the Regional Representative and the first Alternate Regional representative be from different counties wherever possible. 9.7 Replacement or Recall A Regional Representative or an Alternate Regional Representative may be replaced or recalled using the same process for election described here. 9.8 Effective Date This amendment, Article 9 of the by-laws shall take effect on its date of passage in substatially the same form by all county parties in the region. Upon adoption, the County Council from each county party shall separately and independently notify the GPCA of their bylaws amendments adding this alternative election process to the default procedures provided by the state Green Party Bylaws. 9.9 Expiration of Article 9 This article 9 detailing the selection of regional representatives to the GPCA Coordinating Committee shall expire if a county party in the region rescinds it, or if the region is redefined and a new county parties added to the region decides not to adopt this bylaw. From JamBoi at Greens.org Thu Nov 29 11:49:31 2007 From: JamBoi at Greens.org (Drew Johnson) Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2007 11:49:31 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Bylaw proposal for Regional Representatives Election Message-ID: <3415.67.116.237.93.1196365771.squirrel@greens.org> One other note: it wasn't clear to me whether we want to entirely replace the GPCA RR election process or just add another option -- my guess (reflected below) was as another option, but it would be easy to switch it if the sentiment is for replacement. Green is Core! Drew ---------------------------- Original Message ---------------------------- Subject: Bylaw proposal for Regional Representatives Election From: "Drew Johnson" Date: Thu, November 29, 2007 11:45 To: sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Here's another try on harmonizing our bylaw's style and Warner and Jonathan Lundell's proposed alternative election process for Regional Representatives. Please send your comments. The only significant question I have is about the the stipulation in 9.5 that if the counties come to different decisions we would retake the decision until agreement is reached. I guess my question is whether we would want to delegate to the County Councils the ability to sort it out since otherwise it could potentially stretch out the process for some months given the requirement to have additional RR Election Meetings until agreement is reached. Green is Life! Drew Johnson GP of Santa Clara Co Councilor ______ ARTICLE 9 ELECTION OF REGIONAL REPRESENTATIVES (RR), ALTERNATES 9.0 Definitions in GPCA bylaws Regional Representation on the GPCA Coordinating Committee is defined by the GPCA bylaws, sections 6, 7 and elsewhere. This bylaws article constitutes an alternative election process as provided for in the GPCA bylaws section 7-1.5. 9.1 RR Election Meeting The terms ?RR Candidate Presentation Meeting' and ?RR Election Meeting? in these bylaws shall be qualified only if the following requirements are met: 1) the election is authorized and called by the County Council 2) the meeting is open to all county party Members and all Members present can vote in the election, 3) the election has been publicly announced on county party email lists at least 15 days in advance of the election meeting and 4) where the RR Election is a preannounced agenda item for the meeting. 9.2 Declaring Candidacy Candidates shall declare their candidacy on the email lists of the counties of the region prior to the RR Candidate Presentation Meetings at which a vacancy or replacement is considered. Note also that the state bylaws stipulate that N.O.C. (?No Other Candidate?, AKA "None of the Above") shall be considered an acceptable candidate. 9.3 RR Candidate Presentation Meeting The RR Candidate Presentation Meeting agenda item will include time for the candidates to present themselves in person to describe their qualifications, goals, and to answer questions. 9.4 RR Election Meeting Election of a representative will be a decision item at a qualified RR Election Meeting that follows the RR Candidate Presentation Meeting. 9.5 Regional Coordination A candidate must be approved by all of the county parties of the region. If different candidates are approved by the county parties the decision(s) shall be retaken by the county parties until agreement on candidates between the county parties is reached. 9.6 Representational Balance in the Region It shall be an objective to have the Regional Representative and the first Alternate Regional representative be from different counties wherever possible. 9.7 Replacement or Recall A Regional Representative or an Alternate Regional Representative may be replaced or recalled using the same process for election described here. 9.8 Effective Date This amendment, Article 9 of the by-laws shall take effect on its date of passage in substatially the same form by all county parties in the region. Upon adoption, the County Council from each county party shall separately and independently notify the GPCA of their bylaws amendments adding this alternative election process to the default procedures provided by the state Green Party Bylaws. 9.9 Expiration of Article 9 This article 9 detailing the selection of regional representatives to the GPCA Coordinating Committee shall expire if a county party in the region rescinds it, or if the region is redefined and a new county parties added to the region decides not to adopt this bylaw. From j.m.doyle at sbcglobal.net Thu Nov 29 13:31:06 2007 From: j.m.doyle at sbcglobal.net (Jim Doyle) Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2007 13:31:06 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] holiday peace fair tabling Message-ID: <474F2F9A.5090400@sbcglobal.net> Who is going to table at the Holiday Peace Fair? And for which time periods? The tabling portion is from 11 am until 4 pm. PARKING is free but please encourage your members to use the garage and parking lot across Leigh Avenue at SJ City College. Parking permits are available. You can even print your own - see next message. AT LEAST ONE DESSERT AND ONE PRIZE for the drawings are REQUIRED FROM EACH PARTICIPATING GROUP. Who is preparing a dessert? Who is donating a prize for the raffle that will be held? I have a supply of the parts one needs to make buttons, but not the art work. Also, the organizers of the Holiday Peace Fair are asking for help: THE TIME TO SET UP YOUR GROUP'S TABLE IS 9-11 AM. WE CAN STILL USE HELP BETWEEN 8-9 AM WITH SETTING UP THE ROOMS IN GENERAL AND FROM 4-6 PM WITH GENERAL CLEAN-UP (after your own table is cleared ASAP after 4 PM). Please let Lois or Joan know if you have more volunteers from your group who can help at the beginning or end of the day - or with staffing the Entrance Table or Desserts Table any part of the time during the open hours of the fair (11-4, of course). Lois = 408-294-0981; Joan G = 408-396-8039 From j.m.doyle at sbcglobal.net Thu Nov 29 13:32:32 2007 From: j.m.doyle at sbcglobal.net (Jim Doyle) Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2007 13:32:32 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] parking permit for holiday peace fair Message-ID: <474F2FF0.8010805@sbcglobal.net> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From j.m.doyle at sbcglobal.net Thu Nov 29 13:51:34 2007 From: j.m.doyle at sbcglobal.net (Jim Doyle) Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2007 13:51:34 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] summary of legislation Message-ID: <474F3466.1080609@sbcglobal.net> A blogger has posted the following item which lists, tallies, what has actually taken place in this session of congress. Measured by the number of bills signed or vetoed by the president and what they were about. http://quakerscolonel.blogspot.com/2007/11/do-nothing-or-much-ado-about-nothing.html from the article: But now look at what Congress did in terms of the substance (bloggers take) of the legislation sent to the White House. Government reform 3 (lobbying; drug and pesticide safety) Treasury 3 (coinage; increase debt ceiling; Internet tax) Education 5 (U.S.-Poland parliamentary youth exchange; three on college funding; Higher Education Act) Peace Corps 1 (contractor funding) Appropriations 2 (CR; Defense Appropriations) CR = continuing resolution Trade issues 2 (trade assistance; emergency economic powers) Veterans 2 (suicide prevention; disability pay) Water resources 1 (rivers and harbors; passed over veto) Other/Mixed 7 (medals; monuments; museums; 9/11 victims; appointments) Naming post offices 14 highways, Veterans facilities Mote than half ? 21 public laws ? are essentially aimed at ceremonial issues. This is considered ?good use? of congressional time? Hardly, I submit. And what of the eleven remaining appropriations bills that are still pending? From j.m.doyle at sbcglobal.net Thu Nov 29 13:56:29 2007 From: j.m.doyle at sbcglobal.net (Jim Doyle) Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2007 13:56:29 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] terrorism scorecard Message-ID: <474F358D.9030608@sbcglobal.net> Here is a link to an la times article that contains a report card on the war on terror. The article has numbers such as number of people charged with terorism related crimes and the number of those who were prosecuted. It could be a handy piece of literature to have. http://www.latimes.com/media/acrobat/2007-11/33860990.pdf From JamBoi at Greens.org Thu Nov 29 14:00:02 2007 From: JamBoi at Greens.org (Drew Johnson) Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2007 14:00:02 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Two Candidates Explicitly Put Peace Before Party: Kucinich and Paul Challenge Their Parties Message-ID: <1432.67.116.237.93.1196373602.squirrel@greens.org> http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/viewArticle.asp?articleID=44226 Two Candidates Explicitly Put Peace Before Party: Kucinich and Paul Challenge Their Parties Kevin Zeese Kevin Zeese is director of Democracy Rising. November 29, 2007 Peace voters have choices in 2008, will they have the courage to support peace candidates? In recent debates the candidates were asked whether they will support the nominee of their party. Despite increasingly harsh rhetoric between the candidates only two candidates had the courage to put peace before their party and refused to issue blanket support for their party nominee. Rep. Ron Paul and Rep. Dennis Kucinich responded they would not support the nominee unless the nominee opposed war as an instrument of foreign policy. This deserves loud applause from the peace movement. No doubt both candidates will pay a political price for taking such a stand. They may get the ?Gravel Treatment? ? presidential candidate Mike Gravel was harshly critical of the top tier candidates of the Democratic Party and now is excluded from the debates because the Democratic National Committee no longer considers him a serious candidate and the corporate media, which walks lock-step with the corporate parties, has refused to invite him to any debates. His campaign has all but disappeared. Kucinich and Paul face other potential repercussions for putting the life and death issue of war and peace before party loyalty. Both are incumbent congressmen and if they are unsuccessful in getting their party?s presidential nomination will seek re-election to Congress. Will they find themselves with a well-funded primary challenger? And, if elected, will they find their committee assignments downgraded? Will they be appointed to subcommittee or committee chairmanships or passed over in favor of party loyalists? There are many ways for a political party to punish lack of party loyalty. So, Kucinich and Paul deserve a great deal of credit for publicly standing up for peace before party. And, Kucinich and Paul did not just come out in opposition to the current disastrous occupation of Iraq. They came out more broadly for an end to the aggressively interventionist U.S. foreign policy that is dominated by militarism. This is the type of paradigm shifting policy change that is needed in U.S. foreign policy. The fact that the U.S. spends as much as the whole world combined on the military ensures that every other aspect of American civil life is underfunded. It is why the debt is increasing, infrastructure is failing, the U.S. remains addicted to oil, college is overpriced, health care for all unachievable, and pre-school for children widely unavailable. If the U.S. wants to build economic security at home it needs to stop spending half the federal government?s discretionary spending on the military. If we want to build security from terrorism the U.S. needs to stop creating enemies faster than we kill them. If the U.S. wants ?them? to stop hating ?us? we need to stop behaving like an empire. Sadly, at least one peace group, Friends Committee on National Legislation, is turning its back on these real peace candidates. FCNL whose slogan is ?War is Not the Answer,? has published a voter guide that excludes Kucinich, Paul and Gravel ? the three candidates who really believe war is not the answer. FCNL readers will not learn about these peace candidates in their on-line voter guide. Why? FCNL decided on an arbitrary cut-off point in polling that excludes these candidates. All the candidates that are included keep the military option for Iran on the table and do not advocate cutting military expenditures, only one (Bill Richardson) calls for complete withdrawal from Iraq. Are these ?war is not the answer? candidates? For Kucinich and Paul this stab in the back from a peace group comes at a bad time. Kucinich recently won a straw poll by the progressive Democracy For America and in early returns Kucinich is leading in the Progressive Democrats of America straw poll. Paul has been doing extremely well in straw polls around the country as well as in fundraising and in some polls is bettering candidates like John McCain. Both seem to be getting some traction but if the peace movement is not going to even report on their positions ? a movement which should be the base of their support ? then what hope do they have? Sadly, the FCNL view is not uncommon among peace voters. Too many look at which candidate is most likely to win. Peace voters need to learn that voting for peace candidates is the way to increase their power. Voting for candidates who support the occupation or waffle on whether they will remove the troops in their first term is voting against the interests of peace. It is voting for war as the primary instrument of foreign policy and empire as the goal of U.S. policy ? because that is the view of the candidates covered by FCNL. Peace voters need to have the courage to vote for peace candidates. Paul and Kucinich differ on many issues ? Paul is a free-market thinker who sees the solutions to economic disparity, lack of access to health care, poor education, the environment and the housing crisis in less government and more market-based solutions. Kucinich, while agreeing with Paul on bolstering civil liberties and individual rights, sees the solution to health care as ending the for-profit dominated health insurance industry and replacing it with a non-profit single payer system provided by the government. Similarly on environmental issues Kucinich favors a major government investment in alternative energy that is clean and sustainable, Paul doesn?t. Kucinich favors abortion rights, Paul opposes federal government involvement in abortion. Peace voters have a choice between two solid peace candidates with two very different views of government and the economy, but they have more. Mike Gravel is another long-term peace advocate who has been active against war since the Vietnam era. Some peace voters may also see a candidate in Governor Bill Richardson who favors a complete withdrawal from Iraq, but is keeping the military option on the table for Iran and does not advocate shrinking the U.S. military. And, in the General Election, peace voters will have other options no matter what the two establishment parties decide. The Green Party recently acquired a new member in Cynthia McKinney. The former Member of Congress recently registered as a Green in California and filed with the FEC to seek the Green presidential nomination. She has been strongly anti-war for her whole career and during her last congressional term sought impeachment of President Bush for his illegal invasion of Iraq. Ralph Nader, the long-time consumer activist and former presidential candidate who has been working against the Iraq invasion and occupation since before the war began, is also considering a run for the presidency, possibly as a Green or as an independent. He has tirelessly worked to end the Iraq occupation and throughout his career has been an advocate for less spending on the military and more spending on the necessities of the people. Nader has also been a long-term advocate for impeachment of President Bush and Vice President Cheney for their deceptions and manipulations that led to the Iraq invasion. Another Green candidate worthy of mention is Jared Ball. He is an assistant professor at Morgan State University in Baltimore, has a radio show in Washington, DC, and is founder of FreeMix radio which puts together a monthly hip-hop compilation. He is a veteran of Desert Shield/Desert Storm and an opponent of the Iraq occupation. The Libertarian Party also has several candidates running and they are likely to nominate a peace candidate as well. The LP?s official position on the Iraq occupation is: ?It is time for U.S. forces to withdraw from Iraq as quickly as possible in a manner consistent with the safety of our troops.? Peace voters will have choices in 2008. There are several candidates who oppose both the Iraq occupation and the use of aggressive military force as the dominant approach to foreign policy. Peace voters make up the majority of Americans, but will they have the courage to vote their convictions or will they be manipulated by the two parties and the corporate media? Will they work and financially support peace candidates? It is a test for the peace movement to see whether it as the courage to put peace first. Kevin Zeese is executive director of Democracy Rising (DemocracyRising.US) and Voters for Peace (VotersForPeace.US). From JamBoi at Greens.org Thu Nov 29 15:13:51 2007 From: JamBoi at Greens.org (Drew Johnson) Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2007 15:13:51 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Fwd: Please endorse Cynthia's Green Party candidacy! Message-ID: <1881.67.116.237.93.1196378031.squirrel@greens.org> ---------------------------- Original Message ---------------------------- Subject: [G-C-F] Fwd: Please endorse Cynthia's Green Party candidacy! From: "John Morton" Date: Wed, November 28, 2007 10:13 To: "CAL-Forum" -------------------------------------------------------------------------- --- Hugh Esco wrote: Hello: As you may already be aware, the National Committee of the Green Party of the United adopted a "Policy for Recognition of Declared Candidates for the Green Party Nomination for President". This Policy now governs which candidates seeking the Party's nomination may access Party resources. It is anticipated that some state Parties may use this recognition as a criteria for access to the state nominating ballots, as well. We face a December 1st deadline for complying with the standards for such recognition, which include a provision that we receive verifiable support from 100 Green Party members, including members from at least 5 state parties, no later than December 1, 2007; To facilitate the documentation of our compliance with this provision, last night we posted to Ms. McKinney's campaign website a form designed to accept pledges of such support. You can find that form at: http://supporters.runcynthiarun.org/pcsc_recognition.cgi I am writing to ask you to do the following: (1) go online and complete that form, pledging your support for national Party recognition of this campaign; (2) consider making a financial contribution towards our Federal Matching Funds eligibility campaign while you are on our website; (3) help this request to go viral by circulating it to Greens you know and Green Party lists you are subscribed to. At this point we have about sixty hours left to meet this deadline. With your help we can do so. Thank you, -- Hugh Esco Power to the People Committee, Cynthia McKinney for President From j.m.doyle at sbcglobal.net Thu Nov 29 17:13:03 2007 From: j.m.doyle at sbcglobal.net (Jim Doyle) Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2007 17:13:03 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] hunger banquet Message-ID: <474F639F.8080206@sbcglobal.net> WHAT: 5th Annual Hunger Banquet Celebrates U.N. Human Rights Day * WHEN: Sunday, December 2, 2007, 5-8 PM* *WHERE: University Room, San Jose State University* West Side of Cafeteria Building, Near Student Union *PARKING: *Free parking in Lot D on 10th Street between San Fernando and San Antonio. The Student Union is right in front of Parking Lot D. Walk to the left of the Student Union and then walk to the next building, the Cafeteria. The University Room located at the end of that building. *WHO:* Co-Sponsored by Human Agenda, the SJSU Center for Community Learning & Leadership, the Center for Service Learning and the Associated Students at Evergreen Valley College, SEIU Local 521 Social and Economic Justice Committee, Community Links, the Cesar Chavez Center for Community Action at SJSU, and the Art and Banner Club at Bellarmine College Prep *KEYNOTER:* *?The Future of the World Social Forum?, Colin Rajah*, Director of the International Migrant Rights and Global Justice Program at the National Network for Immigrant and Refugee Rights (NNIRR) /Mr. Rajah, a political refugee from Malaysia, has authored dozens of articles and publications on migrant rights, international trade, globalization, and the linkages of the three. He has attended all seven World Social Forums and was on the National Planning Committee of the U.S. Social Forum in Atlanta this past summer, attended by over 10,000 concerned citizens. . / *HONOREES: :* *Martha?s Kitchen *has served the needy for over 25 years in San Jose, providing the most needy with daily sustenance. *Margaret Gregg*, the County?s Homeless Concerns Coordinator, coordinates over 100 agencies serving the homeless. She also served as the Executive Director of the San Jose Family Shelter. She was banned from the base grounds at Fort Benning Georgia while seeking to close down the School of the Americas. *DONATION:* $25 Adult, $10 Student and Low Income; *no one will be turned away*. Show up at the Hunger Banquet or send contributions payable to ?Human Agenda? to: Human Agenda Treasury, 3845 Wellington Square, San Jose, CA 95136. *PROCEEDS: *Benefit Human Agenda,* *Martha?s Kitchen, the Second Harvest Food Bank, and Oxfam America *INFORMATION: *Email /humanagendavision at sbcglobal.net/ or call Richard Hobbs, 408-460-2999 From j.m.doyle at sbcglobal.net Thu Nov 29 18:23:41 2007 From: j.m.doyle at sbcglobal.net (Jim Doyle) Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2007 18:23:41 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] bylaws amendment Message-ID: <474F742D.3080609@sbcglobal.net> I have a few comments: Sections 9.1 and 9.4 have the same title. I suggest changing 9.1 to read 9.1 qualifying a RR Election Meeting The first sentence in section 9.1 qualifies the terms, not the elections. I suggest removing the word terms. And, if desired, inserting as defined after Election Meeting Section 9.9 has a singular vs plural conflict where it staes a new county parties Jim Doyle From JamBoi at Greens.org Fri Nov 30 01:34:31 2007 From: JamBoi at Greens.org (Drew Johnson) Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2007 01:34:31 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Saturday holiday peace fair tabling In-Reply-To: <474F2F9A.5090400@sbcglobal.net> References: <474F2F9A.5090400@sbcglobal.net> Message-ID: <1867.71.138.131.4.1196415271.squirrel@greens.org> Jim Doyle just got a "grandparents needed" call and won't be able to join the fun on Saturday and asked that we put out the news that Cameron is going but additional tablers are needed. (I have a prior commitment.) Here's scoop: Saturday Dec 1st 11a-4p Location: Leigh Ave across from SJ City College at the Immanuel Lutheran church Bring: yourself. If you're really inspired, bring a dessert and/or a 'prize' that can be used for a door prize. Connect with Cameron there. It'll be fun! Green is a Party! Drew On Thu, November 29, 2007 13:31, Jim Doyle wrote: > Who is going to table at the Holiday Peace Fair? > And for which time periods? > The tabling portion is from 11 am until 4 pm. > > PARKING is free but please encourage your members to use the garage > and parking lot across Leigh Avenue at SJ City College. > Parking permits are available. You can even print your own - see next > message. > > AT LEAST ONE DESSERT AND ONE PRIZE for the drawings are REQUIRED FROM > EACH PARTICIPATING GROUP. > > Who is preparing a dessert? > Who is donating a prize for the raffle that will be held? > > I have a supply of the parts one needs to make buttons, but not the art > work. From alexcathy at aol.com Fri Nov 30 06:53:33 2007 From: alexcathy at aol.com (alexcathy at aol.com) Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2007 09:53:33 -0500 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Green Focus Debate: Do Greens Need a 'People of Color' Caucus? Message-ID: <8CA0177E9A2ED7A-D8-7F6@mblk-d23.sysops.aol.com> ? EDITOR'S NOTE: My op-ed below is the first of a series to be published in Green Focus on applying Green values for people of color. Breaking the Democrat-Republicans monopoly on American politics requires the destruction of big city Democratic Party Machines to which many of us have emotional attachments. It's important for Greens to free our minds from the tyranny of Democrat-Republican old politics about race and ethnicity. Thus, we need to consider if we need a "People of Color Caucus" at all. I am posting this essay on www.greencommons.com. Many will disagree vigorously. Good. Accept this challenge: Post a comment with your thoughts; write an 800-word op-eds for Green Focus and send it to don.boring at gmail.com . Alex Walker Los Angeles Greens A Debate: Do Greens Need a 'People of Color' Caucus? No - Let's Be The Change We Want to See by Alex Walker "Be the change that you want to see in the world." -- Mohandas Gandhi Read More at:? http://www.greencommons.org/node/870 ? ? ________________________________________________________________________ More new features than ever. Check out the new AOL Mail ! - http://o.aolcdn.com/cdn.webmail.aol.com/mailtour/aol/en-us/text.htm?ncid=aolcmp00050000000003 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From wrolley at charter.net Fri Nov 30 10:05:19 2007 From: wrolley at charter.net (Wes Rolley) Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2007 10:05:19 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Buy local, support local artisans Message-ID: <475050DF.4020408@charter.net> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JamBoi at Greens.org Fri Nov 30 10:22:53 2007 From: JamBoi at Greens.org (Drew Johnson) Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2007 10:22:53 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Living in the Post-Election Era and Really Protecting the USA Message-ID: <1353.71.138.131.4.1196446973.squirrel@greens.org> http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_rob_kall_071130_living_in_the_post_e.htm November 30, 2007 at 10:55:41 Living in the Post-Election Era and Really Protecting the USA by Rob Kall I look at the news of elections coming in Pakistan, Russia, votes on constitutional changes in Venezuela... and I think of the USA's last two flawed presidential selection events... and I wonder, "have we entered the era where elections WERE?? Have elections become a joke, a sham, a ploy used by people and groups with great power to steal the ultimate power-- of leadership of a nation? Have we entered a "post-election-era" when elections that people trusted and believed were an integral part of democracy have become a thing of the past, perhaps even a mythic concept now questioned as to whether they ever really existed. We look at any of the above elections and how can we not wonder whether they will be manipulated or fixed? Who will benefit? Putin, Musharaf, Chavez!! It is a sad travesty of justice that here in the USA, after two flawed, corruption marred and influenced elections, the elected representatives in congress have failed to PASS legislation which changes the rules so elections in the US can be trusted. Even when one well-intentioned legislator, Russ Holt, tried, his legislation was corrupted and ruined by an either incompetent or corrupted aide, who allowed corporations to re-write Holt's initial draft so it was made worse than current, existing law. There are voting integrity and election reform activists all over America. They are working hard, with passion and integrity at local and national levels. But still, we face the situation today, where three international elections are greatly suspect. And it is impossible not to at least partially blame the US-- the seat of modern democracy-- for failing to clean up its own act. The USA's failure-- the congress's failure-- to enact tough, clear legislation that requires paper ballot records that are the only record used for recounting is a huge failure that is letting down democracies all across the planet. There's a senate bill floating around, by Diane Feinstein, that's even worse than Holt's unacceptably flawed bill. And sadly, selling out democracy and the American people, People for the American Way and moveon.org have, settled for far too little, having supported the Holt bill. Shame on them both. That bill would allow a president to appoint an election commission, without congressional authorization, that would be the final arbiter of elections. That's like inviting Bush to appoint Rove, Cheney, Scalia and Scooter Libby to "impartially" decide election disputes. Is "disgusting" too kind a word? We're soon going to be seeing, here in the USA, primary elections. Who's to say that these can not and will not be tampered with, as it has been proven it is so easy to do? The threat to democracy we face in the USA has travelled around the world. If the US were to install solid, tamper-proof, trustworthy laws and policies for federal elections, these could be quickly cloned all over the world, as the gold standard. Instead, we see questionable, untrustworthy processes that leave all the elections in the world in doubt. It is time for the US congress to get tough with election standards, to stop settling for less, to refuse to accept privatization of the election process-- a process at the marrow core of democracy. It is not too late for congress to pass legislation that requires, that for federal elections-- for US senators, congresspeople and president, that only paper ballots be counted and kept as the official record for recounts-- Period!! No exceptions!! This could still be done in time for the first elections in the first primaries. The congress should do it. Failure to do so should be recorded in history along with all the other failures of this pathetic 110th congress. It is sad that a Democrat led congress could go down in history as being the one that failed on Iraq, failed on protecting the constitution by failing to impeach Cheney and Bush, failed on protecting our troops by allowing them to be kept in Iraq by corporation motivated right wing globalist neocons and they failed to do enough, in so many ways, to protect Americans and the American economy from hemmorhaging, perhaps mortally. We need to let the members of congress know that they do not get to run again, as incumbents, if they fail to do their job, protecting the constitution, protecting democracy, protecting our jobs, our troops, our economy. The Right wing talks about protecting us from terrorists while all the time, holding the back doors wide open to allow invaders and attackers in so many other forms to just sweep in, destroying so many parts and aspects of the USA that we hold sacred. These traitors MUST be exposed and the truth laid bare. It is not too late for this congress to do what must be done on all the fronts I've described. But it must happen VERY soon. Rob Kall is executive editor and publisher of OpEdNews.com, President of Futurehealth, Inc, inventor and organizer of several conferences, including StoryCon, the Summit Meeting on the Art, Science and Application of Story and The Winter Brain Meeting on neurofeedback, biofeedback, Optimal Functioning and Positive Psychology. He is a frequent Speaker on Politics, The art, science and power of story, heroes and the hero's journey, Positive Psychology, Stress, Biofeedback and a wide range of subjects. See more of his articles here and, older ones, here. From tnharter at aceweb.com Fri Nov 30 13:31:58 2007 From: tnharter at aceweb.com (Tian Harter) Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2007 13:31:58 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Green Focus Debate: Do Greens Need a 'People ofColor' Caucus? In-Reply-To: <8CA0177E9A2ED7A-D8-7F6@mblk-d23.sysops.aol.com> References: <8CA0177E9A2ED7A-D8-7F6@mblk-d23.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: <4750814E.3030209@aceweb.com> I tried to submit this comment, but it kept giving me a "you failed the capatcha challenge" error. I've given up, but just for fun, here it is: I agree totally with Alex on this. In my activism on the oil issue, I always look for strategies that work from an "it begins with me" perspective. When someone else agrees with me that a solution to oil addiction is "stop voting for oil companies at the gas pump", I feel like I've made an inch of progress. I like it when another person agrees with me that it's a good thing to have harmless, Oxygen exhaling, bushes in our world. Should I care if that person has the name Patel, Smith, Nguyen, Park, Harter, or Nowak? I say respect their human rights until they break the law. I have met many people that don't look like what you would expect from reading their names. From my point of view, everybody I meet is another John Q. Public until they do something I can remember them for. I visited my sister for Thanksgiving last week. When I was leaving she gave me a pomegranate to eat on the way home. Waiting in the terminal in Houston I ate the thing. The older woman behind me in line asked where I got it. She smiled when I said "my sister gave it to me." My day was brightened by the shared experience. It works so much better when we get along. I had a similar experience with someone from another ethnic group a bit later. Neither of them looked much like me. Last summer I had some "World Famous Ribs" at Murphy's Law, the biker bar in downtown Sunnyvale. I figured there was some hyperbole in the hand lettered sign, but just to be sure I asked my email buddy in New Zealand if she had heard of them. She didn't even know what a Biker Bar was, never mind the rest of it. Since finding that out, I've been calling my sister's granola world famous. If you're not reading this in Marion County, Georgia or Mountain View, California that's even truer now then it was before. I've been talking about food for the past two paragraphs because we all have to eat. You and I are not in a situation where the food on the table is a shared experience. If you hear an old Grateful Dead song with lyrics like "ripples in still water" know that it was written by people like me trying to find common ground in art that was more basic than food. My advice to you is let there be songs to fill the air. I know not your path, but I hope it is okay. From where I'm sitting it's okay to use less energy than Tian Harter, but you have to work to do it. I don't use that much. Tian alexcathy at aol.com wrote: > > /EDITOR'S NOTE: My op-ed below is the first of a series to be published > in Green Focus on applying Green values for people of color. Breaking > the Democrat-Republicans monopoly on American politics requires the > destruction of big city Democratic Party Machines to which many of us > have emotional attachments. It's important for Greens to free our minds > from the tyranny of Democrat-Republican old politics about race and > ethnicity. Thus, we need to consider if we need a "People of Color > Caucus" at all. > / > > / / > /I am posting this essay on www.greencommons.com > . Many will disagree vigorously. > Good. Accept this challenge: Post a comment with your thoughts; write an > 800-word op-eds for Green Focus and send it to don.boring at gmail.com > . / > / > / > /Alex Walker // > /Los Angeles Greens// > * > * > *A Debate: Do Greens Need a 'People of Color' Caucus? > > *No - Let's Be The Change We Want to See* > *by Alex Walker ** > / > / > /"Be the change that you want to see in the world." -- Mohandas Gandhi/ > > Read More at: http://www.greencommons.org/node/870 > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > More new features than ever. Check out the new AOL Mail > ! > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > sosfbay-discuss mailing list > sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org > http://lists.cagreens.org/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss -- Tian http://tian.greens.org "I may be a post-Nietzschean anarcho-Taoist beer mystic, but I ain't no stinking communist." - Gary Singh in the Nov 28th Silicon Valley Metro. From tnharter at aceweb.com Fri Nov 30 13:34:49 2007 From: tnharter at aceweb.com (Tian Harter) Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2007 13:34:49 -0800 Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] holiday peace fair tabling In-Reply-To: <474F2F9A.5090400@sbcglobal.net> References: <474F2F9A.5090400@sbcglobal.net> Message-ID: <475081F9.6090808@aceweb.com> I'll be there, but not at 11 AM. I can help with cleanup at the end to. Jim Doyle wrote: > Who is going to table at the Holiday Peace Fair? > And for which time periods? > The tabling portion is from 11 am until 4 pm. > > PARKING is free but please encourage your members to use the garage > and parking lot across Leigh Avenue at SJ City College. > Parking permits are available. You can even print your own - see next > message. > > AT LEAST ONE DESSERT AND ONE PRIZE for the drawings are REQUIRED FROM > EACH PARTICIPATING GROUP. > > Who is preparing a dessert? > Who is donating a prize for the raffle that will be held? > > I have a supply of the parts one needs to make buttons, but not the art > work. > > Also, the organizers of the Holiday Peace Fair are asking for help: > > THE TIME TO SET UP YOUR GROUP'S TABLE IS 9-11 AM. > WE CAN STILL USE HELP BETWEEN 8-9 AM WITH SETTING UP THE ROOMS IN > GENERAL AND FROM 4-6 PM WITH GENERAL CLEAN-UP > (after your own table is cleared ASAP after 4 PM). > > Please let Lois or Joan know if you have more volunteers from your group > who > can help at the beginning or end of the day - or with staffing > the Entrance Table or Desserts Table any part of the time during the > open hours > of the fair (11-4, of course). > Lois = 408-294-0981; Joan G = 408-396-8039 > > > _______________________________________________ > sosfbay-discuss mailing list > sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org > http://lists.cagreens.org/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss > -- Tian http://tian.greens.org "I may be a post-Nietzschean anarcho-Taoist beer mystic, but I ain't no stinking communist." - Gary Singh in the Nov 28th Silicon Valley Metro.