Saturday, August 30, 2008
1) We are right-wing!
Did you know that? Maybe you didn't. I didn't know that either.
I'm a liberal. Not a 'progressive' -- a term that's historically been used to bash liberals and historically been used by people not of the Democratic Party but of the Communist Party.
As they say on Kids In The Hall, "It's a fact!" (It really is as anyone with any sense of history would know. Especially during McCarthyism, the term "progressive" became a cloak. Right or wrong, it became a cloak. "Progressives" sneer at liberals and consider them "reformers" and not "revolutionaries." The "revolution" is needed to take down the system, clearing the way for Socialism which will then bring about Communism. That's the theory.)
This community has all kinds. Outside of Judge (my friend of many years), I'm not aware of any right-wingers.
We have Greens, we have Democrats, we have Socialist, we have Communists (no closet cases), we have people not interested in party politics.
We don't have any right-wingers.
In my own life, I know and am friends with people of all walks of life. I make no apologies for that and my only "purity" test is are they an honest friend.
3) We are a site for the left. That was noted when this site started. That has always been the case. I will match the links we've offered up against any other site and argue we'll come out ahead.
We started as a resource/review. One of our goals was highlighting different voices (from the left) so that if another attack like 9-11 took place, people would know there were other places to go and the efforts to reduce Americans to scared little children would not so easily take hold.
We are, and have been from the start of this site, in oposition to the Afghanistan War.
It is not a "noble" war, even when contrasted with the Iraq War.
It's easy to understand why it is (still) seen that way because it was the first illegal war sold on the back of 9-11. Even The Nation magazine supported it in real time.
Fear and anger were channeled by the White House (and others, including the media) to unleash war on the Afghanistan people and there has been no improvement in their lives despite that illegal war going on and on and on. (With Barack and John McCain arguing it should continue.)
Barbara Lee was one of the few to stand up to the fear when it was first being sold. Had others stood up, it might have made a difference. As it stands, that war is still wrongly seen by many. John Kerry tried to use it to campaign with, the left (with few exceptions) refused to call him out on it. Barack uses it now and you hear the same silence.
4) Personally, I have voted Democratic in all presidential elections previously and that was noted here many times. In the 2004 primary, I supported John Kerry. By past statements up here, it is clear that I did not support Bill Clinton in the 1992 primary, Al Gore in the 2000 primary, Walter Mondale in the 1984 primary, Michael Dukakis in the 1988 primary, go down the list. That's clear because it has been noted over and over by me that, until 2004, I never supported the primary winner. (Bill Clinton wasn't contested in the 1996 election.) Despite having supported Jerry Brown, Jesse Jackson and countless others, I always voted for the Democratic nominee in the general election.
(And that's not just recent. I did not support McGovern in 1972. I did not support Jimmy Carter in 1976 or in 1980. Ted Kennedy was who I supported in 1980. Other candidates are no longer in the news, but for those wanting to smear me, let me make it easy for them.)
I won't be voting for the Democratic Party nominee in 2008.
I am far from the only one who won't be.
3) We're trying to defeat ____ [fill in cause].
Fill in whatever paranoia is up at Gutter Trash's site.
We're trying to be honest at a time when honesty is in short supply.
We're trying to be honest when others are trying to be alarmist.
The left rightly criticized Bully Boy's use of fear to drive support. But some on the left did the same thing in 2004 and some
But isn't that what Gutter Trash runs with when someone suggests it at her site. Doesn't she run with it and smear us as right-wingers?
I'm also apparently a crazy for supporting Ralph Nader, right?
4) So I'm right-wing and I'm a Nader supporter?
No one knows who I'm voting for.
With New Hampshire, I was on the road to becoming a Hillary supporter.
The race was then John Edwards, Barack and Hillary. I would never support John Edwards. John Edwards repeatedly lied to the press about John Kerry. I know for a fact what went down and I'm so surprised that now that "Honest John" Edwards has been blown out of the water, no one's gone back to that issue because Kerry said Edwards was wrong (Kerry was too kind to say Edwards was lying) and Edwards maintained he was telling the truth. Edwards was lying. We were in Boston the night of the election for the intended victory party and Edwards has always insisted that he wanted the votes to be counted. That's a lie too.
I would have never have supported Edwards in the primary unless he was the only one running.
I was focused on Iraq while there were multiple candidates.
The New Hampshire primary coincided with our days speaking there. One of the college professors I knew from her work on a Clinton campaign (general election, I was for Brown in the primary) in the nineties. She asked me if I would be a Hillary speaker for a forum she had on campus. It was a last minute request. I said no and explained I hadn't decided who I was supporting (and I hadn't). She explained the Hillary speaker had to cancel at the last minute. She pointed out that I knew Hillary and she really needed someone to speak. I said fine but I'm going to say I haven't decided who to support. I spoke and noted that and then went into why Hillary would make a strong president.
She had two more forums booked and I did two more. I wasn't attacking anyone, I wasn't comparing and contrasting. I was dealing with Hillary's long record. And she has a very long record of accomplishments. The students were excited because -- and this was the first I was aware of that -- it had been accepted that Hillary was just Bill's wife, just First Lady.
I did campaign for Bill Clinton in 1992. So maybe that's why I knew about Hillary's accomplishments long before he won that election in 1992.
But I still wasn't supporting Hillary (or opposing her). Somewhere during that the joke caucus in Iowa took place (we've called out caucuses here and at Third since both sites began, the caucuses are a joke, filled with voter fraud and intimidation, that's not a new development in 2008) and a crowded field reduced to three or four. (I'm not sure when Gravel dropped out.) I couldn't vote for Barack because he is a War Hawk who was lying publicly that he was for ending the illegal war when Elaine and I spoke with him and he revealed that it was too late because US service members were in Iraq. That was while he was running for the US Senate. Being hyped as the "anti-war" candidate. A liar.
And John Edwards' unprincipled attack on John Kerry had taken him off a list of possibilities. But I voted in our primary (California) and I never said who I voted for. I never made it an issue. Ava and I tackled the sexism in the campaigns and media at Third. Third (with me included) made the following endorsements: Hillary for the Democratic Party, Ralph Nader's independent campaign and Cynthia McKinney for the Green Party. I was perfectly comfortable with those endorsements because I wasn't saying, "I am endorsing ___." We were saying we thought (take it for what it's worth or not) that those were the strongest ones and the ones who would do the best job.
People act astounded by Barack's inability to connect with any more voters. By his inability to get a huge lead in the polls.
I'm not shocked. We dealt with that when John Edwards was still in the race. (And you won't find me calling Edwards a "liar" then. I didn't do it. I didn't try to tilt the field in his favor or against his favor despite the fact that I didn't care for him and wouldn't support him. We defended him when Michael Gordon distorted his words in the New York Times.)
But at that point, the problems the media now sees for Barack were already noticeable.
It was no secret that many groups (including women, LGBT, Asian-Americans, and Latinos and white working class voters) were not being reached by the campaign. I made that very clear to friends on Obama's campaign as far back as January.
This idea that suddenly last Thursday he would connect with the voters was always suspect. He didn't connect. Not even swiping from American President and Hillary.
His problems are very real.
And it is not about racism. But screaming "racist" falsely over and over has only intensified the problems.
Over a year before Geraldine Ferraro made her 'controversial' remarks, Peter Hart had written more or less the same thing for FAIR's Extra! He was talking about the slide Barack was being given due to his perceived race (he is bi-racial). Barack himself had made similar comments. People tore into Geraldine (who I don't like and have never liked but have no problem defending from false attacks) and there is a backlash.
When you falsely scream "racism" over and over, you do two things. One, you make it very difficult for real victims of racism to have their valid objections recognized because (two) you have treated everything in the world like racism and have turned the charge into The Little Boy Who Cried Wolf.
With the exceptions of Jesse Jackson Jr., James Clyburn and Melissa Harris-Lacewell, publicly those charges were not being made by anyone with a name that was part of the campaign. (His various flacks of course made it regularly to the press, both on and off the record.) The drive for the charge of racism came from Panhandle Media, from White people. (Often from non-praciting Jews, make of that whatever you will.)
They better stop it because no one knows until the votes are counted who will win. And if Barack loses (yes, boys and girls, he could lose), you've just set the cause of a person of color winning the presidency (unless Barack loses to Cynthia McKinney or Ralph Nader) back for at least a decade. The most stunning person of color could emerge for the 2012 race or the 2016 race and they will be handicapped by this nonsense that "people won't vote for then! They didn't vote for Barack because he's Black!" (Again, he's bi-racial.)
There is no data that demonstrates people aren't voting for him due to his race. There is data that suggests his race has been a factor in the African-American support. (That took place after the race card was repeatedly played in South Carolina.) There is anecdotal evidence of some strong support for him due to race and of some minor opposition due to race. But there is nothing that warrants anyone claiming he's winning support or losing support from voters due to his perceived race. (Had he ran as bi-racial, that would be more of an issue, as his campaign admits privately. Running as bi-racial would have pissed off many old lions -- the same ones who launched their attacks on the bi- and multi-racial movement in the nineties.)
But it was Panhandle Media that led the charge on racism and continues it to this day.
How does CounterSpin bill itself? "FAIR's weekly look at the press!" That half-hour weekly show couldn't stop reaching to find racism (often where it didn't exist or where it wasn't surprising to find -- from the right-wing pundits) but how many times did it call out sexism in the primary coverage? In 2008, it called it out only once and took a CNN discussion on whether or not Hillary was a "bitch" to get that one sentence on CounterSpin. One sentence.
And they wonder why people stop listening to them?
We have been a left site and we remain one. Early on, I was happy to highlight anyone suggested in an e-mail. That stopped when a sexual predator was being highlighted. I did not know his history. A friend provided me with the video of his refusal to answer the questions asked on TV about his past arrests. That began our move away from highlighting just anyone.
We continue to highlight people on the left that I personally know and dislike. It's not an issue to me. It is an issue if they lie.
Due to the fact that a number of Closeted Communists (and a smaller number of closeted Socialists) in Panhandle Media injected themselves into the Democratic Party, and pretended they were Democrats, they no longer get highlighted. I know they lied and they know they lied. There's no reason to believe another word from their mouths.
The general election is for all. Party primaries are for members of that political party. There was no reason for those not in the Democratic Party to be pushing any Democratic candidate in the primary. There was no excuse for their posing as Democrats in order to do so. But had they said, "As a lifelong Closeted Communist, who never votes Democratic in the presidential election to begin with, I would like to endorse Barack Obama," their endorsements would have meant much less.
One Closeted Communist (whose long been with a political magazine as a contributor) has never been highlighted. That's due to his promotion of The Ego Of Us All and his slanders against Gloria Steinem. I'm not talking publicly, I'm talking about his pitches to the New York Times (staff as well as editorial board). It's why Gloria, a lifetime activsit, never received the credit she deserved for a lifetime of work from that paper and why The Ego Of Us All got credit for a rip-off book.
I do not like attacks on Gloria, I do not tolerate them. I don't tolerate them in my personal life (and never have) so I've not tolerated them in my online life.
I have never spoken or written an unkind word about Gloria and do not intend to start. That's an important point because grassroots feminists are rightly outraged by what was done to Hillary and Gloria will campaign for Barack this fall. Gloria campaigns for every Democratic presidential nominee. It is who she is. So if she says something that sets you off while doing that (or just that she's doing that), remember that is who she is and remember that when the sexism got into high gear, Gloria stood up and called it out. (And was tarred and feathered as a racist for daring to believe that ALL women mattered. As Ava and I noted repeatedly during that and after that, it was really important to scream "racist" at any name who didn't support Barack.) You were silenced ( such as Amy Goodman deciding she wasn't interested interested in interviewing Paul Krugman, Sidney Blumenthal, Joe Wilson, Larry Johnson or various others who were supporting Hillary) or you were attacked. Attacks on a man didn't take place to a large degree but they did happen (Johnson was probably the male most attacked. Blumenthal was smeared and there are others) but it was open season on women.
[Note. I planned a three-entry cycle. This was the second. The third is going over to Third. This wasn't the ending of this post but there's no way I can go further. The next four paragraphs set up the intended third entry that will now be a group piece written by and posted at Third.]
First, Jess' mother just told me C.I.'s kids are very upset about the e-mail C.I. responded to publicly. What has them upset is that the 'caring' person who e-mailed made no effort to note their mother's condition. C.I. doesn't care about anything like that, it's the last thing on her mind. But Jess' mother told me she thought C.I.'s kids would feel better if it was noted. So let me be very clear, while ____ tried to play like this is something just discovered (one would say ___ knew about it early in the week when ___ was posting at Gutter Trash and taking part in the trashing of C.I.), ___ tries to act sympathetic. The reality is that as C.I. notes, _____ the pain her children have been through is never mentioned or even alluded to. However, the point that also needs to be made is that C.I.'s condition is never noted or alluded to.
C.I. doesn't care. C.I.'s focus is on her kids. But it does matter to her kids that this ___ shows up at the public account trying to act 'concerned' and doesn't have the decency to ever acknowledge what got exposed by Gutter Trash.
If you hear someone's sick, you acknowledge it.
The kids are correct, it is not a small point.
Next, C.I. is editing another entry.
Jim was reading over C.I.'s shoulder.
The plan was three entries. "I'm a mother" (which is the response to the e-mail), "I'm a liberal" (which will post shortly) and "I'm a feminist."
The third one is the most powerful of the three and where C.I. was leading, weaving threads here and there, so that it all culminated with that powerful piece.
However, did I mention Jim was reading over C.I.'s shoulder?
Jim wants it for Third and C.I.'s agreed because it's pretty much complete. C.I. agrees because it's one less thing to write tonight for Third.
I disagree and take the position Elaine generally takes which is when we pull stuff from C.I. and bring it over to Third, Third gets a good article; however, as written by C.I., it was a powerful piece. That happens a great deal and Elaine's never been silent about that fact.
Something so powerful in first person gets watered down when others start adding to it.
I'm all for group writing. I think it's very productive and we hash out numerous things in the process and explore points that, if one person wrote it, wouldn't be explored.
But this is the best example of something that gets watered down in the process.
C.I.'s pulling all of it for Third and, since elements lead up to that in "I'm a liberal," C.I.'s pulling those out of the entry that goes up next.
For those who want to see if Elaine and I are right about this, I will pass C.I.'s original over to Hilda and she can run it Tuesday in Hilda's Mix. (I can't pass it on to El Spirito. If I do that, you'll read it before you read Third's version. Unlike us, Francisco, Maria and Miguel are done by Sunday morning early.)
Oh, I'm sorry.
E l S p i r i t o.
Did I say that slowly enough for the useless readers of Gutter Trash? Yeah, I heard they trashed me at her site. Unlike Gutter Trash, I actually hold a degree in journalism. If I'm posting here, I'm doing a "talking entry." C.I. invented them. Members love them. Sorry that it is so hard for you to follow but I'll assume your education stopped early.
And unlike Gutter Trash, if I decide to use that degree, I won't have to beg for work (and would never get the many turn downs Gutter Trash does). Write from your stye, Gutter Trash, I was raised with money and can go to work anywhere I want and, this'll really kill you, not even 25 yet and I already have enough money that I never need to work a day in my life if I don't want to.
Poor little Gutter Trash, still competing with college graduates for entry level jobs, all these years later.
We'll be off the road while C.I. gets treatments. We do have some speaking events locally (mainly women's groups and a few student groups). C.I. says if we don't, her attention will just be on the treatments so we've got some planned.
I will be popping in from time to time. As always, when I write, it will say "Ava here." In 2005, C.I. did it all by herself while going through this. There's no question that she can do it again. However, there's also no reason that she should have to.
So if you see me, don't assume, "Something's wrong!"
It will most likely mean that C.I.'s just sick of it. Gutter Trash -- check the other sites and note how the posting has been there -- has left a very sour taste in our mouths.
Because we will not be right out the door in the morning. C.I. may drop back on the time for morning entries she does and they may go up later than they usually would. It may not happen. If it does, know that's why and don't think something's wrong.
Unless Gutter Trash violates the law again for another 'exclusive,' if there's anything to learn, it will be learned in a community newsletter.
I don't feel like putting this in but C.I. asked me to. Should something go very wrong, I am the person who takes over (that was announced in April of 2005 here) and keeps the site going until after election day. Nothing's going to go wrong and we should all think positive.
But in the summer of 2005, as announced at Third, the decision was made that the end date would be after the 2008 election. That is not saying sites will all go dark then. Some didn't think they would at that time (and we've had new community sites since then). For The Common Ills, C.I.'s statement at that time was "I want my life back" and that the community newsletters would continue. Since then, many of you written about it going on beyond that. That's a decision for C.I. to make. Obviously, that's the last thing on her mind right now and no one's asked that in an e-mail but if anyone's wondering, C.I. wanted it noted here.
This is parents' weekend with most parents here. (My mother is but my father couldn't get away due to the political race -- what appeared to be an easy weekend changed on Friday when John McCain announced his running mate.) They leave tomorrow afternoon. The plan was to have a fun Saturday, work all night, see them off at the airport on Sunday and then C.I. was going to break the news to her kids while I explained to Ty, Dona and Jim what was going on. (I told Jess weeks ago. He's the only one I told and I had permission to tell him if I needed to tell someone.) Our fun weekend (always questionable on fun for C.I., Jess and myself since we knew what would take place Sunday evening) went down the tubes thanks to Gutter Trash.
What C.I. did not want to happen has happened with all this, "Are you sure you can do the edition? If you've got the energy, you and Ava can do the TV piece and that's all you have to worry about." C.I. is working on the entire edition. (Though we have all taken up Dona and Jim on their kind offer to type up everything -- except the piece Mike, Elaine, Rebecca, Kat, Betty, Cedric, Ruth, Marcia and Wally work on. Mike types that.) Seeing C.I. bristle on that (as anyone should have expected), I will take a second to say to members, "I'm thinking about you"? That's more than fine. But, "Are you okay?" -- not really working. Think of how many of you write and how many times C.I.'s reading, "Are you okay?" -- over and over. I do understand the concern but I saw C.I. go through the member accounts tonight and saw the toll it took to read that over and over. If you need to express something like that, do it to us at firstname.lastname@example.org. Jim, Dona, Ty, Jess and I are all here, will all be here, and if you're nervous, e-mail us and we'll be able to update you.
(Needless to say, that applies only to community members.)
I mentioned John McCain before. C.I.'s on record (since 2004 here) that she will not vote for John McCain. I am on record with that as well. Neither C.I. nor I have said who we will vote for but we have stated publicly we are noting for Barack or John McCain.
I am a Latina. I know many in my own community (especially men) who are voting for John McCain. This is not a bash John McCain website. Third has Democratic readers who are considering or are going to vote for McCain. Third has a few Republican/Libertarian readers who are as well. Those people are not left out. And C.I. and I go out of our way to make sure that they do not feel that we think, "You're stupid for voting for John McCain." Maybe I should throw in that I don't know Cindy McCain. I've never said I do. But Elaine and C.I. do and have noted that they know her, they like her and they have tremendous respect for her work. In case anyone's wondering, I don't know Cindy McCain.
But what I do know is that Sarah Palin is a woman and I do know that we're not going to allow the attacks to take place. Kat already wrote about what happened on the taxi ride and how this sexist pig Barack supporter started smearing Palin and Hillary and admitting that he thought no woman should hold office. We will not be taking part in that crap.
We're not voting for McCain and the decision to put Palin on the ticket didn't change that. We do not agree with her on abortion rights or LGBT rights. We can note that and we can use any tone we want -- serious, humorous, you name it.
But we will not attack her for being a woman. We will not belittle her for being a woman.
And we will call it out when see anyone doing that.
She is not our candidate. That doesn't matter.
Attacks on her like the ones we saw on Hillary will be called out in the same manner. Being a woman is not a 'danger' or a 'liability.' Those who engage in sexism to go after Palin are using the same device they used on Hillary and it was device that harmed all women.
(Yes, Betsy Reed, Katrina vanden Heuvel, Laura Flanders, Amy Goodman -- it's amazing how many times she chuckled at Hillary on air and never got called out, isn't it? -- participated. Women can be sexist pigs as well although the proper term for it when it's a woman is "Queen Bee.")
Due to the crap that Gutter Trash started, and started in public and launched for an entire week (though the person e-mailing this morning forgets those BASIC FACTS) being only discovered late Thursday, we still haven't seen Barack's speech. We've been dealing with other things. We're going to try to watch it and other coverage before writing our piece but we may not. (If we don't, we already know how to handle that absence.)
Jim, Dona and Jess have waited Thursday, Friday and today to respond to the attacks launched on C.I. and on them by Gutter Trash. It is most likely that we will be addressing it there. If so, it will be harder hitting than anything here because Jim, Dona and Jess are incredibly pissed (for themselves, for C.I., for C.I.'s family). Betty, Rebecca and Wally (maybe Cedric too) are currently on the phone with each other trying to figure out an outline for the edition and Dona's already ruled, "Short pieces whenever possible."
If it gets very late and it's not anywhere done, we're going to sleep and publishing Sunday evening. Again, it's 'parents weekend' at C.I.'s house. (Partly because C.I. had already been talking about that and also because, once the news came, it made it easier to explain to her kids on why she was inviting them for the entire weekend. They fly in and out regularly. But they have their own homes and jobs and generally stay for more than two days only on their vacations or on Christmas and Thanksgiving.)
I want to strongly recommend Elaine's amazing post. As I warned her, she better get it up before Jim hears about it. He read it and his first comment was, "If I'd known she was working on that, I would have tried to make it a group effort." No surprise. It's Elaine's and it's wonderful. (Elaine says she didn't use spell check, she didn't read over it. No s**t. How could she? She's been dealing with Gutter Trash's b.s. since Thursday night. No one needed the damage Gutter Trash caused. Something the e-mailer this morning forgot to mention in the e-mail of 'higher purposes.')
Wally and Cedric will post at some point Sunday morning or Sunday.
Everyone else has already done their weekend post at their own sites.
I think that covers everything.
(And I'm sure it's all confused Gutter Trash and her knuckle dragging, mouth breathing readership of two -- plus sock puppets!)
The e-mail address for this site is email@example.com. Members use the private e-mail addresses. The public e-mail is not for penpals. That's probably what so upset Gutter Trash the most. When my boyfriend explained to her that we didn't have the time or desire to be her penpal. Poor lonely girl. Jess is good, but I never knew him to inspire such a psychopathic desire on the part of someone to have him. Paws off, Gutter Trash, I saw him first.
Sorry, one more point. The Palin issue. I raised it because a writer we do not highlight has yet again e-mailed her crap to the public account tonight. We refused to highlight all the garbage she wrote (sexist attacks) on Hillary. We refused to highlight it here and Jess e-mailed her back to tell her to stop sending it. She got the message. Now she's back with an attack on Sarah Palin and how Sarah can't be qualified. Red Annie, Dan Quayle was vice-president. The bar's not all that high. More importantly, we don't need you sending all of your articles to us. We don't need it, we don't have the time for it. You will never be highlighted here.
There's a Congressional candidate who still does not get that point. (Democrat.) When we complain about the public account, we complain for a reason. Everyone has a press release, everyone has an article, everyone has a book tour, TV appearance, campaign stop, fund drive, you name it. People who've been highlighted in the past know they can send in and continue to be highlighted. Those who have been repeatedly ignored really need to get a clue. (Such as a failed candidate who has e-mailed every week -- sometimes twice a week -- for over eight months.) In terms of the Green Party, anyone who e-mails a press release on the Green Party gets highlighted. Congressional, Cynthia, local race, it doesn't matter. In 2004, the wounds were still deep (from the never ending attacks launched in 2000) for Greens who became members of this community. C.I. knew that and made the decision that their party would get highlighted. That's candidates. During the primaries a number of Green voices thought they could join in the attacks on Hillary. They're crap never went up here or at Third (and I'm thinking of three people in particular that e-mailed here and to Third always with the same stuff that we never highlighted).
For visitors who are NYT fanatics and will e-mail at some point asking, "Why didn't you highlight ___ in NYT!" C.I. hasn't read it. No one has. It's still in the blue bag it's delivered in. If it's a strong article it will be noted Sunday night. (Assuming there's an article in it on Iraq. That's not always the case.)
I mentioned a number of people, I thought of all:
The Third Estate Sunday Review's Jim, Dona, Ty and Jess
Rebecca of Sex and Politics and Screeds and Attitude,
Betty of Thomas Friedman Is a Great Man,
C.I. of The Common Ills and The Third Estate Sunday Review,
Kat of Kat's Korner (of The Common Ills),
Cedric of Cedric's Big Mix,
Mike of Mikey Likes It!,
Elaine of Like Maria Said Paz,
Ruth of Ruth's Report,
Wally of The Daily Jot,
Trina of Trina's Kitchen
and Marcia SICKOFITRDLZ.
For someone who claims "respect" for me or this site or whatever, my attorney advises me that was not evident in statements he made elsewhere. (I've never read Gutter Trash's week long bashing of me.) He is combing over everything.
If the treatments do not work, I will most likely be suing. (And my attorney has already made copies of everything up at Gutter Trash.)
That will be my last act to ensure that the pain and suffering Gutter Trash has caused my children does not go unpunished.
I'd love to write you but I can't write you. You left comments at that site. I'm told those comments were not nice about me.
For anyone late to the party . . .
Gutter Trash pulled stunts with Mike and Rebecca over a year ago.
The way she works is she e-mails with a compliment, gets a reply from you and then begins some screaming match with you over what she once complimented you on but really wanted to disagree with you over in the first place.
When that took place and I learned of it, Gutter Trash was not linked by this site again. She has not been linked to since 2007 (no loss) and her name has not appeared here since then. And that is: Her name has not appeared since then to this day.
The e-mail this morning makes a laughable claim. The idea that I've taken something public is a laugh.
Gutter Trash e-mailed this site earlier in the week. (Monday, I believe.) Jess saw the e-mail and knew how Gutter Trash worked. He also wasn't in the mood for lectures from her let alone the abuse she tossed out at Rebecca. He also knew about my cancer and wasn't in the mood for Gutter Trash's uninformed bickering/dickering over details for that reason.
But she was writing on behalf of the "organization." So Jess e-mailed her back and told her if she had an event or news to pass on, e-mail, otherwise leave us alone.
She didn't do that. She immediately posted Jess' e-mail. No one knew that on this end.
All that was known on our end was that she then clogged up the public account (24980 unread e-mails, 556 in Spam which may or may not be spam are the current total for all e-mails currently in the inbox of the public account and we'll have to go through the spam folder as well -- we do not have time for anyone clogging up that account) in screeching at Jess repeatedly the next day. Then she wrote a 'nice' e-mail.
Dona was on public account duty that day. She didn't have time for it. But she saw Gutter Trash's nonsense and repeated Jess on why to e-mail the public account (news or events) and went on to try to reach the nut job by explaining what happens on our end and how we do not have time for the crap Gutter Trash already pulled with Mike and Rebecca.
Dona sends that e-mail and it gets posted as well (uknown to any of us). And Dona's insulted all over the blog for being "wordy." Dona went through everything to try to tell a nut job when an e-mail from her organization was needed and when it wasn't.
Gutter Trash still isn't done. We're now on Wednesday, I believe. She's still e-mailing the public account and clogging it up with all her bulls**t.
Jim's had it with her by now. He's the one who pulled public e-mail account duty. (And please note, the bulk who read the e-mails here were on the private accounts because with Hillary not getting the nomination, not getting a roll call, we knew ahead of time that needed to be the focus.) He e-mails her back and, being Jim, he writes the shortest e-mail possible.
So she posts that as well. (She posted Dona's if I didn't mention that.)
Now throughout her posts and her comments she, and her goon squad, are trashing me.
I've never written the woman before in my life. I've never spoken to her.
I didn't publicly call out the stunt she pulled on Rebecca or on Mike.
So let's not pretend she's the innocent party.
Read her trashy comments about me and remember I've never said a negative word about her in public. Not even like I am now where I just call her "Gutter Trash" and don't use her real name.
My oldest son gets drug into it because someone outside of her freak squad finally sees what's she's doing and sees Dona's sentence about my spending a week on medical exams. He calls my son to ask if the cancer is back? My children did not know (by my choice -- it is my life) about the exams. They were going to find out what was what this weekend, face to face. That didn't happen. Instead, because of Gutter Trash, I had to confirm to my oldest that the cancer was back and then call my two youngest and break the news over the phone to them before they heard something the way my eldest had.
That was not fun.
That was not delightful.
It was very painful for them.
I do not take their suffering lightly.
Gutter Trash found that so amusing (and this really pisses my daughter off) that she then went on to write about that and continue her insults and add little jabs like (I've been told) "wow!"
I think any sane person would take offense at Gutter Trash writing about my cancer and including little jabs.
That's not all that's happened.
As legally advised to do so, I contacted the organization Thursday to see if Gutter Trash was indeed their representative and, if so, asked them to address the situation.
I received a reply stating she was (from the head of the organization) and nothing was done except to pass on my 'concerns.'
Under legal advice, I wrote again on Friday to say the e-mails needed to be taken down from Gutter Trash's site.
I received no reply.
But, pay attention, my e-mails to the "organization" are now dicussed by Gutter Trash at her site. Her own personal site.
If you don't see the problem with that, you're crazy.
If the Red Cross has some staffer who is a loon and decides to post e-mails she receives while presenting herself as a Red Cross staffer and you complain to them what would happen? I know what would happen because I made a point to call everyone I could on Friday to ask. The person would be told to pull them down from her private site and would be told she was no longer part of the organization. Why? It's a public relations disaster.
Now that's the Red Cross. They help people in need and people who don't need to hide their need before they get to the Red Cross.
This 'organization' allegedly helps people in need including people circumventing US law.
How much faith will there be in the 'organization' from people who might consider asking for help? Not a whole hell of lot if it's known that Gutter Trash is posting private e-mails (to her as their representive) online or talking about e-mails coming into the organization -- talking about them at her private site.
The e-mail sent here this morning has "public debate" in the title.
Until Thursday night, I hadn't said anything about this because I didn't know anything about this until late Thursday afternoon.
If you're concerned that a "public debate" on this issue might hurt the "organization," you're a little late to the party, aren't you?
Gutter Trash started it and she started it on Monday.
You should know that because you posted to her site.
You never posted a word at her site about concerns over a "public debate" according to my attorney.
With me, this morning, you're concerned?
I didn't initiate this.
I didn't start it.
I was drug into it and it was going on for days before any of us on our end knew about it.
If you were concerned about the "public debate" nature, you could have stopped everything that had happened at any point before Thursday afternoon. You could have sent the e-mail you sent to me today to Gutter Trash. You could have made the case you attempt in your e-mail about larger purposes.
It's too late for that now. And you certainly have no right to show up in the inbox making that request of me after all my children been put through.
That is what I've focused on, my children.
And I find it really offensive that in your e-mail calling for a truce*, you don't even acknowledge them.
[*I don't know what the e-mails calling for. It's a 'Can't we all get along' type vibe.]
You want it to end?
It hasn't even started yet.
Jim, Dona and Jess have not had the chance to publicly reply. Third Estate Sunday Review posts on Sunday, hence the title. Truest statement from last week (still up at the top right now) might be of interest to you.
Jim, Dona and Jess held off because they were hoping the e-mails would be taken down.
They never should have gone up. And why don't you ask Gutter Trash why they went up?
I'm told her defense is Jess said mean things to her so she felt she could violate the law and post them.
Would she like to then explain why she posted Mike's e-mail from over a year ago? Posted it without his permission. (Click here for Mike's comments on that.) It's funny that you never pointed that out to Gutter Trash -- nor did anyone commenting at her site. That's when Gutter Trash exposed herself yet again as a liar but you're all so busy lapping up her lies that you didn't bother to notice that.
All it would have taken was one of you to say, "Hey, Gutter Trash. You stated you weren't sure about posting Jess' e-mail but then you felt you had the right to because you thought he was mean. And yet, now you've posted an e-mail by this guy Mike and his e-mail isn't mean at all, even you don't think so. Did you get Mike's permission?"
You should be afraid of a public debate because my focus has been on my children and everyone on our end, community wide, has been in a holding position. My children's attitude is now known: Nail Gutter Trash to the wall. In other words, no one has to hold back.
I woke up Thursday morning and did what I usually do. By the afternoon, these days of abuse that had taken place online were dumped in my lap. Except for the plane ride back today, I haven't slept a wink since. I was up all night Thursday, I was up all night Friday. I didn't sleep during the day. I didn't grab a nap.
You say you're concerned about the 'public nature.'
That's something to address with Gutter Trash.
And it's something you should have addressed with her long ago.
Had you done that, you would have had no reason to e-mail me now. She trashed me for how many days before you got 'concerned'? Oh, that's right, you only got concerned when it turned out I wouldn't just be silent and let her s**t all over my kids' lives.
Now I'm goig to be upset at what was done to Dona, Jess and Jim at some point. I love them. But they aren't my kids. I'm not even sure what I feel on my own about what was done so I haven't had time to think about what Dona, Jess, Jim or Mike are going through. My kids have been my first priority and focus.
My kids aren't mentioned once in your e-mail so it is very easy (before we take into account whatever you posted about me at Gutter Trash's site) for me not to be at all concerned about what interests you.
My kids didn't do a damn thing to anyone and they're the ones who suffered.
Before you next try to offer advice, here's some for you: What she did hurt my children very deeply. I do not allow that. I do not forget that. Any request to me for anything starts off badly when it refuses to acknowledge their suffering.
I think your e-mail is suspect and will not reply to it privately.
Why should I?
So she can post it too?
It's cute the way your second paragraph begins. Read that to yourself. Read it to yourself and grasp that I know you posted comments to her site before I ever found out what she was doing. So don't try to pull an 'I just discovered' with me.
It's not only dishonest, it lies about your own part in all of this.
You knew what was going on. If you wanted to stop it, you could have done so a long time ago. If you'd acted like the adult you seem to be in your e-mail you sent at 8:57 a.m. this morning, none of this would have happened and my children wouldn't be hurt.
So, excuse me, but yeah, you owe my kids an apology. At the very least when you decide to e-mail the public account, you need to include "I'm sorry about your kids." This implication that you just discovered what was going on makes your entire e-mail suspect.
It looks like you're trying to do damage control. For Gutter Trash, for yourself, for the 'organization,' I don't know.
And I don't really care because, again, any points you make about the value of the 'organization' and how it might be hurt by all of this are points you should have made to Gutter Trash when she launched her week long attack. Day after day. You said nothing.
Excuse me, I'm told you said a few things. I understand you left comments.
You didn't call her out. You didn't tell her, "Hey, this could hurt the 'organization,' stop it." You took part in the trashing, you backed her up.
And now you want to show up, days later, asking me to please think about the 'organization'?
She was told to take down those e-mails.
You might want to look at those e-mails really closely because their being up hurts war resisters. You might want to try reading them from that view and not from the view of "Ha ha lets attack Dona, Jim, Jess and C.I." If you read from that perspective, forget my health information, you'll see they need to come down.
I'll be kind and not clarify that in public at this point.
"Solidarity"? My solidarity is with my children.
That's a concept your own parents understand but there's nothing in your e-mail that indicates you grasp that. So setting aside the suspect nature of your e-mail (due to your having taken part in a public trashing of me, actively posted there and refused to call for her to do whatever you're calling for me to do now), the fact that you refuse to either grasp or acknowledge that basic fact (one widely noted here already) only makes me doubt your sincerity. I wish that wasn't the case but that's how it is.
The e-mail for this site is firstname.lastname@example.org. And the only people mentioned by name in this entry were:
Third Estate Sunday Review's Jim, Dona and Jess
Sex and Politics and Screeds and Attitude's Rebecca
and Mikey Likes It!'s Mike
Obama, Carter, Israel
Posted by The Nader Team on Saturday, August 30, 2008 at 11:13:00 AM
Obama is such a man of principle.
Take Israel/Palestine as an example.
Tradition has it that former presidents get a speaking slot at the national conventions.
Not at Obama's convention.
Not in Denver.
President Jimmy Carter was scheduled to speak at the DNC in Denver.
And then, at the last minute, his speech was cancelled.
Because Carter has spoken out about the plight of the Palestinian people?
Because Carter has written a book with the descriptive title: Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid?
Because Obama didn't want to offend the militarist American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC)?
Apparently yes, according to this article from the Jewish Daily Forward.
Denying Carter a speaking slot at the DNC "shows the party gets it and Barack Obama's campaign gets it," according to one Democratic party activist.
Well, we get it too.
While Obama and McCain take the hardline AIPAC militarist line.
Nader/Gonzalez will stand with the millions of Americans, Israelis and Palestinians who want peace, with justice for all.
Stand with us now.
Stand with a candidacy that will be on 45 ballots, that is bumping up against ten percent in key swing state polls, and that will push hard over the next two months to make it a viable three way race.
Help us reach our goal of $100,000 by September 4th.
We're about a third of the way home.
But we need to push hard this Labor Day weekend to make it.
Give whatever you can -- $10, $20, $50, $100 -- for the peace candidacy.
And remember, if you give $100 or more now, we'll send you three DVDs -- the Denver rally, the Minneapolis rally, and a special debate DVD. (Three DVD offer ends September 4 at 11:59 p.m.)
Onward to November
The Nader Team
Eddie noted the above. I'm doing a series of short entries. Partly to get the videos off the main page so members on dial-up don't have problems with the page loading.
The e-mail address for this site is email@example.com.
Friday, August 29, 2008
Friday, August 29, 2008. Chaos and violence continue, the US military announces another death, John McCain declares a running mate, Cynthia McKinney campaigns this weekend in Michigan, and more.
Starting with the US presidential race. Independent presidential candidate Ralph Nader held a Super Rally in Denver Wednesday and took the stage to the tune of "This Land Is Your Land." Below are some of his opening remarks and you can see the video here:
Ralph Nader: . . . one of the best songs of social justice ever written. And for those of you concerned, all this [points to confetti] can be recycled. Well, where do we start? Let's start with something dealing with Colorado. The Democratic Party Convention selling sky-boxes. And guess who paid big money for those sky-boxes? Coors. One million dollars. How about this one: Excell, one million dollars. Qwest, six million dollars.
Well, you know, if they are really a part of working people, the way they used to say they were, fifty, sixty years ago, under Franklin Roosevelt and Harry Truman. They'd have hospitality suites, not for these fat cat corporate lobbyists who are tearing the heart and soul out of America, they'd have hospitality suites for workers, for farm workers, for nurses, for patients trying to get health care, for consumers being ripped off, for students who are being gouged by student loans. They'd have all kinds of hospitality suites and maybe they ought to go and see how some people in Denver live on the other side of the tracks, to see the poverty and the desperation and the lack of affordable housing and the lack of insurance when they get sick.
This party is sick. It's decaying. It's lost its soul. And its leaders can't ever get up on the stage like at the Pepsi Center -- the Pepsi Center, imagine after you say "The Pepsi Center" -- I'll bet you the tax payer built that center.
You never talk about the poor. That's a no-no in Democratic Party dictionary. You talk about the middle class, which they've helped shrink through NAFTA and WTO and all the way they've crushed opposition to corporate power. Corporate power has crushed so much of its opposition they've brought trade unions to their knees. They've made it almost impossible for industrial or commercial workers to even form a trade union because of the Taft-Hartley Law and other obstructive laws that no other western country puts before it workers.
The Democrats are dialing for the same dollars, the same corporate dollars the Republicans are dialing for. And they don't even bother covering it up. They're being winded and dined by the corrupters, the corporate predators, the corporations who have ripped off American consumers and workers that depleted their pensions who are outsourcing your jobs when you get out of college. Who are saying to you when you get out of college, "You got a skill but try getting a good paying job, try getting affordable housing, try getting affordable health insurance, try getting anything that your forebearers were able to get." You know what you're doing? I'm talking to young people in the audience, you're the first generation that's ever polled and said they aren't going to be as well off as their parents.
And the indicators are all coming down. More and more, millions of Americans, not making a living wage, not even close. Wal-Mart wages. K-Mart wages. Millions and millions of people who have to get sick or become sicker or even die because they can't afford health insurance. Just think of that.
This is the richest country in the world and the Institute of Medicine of the National Academy of Science, just to give you a fact, says 18,000 people a year in this country die because they can't afford health insurance. That's six 9-11s. Washington turned the country upside down after . . . 9-11. In a lot of bad ways, as we know. They don't turn the country upside down for 58,000 people who die every year from work-related diseases in the mines and foundries. They don't turn the company upside down for 65,000 Americans who die from asphyxiation or cancer due to air pollution. They don't turn the country upside down for the 100,000 people who die from medical negligence and malpractice in hospitals.
They don't turn the country upside down for any form of violence -- however preventable it is -- if it's source is corporate crime, corporate negligence, corporate greed and corporate power.
You know some people ask me this around the country, "Nader, what are you doing this for? What do you expect to achieve?" Well look at what we've achieved tonight. You have seen the young leaders of the future on this stage. You have seen not only veteran advocates like Cindy Sheehan, you've seen Ashley Sanders. You've seen Rosa Clemente. You have seen Nellie McKay. You've seen someone you're going to hear a lot more of in the next few months, you've seen Rev. J Wait and see. He's only 21-years old and he's breaking away from this notion that although many of us have always hoped there would be an African-American ascended to the presidency of the United States. He's saying something more than that. He's saying that's not enough, that may be an unprecedented career move into the White House but it's got to mean more than that, it's got to mean standing up to the corporate subjugation of the American people. It's got to mean pushing forward a war against poverty. It's got to mean coming from your background, something more than if it were just a White man or White woman in the White House, it's got to mean a peculiarly insistent sensitivity to the bottom 100 million Americans in this country who are at the bottom of the income scale: African-Americans, poor Whites, Latinos who do the most dangerous work, who do the most dangerous work for us, who do the most thankless work for us, who raise our children, take care of our children, be with our ailing parents, harvest our food, service us in all kinds of ways while they're underpaid and overcharged, while they're excluded. While they're disrespected. While their marginalized. And the only time they're held up before the country is when they ask them to go overseas and fight our criminal wars for us.
And we're stopping there to note Hispanic Business trumpets today that the US army has launched its "Leaders Among Us" tour in Illinois after having been through San Antonio, Dallas, Houston, NYC, Miami and Puerto Rico. Just reruns the press release as though it were a good thing. "Leaders Among Us" is a recruitment effort -- long on rah-rah, short on facts. Natalia Montemaor (The Ranger) told the sad, sad tale of the efforts in San Antonio and how everyone was just so mean to the ROTC. ROTC instructor Micheal Trujillo didn't conform to the rules and wants to whine about the unfairness of it all. Why can't he just he make his own dates for events? And what happened to the $300 he was promised by someone -- he doesn't say who -- that his field trip to the Bataan Death March cost. "Those funds were not promised through the office of student life," said its director Jorge Posadas. But it's a conspiracy by the well funded counter-recruitment forces who are bankrolled in the millions by the US government while the US army must depend on the donations of individuals and is not on the tax payer payroll -- oh, wait, it's the other way around. Someone explain it to the ROTC.
From the recruiting tricks to its outcome: violence in Iraq.
Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Baghdad bombing that claimed 1 life and left another person wounded.
Rueters notes police shot dead 1 person in Tal Afar that they suspected was a bomber.
Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 2 corpses discovered in Baghdad.
Today the US military announced: "A Coalition force Soldier died in a non-combat related incident Aug. 28 while conducting operations in Ninewa." The number of US service members killed in Iraq since the start of the illegal war stands at 4150 and, for the month, at 22.
It's Friday, very little violence gets reported. So who's going to end the illegal war? Not Barack Obama. But he's going to rip off the film The American President, as Delilah Boyd (A Scrivener's Lament) makes clear. Next up, Barack pretends he's Harrison Ford in Air Force One. Jeremy Lott (Guardian of London) observes of the speech in front of the mock Pagan Temple, "It was made-for-cable catnip. Obama looked at the last four years and yelled 'Enough!' He promised to end the war in Iraq but to do so 'reasonably.' . . . Obama prissily informed us that he's 'ready to have' that debate about all this. With all due respect, no he's not." Lott notes the usual MSNBC male orgy for Barack. Greg Mitchell (Editor & Publisher) reports that Olberman's yet again on attack, "So the liberal Olbermann was outraged that the AP's Babington had written, in his analysis of the speech, just off the wire, that Obama had tried nothing new and that his speech was lacking in specifics. He read the first few paragraphs on the air, lamented that it would be printed in hundred of newspapers on Friday, and concluded, 'It is analysis that strikes me as having borne no resemblance to the speech you and I just watched. None whatsoever. And for it to be distributed by the lone national news organization in terms of wire copy to newspapers around the country and web sites is a remarkable failure of that news organization. Charles Babington, find a new line of work." Babington (whom I know) is not light with the facts. His work can strike some as 'boring' because he does not play the drama game in his copy but sticks to the basics: Who, what, where when. Babington has a long resume filled with many accomplishments. Olbermann? He's got a mike to yell into as he stars in a low rated, basic cable yuck-fest. The telling part of Olbermann's comments can probably be found when he whines that Babington's reporting will be in "newspapers around the country and web sites".
John McCain's showed no more indication of ending the Iraq War than has Barack Obama. And no doubt Keith will be spewing his usual sexism tonight at the McCain campaign because today McCain announced his running mate: Alaskan Governor Sarah Palin. The Chicago Tribune's Mark Silva and the Los Angeles Times Michael Finnegan pretty much write the same exact story except Silva's obsessed with one beauty pageant and, in fairness, neither writer wrote a story -- the Obama campaign did. It's the Obama camp's narrative in both: She's inexperienced!
Seems Sarah Palin's crime is daring to go for the vice presidency with a little less than two years of being the governor of Alaska. But, Team Obama insists, you can declare the presidency with less than three years. Unlike Obama, Palin has an actual resume -- one that the press tries to trivialize -- which includes having been elected mayor and having been elected to city council twice. She and her husband Todd are also the parents of five children. Palin's not pro-abortion, she's not pro anything for the left. She also isn't someone who deserves to be derided as "beauty queen" or mocked for her gender which has already become all the rage online since the surprise announcement today. Klownhaus notes, "Sarah Palin is young and telegenic, and any attack on her lack of experience opens up the GOP counter-punch of attacking Uh-bama's lack of experience. When the He-Man Woman Haters Club launches misogynistic attacks on Palin (and they have already begun) it puts the GOP in the position of supporting and defending women." It's noted that her oldest son will deploy to Iraq shortly.
McCain gets a running mate who is young (diminishing the perceived negative of his age), female (snookering Obama for Hillary's hold-outs), executive (to his legislative) and most important, both by her deserved reputation and by the impact of the choice itself, re-establishes McCain's eroded credentials as a genuine maverick candidate. That appeals to the middle voters who will decide the election.
Plus, McCain's choice of Palin achieves what McCain himself can never do -- it took the words right out of Obama's mouth.
The acceptance speech that was so essential to Obama has been filed in the dusty back drawers of political history, as if the text had never been given voice. Media are addicted to the new and the now, and now the Labor Day Weekend will be all I Dream Of Sarah and no echoes of I Had A Dream. Magic.
Governor Palin is a tough executive who has demonstrated during her time in office that she is ready to be president. She has brought Republicans and Democrats together within her Administration and has a record of delivering on the change and reform that we need in Washington.
Governor Palin has challenged the influence of the big oil companies while fighting for the development of new energy resources. She leads a state that matters to every one of us -- Alaska has significant energy resources and she has been a leader in the fight to make America energy independent.
In Alaska, Governor Palin challenged a corrupt system and passed a landmark ethics reform bill. She has actually used her veto and cut budgetary spending. She put a stop to the "bridge to nowhere" that would have cost taxpayers $400 million dollars.
As the head of Alaska's National Guard and as the mother of a soldier herself, Governor Palin understands what it takes to lead our nation and she understands the importance of supporting our troops.
Governor Palin has the record of reform and bipartisanship that others can only speak of. Her experience in shaking up the status quo is exactly what is needed in Washington today.
A number of female 'leaders' have taken to trying to forcibly escort women onto the Barack bus (the one that they were previously thrown under) and they love to make statements, "Well, like Hillary asked, were you in it just for her?" It's time for those same 'leaders' to prove whether they are in it for women or just the Democratic Party? Sarah Palin becomes the second woman to run for the vice presidency on a ticket of one of the two-major parties. Are they going to demand that she be treated with the same respect/tone a male running would be? Or are they just going to stay silent? Put up or shut up. Feminist Wire posts two items today -- neither noting Palin's nomination. Do they needed to be reminded of their tax free status? Or do they need to lose it? That really needs to be explored since their tax status forbids them from endorsing but Feminist Wire likes to 'fact check' McCain's statements while just reposting Barack's without any 'checking.' Today a woman was named to be the running mate of the GOP presumed nominee and Feminist Wire couldn't find a thing worth noting?
Geraldine Ferraro, the first woman to run for the vice-presidency from one of the country's two largest political parties. could note Palin's significance. Kristine Johnson (CBS) quotes Ferraro declaring today, "I've spent a lot of time over the last 24 years saying, 'Gosh, I wish I weren't the only one.' So I welcome seeing a woman on the ticket. . . . The potential for a woman to be vice president will really make a difference for girls in this country." NOW on PBS notes that they interviewed Palin for a broadcast earlier this month "about her efforts to clean up corruption in her home state." But Feminist Wire? Nothing.
Which is indicative of the 'coverage' they've given Cynthia McKinney for her presidential run. McKinney is the Green Party nominee and Rosa Clemente is her running mate. Does Feminist Wire really think that one brief, on July 14th, cuts it as 'coverage' of McKinney's run? And then later they wonder why Ms. is falsely seen as "White, White, White" and when Ms. is seen that way, feminism gets seen that way. Feminist Wire exists on the Feminist Majority Foundation's tax-free status -- as does Ms. these days -- and they are forbidden from endorsing candidates. So it's about damn time they started offering coverage for all the candidates -- and there's never a need for a feminist publication to explain why they cover female candidates. (Though there is a need for Ms. and Femnist Wire to explain why they failed to call out the attacks on Hillary.)
The Green Party of Michigan notes Cynthia will be campaigning in Michagan August 30th through September 1st. She's working the holiday. Maybe Feminist Wire could do the same? Saturday night (7:00 pm) she'll be speaking at the International Institute in Detroit at a press conference with a rally immediately after (7:30). Sunday, Cynthia will appear at the National Welfare Rights Union Awards Dinner where she will deliver a speech on poverty. Monday, Cynthia will be standing shoulder to shoulder with union members as they march down Woodward Avenue in Detroit to mark the historic workers struggle in this country that produced the 40-hour work week, that produced a respect for the workers in this country and that produced the Labor Day holiday (among many other things).
Meanwhile, China scores big! Erica Goode and Riyadh Mohammed (New York Times) announce that China National Petroleum signed a contract with the puppet government in Baghdad. With the DNC speeches this week repeatedly hitting on the borrowing from China, that will probably not go over well in this country. Some examples:
Mark Warner: "Two wars, a warming planet, an energy policy that says let's borrow money from China to buy oil from countries that don't like us. "
Al Gore: "As I have said for many years throughout this land, we're borrowing money from China to buy oil from the Persian Gulf to burn it in ways that destroy the future of human civilization."
Hillary Clinton: "The biggest deficit in our nation's history. Money borrowed from the Chinese to buy oil from the Saudis."
Ava and I cover the DNC convention Sunday at Third. Ralph Nader's Super Rally took place in Denver and, with little media attention, Team Nader turned out a large crowd of 4,000. As the huge crowd gathered and the event geared up Wednesday, Jesse A. Hamilton (Hartford Courant) reported that Sean Penn had spoken and notes "major cheers" for Nader's "amnesty talk for non-violent drug offenders" and quotes Nader stating: "Every politician I've ever known from the major parties . . . starts flattering the people. Oh, how they flatter the people! Because that's what gives the people weak knees. . . . Read the grim lesson of history, here and abroad. When people do not turn on to politics, politics will turn on them." Not noted is that Ralph noted the historical importance of the week (19th Amendment enacted). Something that Barack skipped out on but no one's supposed to notice that. Team Nader notes:
What a wild last 24 hours.
With the help of more than a hundred Colorado volunteers and our best roadtrippers we worked day and night to pack 4,000 people into the University of Denver's Magness Arena.
(As usual, this was done with zero help from the Denver media. For example, not a mention all week in the Denver Post, the city's largest newspaper, before or after the event.)
Now we're re-focusing and gearing up for the RNC.
I just flew into Minneapolis and we need your help to fill thousands of seats for our September 4th rally at Orchestra Hall.
Right now nearly a dozen Nader's Raiders are driving across the country in three large vehicles armed with sandwich boards, our two large inflatable props, and boxes of promotional material.
Before they can join us in Minneapolis, they have to make an emergency stop in Wisconsin where we need 3,000 more signatures over Labor Day weekend or we won't make the ballot.
It's just that simple.
Before we can crank up the energy this week in Minneapolis, we need you to donate right now to help us fuel our roadtrip team through the cornfields of Iowa to the dairy lands of Wisconsin.
A donation of $10 helps provide a roadtripper a hearty and (as Ralph would say) nutritious meal.
A donation of $50 helps put a roof over their heads.
A donation of $100 helps outfit our roadtrippers in the new Buffalo Nader '08 t-shirts like you see our team wearing in this photo.
To meet our most recent fundraising goal, we've got to raise more than $70,000 more on our way to $100,000 in less than one week.
Please give whatever you can, to help us knock out Wisconsin fast so we can hit the streets this week at the RNC and demand that McCain invite Nader/Gonzalez into the presidential debates.
And remember, if you give $100 or more now, we'll send you three DVDs -- the Denver rally, the Minneapolis rally, and a special debate DVD. (Three DVD offer ends September 4 at 11:59 p.m.)
Onward to November
Tonight and over the weekend on PBS (check local listings) NOW on PBS (debuts Friday night in most markets) explores affirmative action and state-ballot measures attempting to overturn it. Katty van van sits down for a chat and chew with Bill Moyers -- hope he brings the oats and remember to keep the kids out of the room. Cat Radio Cafe does not air on WBAI Monday (fundraising) but The Next Hour features Michael Heller, Harvey Shapiro and John Taggart on the topic of Pulitzer Prize winning poet Goerge Oppen broadcasting from eleven to noon Sunday on WBAI. And iIndependent journalist David Bacon's latest book officially is released next week, Illegal People -- How Globalization Creates Migration and Criminalizes Immigrants (Beacon Press). (Some bookstores already have it in stock currently -- and you can order at the link if you order online.)
Finally. The 'peace' organization passes on e-mails. A number of visitors and members have e-mailed to explain that they complained about what went down and their 'reward' was to have their e-mails passed on. They end up getting the Gutter Trash's stark raving partner screaming at them in e-mails. Well, we know they have no ethics. Until Third on Sunday, that's all I plan to say. We will address it there and some community sites will address it now. Visitors also e-mail to ask that it be passed on: Don't bother posting to Gutter Trash''s blog. She will not allow you statement to go up. Of course not, she can't play victim and get her small posse to lie with her by allowing outside voices. Best visitor e-mail runs in Polly's Brew (with sender's permission) this Sunday -- it's a Canadian who's had it with the "pushy American" who is "as phoney as Madonna's British accent." We're done promoting the organization. There were questions about that in e-mails. They've been pulled from the links and I'm weighing whether or not to pull their chapters from the links. We were not speaking of Courage to Resist, for visitors who e-mailed asking about that. Courage to Resist is a real organization and remains linked at this site. I've passed on the e-mail to Mike (I've never read Gutter Trash's site) that asks if he gave permission for his e-mail to be posted (Gutter Trash apparently claims to be concerned about "niceness" in reposting people's e-mails). No, he did not. He will address that at his site tonight as well as what Gutter Trash leaves out.
That's the opening to Nicholas Spangler and Hussein Kadhim's "Chalabi aide arrested on suspicion of Baghdad bombings" (McClatchy Newspapers) and whether the man, Ali Faisal al Lami, is guilty or not, who knows? Chalabi is a notorious liar.
Oh no, not me,
We never lost control,
You're face to face,
With the man who sold the world
And he sold the illegal war.
Lynda notes this from Team Nader:
Sean Penn Hit it Out of the Park
Posted by The Nader Team on Thursday, August 28, 2008 at 05:25:00 PM
Last night in Denver was a wild party for democracy.
Four thousand people jammed into Magness Arena.
Sean Penn hit it out of the ballpark.
Tom Morello sang a glorious version of Woody Guthrie's This Land is Your Land.
Cindy Sheehan ripped into the dastardly twins (Democrats and Republicans).
Two new supporters came out of the woodwork to support Nader/Gonzalez.
When we asked for donations, Brooke Smith, star of ABC's Grey's Anatomy, rose out of the crowd, took the stage, pledged her support -- and $4,600 -- to the Nader/Gonzalez campaign.
Then we had another convert.
A 21-year-old African American from Phoenix -- Rev. Jarrett Maupin -- gave an eloquent speech as to why he's breaking with the Democratic Party, and vowed to organize the Latino and African American communities for Nader/Gonzalez.
And off course, Ralph laid it on the line, as usual.
Free Speech TV was slammed.
So, few people were able to watch on line.
But highlights from the rally have now been posted on the internet. Click here to watch. Then click on the icon that says FSTV Coverage: Ralph Nader at the Open the Debates.
So, take a peek at this amazing show, and then get the DVD (see below).
As you know, we're in the middle of a fundraising drive to raise $100,000 by September 4.
We're off to a great start, hovering around $25,000 in just four days.
But we have to crank it up to meet our goal (we haven't missed one yet -- good job troops).
Let's get it done.
Remember, if you give $100 or more now, we'll send you three DVDs -- the Denver rally, the Minneapolis rally, and a special debate DVD. (Three DVD offer ends September 4 at 11:59 p.m.)
Onward to November.The Nader Team
We don't normally post videos on Friday but those didn't get noted yesterday. By Saturday night, I will have enough up that the videos aren't up. (Videos are a problem for people with dial up. Not only is it slower for the page to load, they also receive some Adobe Acrobat error.)
Baylie Davis (Wyoming Tribune-Eagle) reports on Ralph's campaign stop in the state in "Wind, sun power Nader selling points:"
Nader, who is running for president as an Independent this year, spoke to the media and several residents in the Capitol Rotunda.
In his speech, he said the government has been "hijacked" by corporations, which are controlling the debates and not allowing third-party candidates to participate.
This means they can "control the gateway to tens of millions of viewers," he said "There's no other western democracy in the world that would tolerate something like that."
One goal of his campaign is to be allowed to participate in the presidential debates, his regional campaign coordinator Benjamin Drendel said.
AP notes this of the campaign stop:
"The release of carbon dioxide is massive in this country," said Nader, a longtime consumer rights advocate and a perennial political candidate.
Nader said wind resources could provide electrical power to the country without leaving a legacy of pollution.
Julie steers us to this press release:
Nader Polling 6-8% in 4 Key Battleground States
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Contact: Marc Abizeid, 831-818-7736, firstname.lastname@example.org; Chris Driscoll, 202-360-3273, email@example.com
NADER POLLING AT 6-8% IN 4 KEY BATTLEGROUND STATES
A new Time/CNN poll shows Ralph Nader polling 8 percent in New Mexico, 7 percent in Colorado, 7 percent in Pennsylvania, and 6 percent in Nevada (See poll here).
"It's clear that Ralph Nader could again have a significant impact on the Presidential race – though in highly unpredictable ways," Time/CNN pollsters concluded." In Nevada, Nader was the choice of 6% of respondents, and his presence flattened Obama's lead into a 41%-41% tie. Yet in New Mexico, where Nader polled at 8%, he drew votes almost equally from both major candidates, while in Pennsylvania he siphoned off significant support from McCain; a three-way race there would give Obama 47%, McCain 38% and Nader 7%."
The Nader/Gonzalez campaign is on track to be on 45 ballots by September 20.
For more information on the Nader/Gonzalez campaign, visit: votenader.org.
Ralph discussed that (and more) yesterday on Democracy Now!
Green Party presidential nominee Cynthia McKinney campaigns this weekend:
* Social Justice
Green Party of Michigan
** News Release/ **
** News Advisory **
** ------------- **
August 22, 2008
For More Information, Contact:
Fred Vitale, State Coordinator
John Anthony La Pietra, Media Committee
, for President,
Will Spend Labor Day Weekend Visiting Michigan
(Detroit) --- Cynthia McKinney (www.votetruth08.com),
of the Green Party of the United States
(GPUS; www.GP.org) and head of the first nationwide ticket
putting two women of color on ballots across the US, will
visit for Labor Day weekend August 30 - September 1.
The (GPMI; www.MIGreens.org) will
be hosting a press conference for Congresswoman McKinney at
7pm Saturday, August 30 at the International Institute (111
E. Kirby, Detroit). The press conference will be followed by
a rally with other GPMI Federal, state, and local candidates
at 7:30pm at the same location. The rally is open to the
public, and free.
The following evening -- Sunday, August 31 -- Congresswoman
McKinney will deliver a key policy speech on the elimination
of poverty at the National Welfare Rights Union (www.MWRO.org)
Awards Dinner. The dinner, starting at 6:30pm, will be held
at St. Paul of the Cross Retreat House, 23333 Schoolcraft,
On Monday, Labor Day, Congresswoman McKinney will be joining
thousands of union members in Detroit celebrating Labor Day by
marching down Woodward Avenue.
Other campaign events during the visit will be announced
as the details are finalized.
The Green Party of Michigan welcomes Cynthia McKinney to
Michigan. She will lead GPMI's 2008 slate -- which includes
* Harley Mikkelson of Caro, retired after service with
the Army in Vietnam and for 26 years in Michigan state
government, for US Senate (www.harleymikkelson.com);
* Rev. Edward Pinkney, a Benton Harbor community activist
currently unjustly imprisoned at Hiawatha Correctional
Facility, running to represent his home 6th Congressional
District in the US House (see also BHBANCO.blogspot.com);
* 30 other Michigan Greens running for Federal, state, and
Cynthia McKinney is a six-term former Congresswoman from
Georgia who quit the on her birthday in 2007
because the Democratic Party no longer represented her values.
She joined the Green Party, campaigned for its Presidential
nomination, and was nominated in Chicago at the Green Party
on July 12 (www.votetruth08.com).
During her time in Congress, Cynthia McKinney
* consistently opposed funding for bloated military and
secret intelligence budgets;
* introduced Articles of Impeachment for George Bush,
Dick Cheney, and Condoleezza Rice;
* introduced, championed, and passed in the U.S. House
the Arms Trade Code of Conduct, prohibiting the sale
of arms to known human-rights abusers; and
* passed legislation to extend health benefits for still suffering the health effects of
exposure to the defoliant Agent Orange.
She currently serves on an International tribunal on
Hurricanes Katrina and Rita and on the Brussels Tribunal on
Iraq. She is also participating in War Crimes prosecutions
in Spain, and working with the Malaysian Peace organization
to criminalize war.
Cynthia McKinney’s long-time advocacy for poor people
and her recent participation as a Commissioner in the Truth
Commission for Water Rights held in Detroit May 3 prompted
anti-poverty leaders to invite her as the guest speaker for
the Awards Dinner at the National Welfare Rights Union Retreat.
Currently on the ballot in 25 states that hold a majority
of electoral votes -- and with a good chance to make it on in
several more states -- the Green Party presidential ticket is
breaking new ground, and breaking down barriers, in American
politics with the Cynthia McKinney-Rosa Clemente campaign.
The campaign has also crossed the fundraising threshold
in 14 states (including Michigan) out of the 20 required to
qualify for matching Federal funds for the primary season.
The deadline to qualify in at least six more states, and
earn matching funds, is September 4.
The McKinney/Clemente campaign offers a profoundly pro-
people, anti-corporate program for this election. Congress-
woman McKinney will bring the troops home -- all the troops --
not only from Iraq and Afghanistan, but from every country
where US troops are stationed. She will reduce significantly
the bloated Pentagon budget, and spend the money here at home.
She supports an immediate moratorium on foreclosures. She
wants to convert the prisons for profit into money spent on
education. She supports universal, single-payer healthcare.
As her running mate, Congresswoman McKinney chose Rosa
Clemente (www.RosaClemente.com). Ms. Clemente brings strong
credentials to this race. She is a founder of the Hip-Hop
Convention, a community activist, and a scholar.
For complete information on the Green Party's historic
Presidential ticket, please visit the candidates' Websites:
For the latest information on the candidates, issues, and
values of the Green Party of Michigan, please visit GPMI's
# # #
created/distributed using donated labor
Green Party of Michigan
GPMI was formed in 1987 to address environmental
issues in Michigan politics. Greens are organized
in all 50 states and the . Each
state Green Party sets its own goals and creates its
own structure, but US Greens agree on Ten Key Values:
Respect for Diversity
Again, we'll note Deeky (Shakesville) explaining "I'm a gay man, and so refer Mrs. Ephron to one Donnie McClurkin. And when she's done making herself familiar with McClurkin, I'd like to point her toward James T. Meeks. You see, there are other things that are important to me; this isn't a one issue election. And I have a very big problem voting for a candidate that uses anti-gay bigots as part of their campaign, regardless of the threat McCain may pose to Roe v. Wade."
The e-mail address for this site is firstname.lastname@example.org.