Texas Longhorns with newborn calf in Bluebonnets

Texas Longhorns with newborn calf in Bluebonnets

Please note I have a new phone number...

512-517-2708

Alan Maki

Alan Maki
Doing research at the LBJ Library in Austin, Texas

It's time to claim our Peace Dividend

It's time to claim our Peace Dividend

We need to beat swords into plowshares.

We need to beat swords into plowshares.

A program for real change...

http://peaceandsocialjustice.blogspot.com/2013/03/a-progressive-program-for-real-change.html


What we need is a "21st Century Full Employment Act for Peace and Prosperity" which would make it a mandatory requirement that the president and Congress attain and maintain full employment.


"Voting is easy and marginally useful, but it is a poor substitute for democracy, which requires direct action by concerned citizens"

- Ben Franklin

Let's talk...

Let's talk...

Thursday, April 24, 2008

David T. Young... the liar doing the dirty work for the Michigan Democratic Party and the Fertitta Family

David T. Young... the face of an uncaring, deceitful, lying hypocrite:



David T. Young publishes a blog:

Compulsory News

David T. Young knows full well that more than 1,800 workers will be going to work in the Gun Lake Casino south of Grand Rapids, Michigan.

David T. Young knows these 1,800 casino employees will go to work in a loud, noisy, smoke-filled casino.

David T. Young knows these 1,800 casino workers, among whom will be his neighbors, will have no rights under tribal, state or federal labor laws.

David T. Young knew when Michigan Governor Jennifer Granholm signed the Gun Lake Casino Compact the situation these workers were going to be put into.

David T. Young knew when the Democrats in the Michigan House led by Steve Tobachman gave their approval to this dirty, anti-labor "Compact" exactly what was going on.

David T. Young, like Fox News, talks about the "truth" with the very same hypocrisy as Fox News.

David T. Young stands to make hundreds of thousands of dollars advertising for this Gun Lake Casino so this two-faced, lying hypocrite talks about how he is telling the truth about this dirty casino deal involving some of the most notorious mobsters and corrupt politicians in the United States.

David T. Young's blog, Compulsory News, should be called the "Yellow Journal of Lies and Deceit."

David T. Young should more appropriately be called a pimp for organized crime and a peddler of corruption.

David T. Young has published his "views" knowing that one-thousand eight-hundred workers are going to suffer while he reaps great profit$.

It is amazing that of all the newspapers, radio and television stations from Grand Rapids to Kalamazoo, not one single one of these newspapers--- not even the pathetic little "labor" rag known as the Grand Valley Labor News--- has had the courage or common human decency to allow the issues of casino workers and their rights to surface in the hundreds of thousands of words that have been written and spoken about the Gun Lake Casino.

Not even a peep about the history of the Station Casinos and the Fertitta Family who will manage this casino operation.

With the Fertitta's and their Station Casinos coming to town... the people, those people David T. Young refers to as the "Flat Earth Society" have good reason to worry about the future of their communities.

When you bring together a casino operation, combined with a huge workforce without any rights being paid poverty wages you come up with a formula for some of the most deviant and perverted behavior known to human-kind.

But, as long as these people like David T. Young can get rich they are willing to look the other way in the face of injustice.

What is one more casino out of some four-hundred casinos spread out across this country like little right-to-work-for-less-without-any-rights colonies?

God Damn America!

God damn liars like David T. Young who are willing to cover-up the truth are what make it all possible.

Alan L. Maki

Director of Organizing,
Midwest Casino Workers Organizing Council

Tuesday, April 22, 2008

Earth Day 2008 and The Freeman Forum

April 22, 2008

Earth Day

-----Original Message-----

From: Alan Maki [mailto:amaki000@centurytel.net]

Sent: Tuesday, April 22, 2008 9:36 PM

To: 'Denise Pfeifer'; 'peter.makowski@mail.house.gov';'Jody Beaulieu'; 'carl.pope@sierraclub.org'

Cc:'mmiron@bemidjipioneer.com'; 'bswenson@bemidjipioneer.com'; 'editor@orionsociety.org'; 'editor@outdoornews.com'; 'Laurel'; 'William McAuliffe'

Subject: RE: Freeman Forum Lecture Follow Up

Ms. Pfeifer,

Thank you for inviting me to the Freeman Forum; it was a great learning experience in so many ways.

I am looking forward to next year’s Freeman Forum… what will the topic be?

Also, you might want to pass on the link to my blog about my experiences at the 2008 Freeman Forum:

http://freeman-forum.blogspot.com/

You might also be interested in circulating this blog:

http://pineislandstateforest.blogspot.com/


I am wondering how I can obtain the recording of the question period following Congressman Jim Oberstar’s lecture.

Also, I asked for a receipt for the twenty dollars I paid for the luncheon as I get reimbursed provided I have a receipt; I was told the receipt would be e-mailed to me; it was not. Would you please provide me with the receipt?

On a final note, do you think on behalf of the Freeman Forum, you could ask United States Congressman James Oberstar to make a written and public apology to me for calling me a “liar?” I am sure you understand the seriousness of this kind of slanderous remark. As you are aware, James Oberstar did in fact “orchestrate a racist, back-room deal” regarding peat mining in the Pine Island State Forest located at the center of the Big Bog, our most important freshwater aquifer now that Congressman Oberstar has allowed the mining companies to pollute Lake Superior. As you are aware, truth is the only defense against a lawsuit for libel and slander; I hope I will not have to proceed with a lawsuit to defend my good name from the untruthful, vicious and vile statements Congressman Oberstar made about me. Congressman Oberstar was well aware that his remarks were being brought to a much wider audience, and Congressman Oberstar was fully aware that he lied in denying any knowledge of the peat mining permit in the Big Bog. Further, Congressman Oberstar was fully aware the Red Lake Nation is in complete and full opposition to this peat mining. I think we need an explanation from Congressman Oberstar why he lied about his involvement in this dirty deal. Needless to say, an apology to me is in order.

I stand by my remarks that Congressman Oberstar’s lecture on “Water” was the “most self-serving and hypocritical speech I have ever heard from a politician.” As you are aware, I am entitled to my opinion; as Congressman Oberstar is entitled to his opinion. His response that he was “offended” by my characterization of his speech is very legitimate. On the other hand, calling me a “liar” as Congressman Oberstar did is an outright slander prohibited under state and federal statutes… you may consult with Mr. Freeman who is an attorney of sorts from what I hear.

Again, you may read the statement which was posted for many years on the Minnesota Environmental Partnership’s web site concerning Congressman Oberstar’s involvement in obtaining the permit for a Canadian multi-national corporation to mine peat in the Big Bog. I have posted this statement in its entirety on this blog:

http://freeman-forum.blogspot.com/

Perhaps you and the facilitators of the Freeman Forum might want request an explanation of Congressman Oberstar about his role in all of this… I assume the Freeman Forum had a sincere desire to want to provide information enabling people to act to protect our freshwater aquifers as required; anything else would be seen as hypocrisy by the public.

One other concern I have. I noticed the extremely high level of involvement on the part of numerous public officials including the Secretary of State and a former State Governor as well as Mr. Gene Merriam and current members of the MN DNR along with numerous organizations and foundations very prominent in the public eye; on the other hand I noted that the audience and ALL panelists were white. I assume the facilitators of the Freeman Forum attempted to involve people of color? What went wrong? Is there some underlying institutionalized racism involved? I note this event took place at the Humphrey Center, which is part of the University of Minnesota. I am sure you must have noted that people of color were not represented at all as panelists or as audience. I find this very strange and something which should not be tolerated by those concerned with civil and human rights. Was there a fear that to include people of color might have resulted in accusations of racism regarding how the Minnesota Democratic Farmer-Labor Party resolves issues involving “water?” Might not you have invited the head of the Red Lake Nation’s Department of Natural Resources to have been a panelist if you were truly interested in hearing from all concerned? I am suggesting that the American Civil Liberties Union’s Task Force On Race Relations look into this. Perhaps the Minnesota Department of Human Rights should be requested to look into this, also.

I think it is important to note, and you must be aware, that none other than the United Nations has pointed out that the destruction of ecosystems and the pollution and contamination of fresh water aquifers is often found to be related to racism and genocide. I would assume that organizations like the Sierra Club would be very concerned to find out that people of color were excluded from the Freeman Forum’s 2008 “Water, Water Everywhere?” In a situation like this perception really is everything.

I thank you in advance for your attention to these matters.

Alan L. Maki
58891 County Road 13
Warroad, Minnesota 56763
Phone: 218-386-2432
Cell phone: 651-587-5541
E-mail: amaki000@centurytel.net

Check out my blog:

Thoughts From Podunk

http://thepodunkblog.blogspot.com/




-----Original Message-----

From: Denise Pfeifer [mailto:info@minnesotaruralpartners.org]

Sent: Tuesday, April 22, 2008 7:59 PM

To: amaki000@centurytel.net

Subject: Freeman Forum Lecture Follow Up

Freeman Forum Attendees,

Thank you for attending the 2008 Freeman Forum.

As a follow up to the event I wanted to share with you Deb Swackhamer's summary along with a link to an audio of the Freeman Forum lectures from April 8th, 2008.
Attached is Deb Swackhamer's summary paper of the Water lecture program is a spectacular piece of work that underscores the stature of the lecture program series in a way that we've never been able to do before. It also illustrates the value of the work that all of us involved in putting together these programs can see in a tangible form. Freeman Forum Synthesis Swackhamer 041708.pdf

The audio from all the Freeman Forum lectures on April 8, 2008, is now available on the Humphrey Institute podcast. You can find this at http://blog.lib.umn.edu/hhhevent/news/. Please feel free to share with your colleagues.

Thanks for your attendance. We look forward to seeing you next year!

Best, Denise

Denise Pfeifer
Minnesota Rural Partners
dpfeifer@minnesotaruralpartners.org
507.828.5559

Monday, April 21, 2008

More on "Doing Elections" A reply to Carl Davidson and "Progressives for Obama"

-----Original Message-----

From: Alan Maki [mailto:amaki000@centurytel.net]

Sent: Monday, April 21, 2008 9:49 AM

To: 'carld717@aol.com'

Cc: 'Carolyn Laine'

Subject: RE: Are Democrats about to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory? Three Views... a reply to Carl Davidson; another response to Carl Davidson's reply

Okay, Carl…

Let’s take it point by point regarding your response:


-----Original Message-----

From: Carl Davidson [mailto:carld717@aol.com]

Sent: Monday, April 21, 2008 7:06 AM

To: 'Alan Maki'

Cc: 'Carolyn Laine'

Subject: RE: Are Democrats about to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory? Three Views... a reply to Carl Davidson

Read a little closer, Alan

We don't even endorse Obama; we say he's 'the best option' of the three.

I don’t understand the difference; seems to me a play with words.


We don't call him a progressive, either. We say he's taking a centrist position in a left-center coalition that needs a progressive poll to curb rightward drift.

There is no left-center coalition; there is a coalition of sorts of the center, right, and those--- among the majority of Obama’s enthusiastic supporters, who have coalesced around a meaningless phrase of “hope.”


We're independent of his campaign, and don't have to defend every word he ever uttered--and don't.

“Independent?” No way. The name, “Progressives for Obama” says it all. The word “for” means a little something, eh?


Plant closings? I've already posted on that topic here. We've probably got more closed plants around here than Minnesota has plants, period. We've pushed him to come out for the Apollo Alliance as an antidote, and recently he has.

The “Apollo Alliance” is a front for the class-collaborationist labor “leaders” and pseudo “environmentalists working, as class-collaborationist do, with corporate managements and Wall Street coupon clippers looking to make their next big bucks in the “greening of America;” the only “green” they care about is “money green.” Where could you find phonier leaders of either group than Carl Pope, Leo Gerard, David Foster and Maurice Strong. One day Carl Pope and Leo Girard are standing in front of the St. Paul Ford Twin Cities Assembly Plant saying “Save the plant and two-thousand jobs;” the next day they are working in league with, and part of a “coalition” including, the Ford Motor Company’s land development division, the St. Paul Chamber of Commerce, the Summit Hill Club and, oh yes… all the Democrats who are supporting Obama.

Carl, we both know where Obama will stand on this issue of the closing of the St. Paul Ford Twin Cities Assembly Plant, the sale of the hydro dam that has powered Ford’s manufacturing operations to a foreign corporation; and, most importantly, the loss of two-thousand union jobs. Are you going to come to Minnesota next and make sure all workers who might gain employment in the model “green” yuppie community of cute little boutiques and racially segregated upscale housing and research and development centers receive wages and benefits in line with what Ford workers had (minus the two-tier wages) before the Plant is demolished and their incomes will be secure until these workers are rehired? Obama could come to St. Paul and walk the strip of Ford Parkway up the hill from the St. Paul Ford Twin Cities Assembly Plant and assure the thousands of workers now employed in this area at mostly minimum wages, or slightly higher up to about nine dollars an hour, without any benefits?


The IAM's honcho is attacking Obama from the right, with a red-baiting, terrorist-baiting smear. I wouldn't associate myself with it , if I were you.

I associate myself with Buffenbarger’s remarks to the extent he has articulated “why” he is not supporting Obama. As to Buffenbargar coming from the “right” with a “red-baiting,” “terrorist-baiting” smear, I would appreciate you providing me with the evidence of all three since the weakness I heard in his speech was that he did the same thing you are doing… only urging support for Hillary Clinton. If we are talking about Buffebargar’s speech which became the speech so widely referred to and characterized “as a vicious attack on Obama,” I heard none of what you refer to as “right,” “red-baiting,” and “terrorist-baiting smear.”

You can watch and listen to Buffenbargar’s complete speech from my past blog, in which you will find my criticism of his speech, too; however, either Obama did what Buffenbargar said, or he didn’t--- to date, I have heard no refutation from Obama of Buffenbargar’s remarks. Check out his speech for yourself:

http://thepodunkblog.blogspot.com/search?updated-min=2008-02-01T00%3A00%3A00-06%3A00&updated-max=2008-03-01T00%3A00%3A00-06%3A00&max-results=6



In PA at the moment, I'd guess a majority of the young workers are for Obama, while those over 30 split evenly between Obama, Clinton and McCain. Those in the working class here willing to break with both racism and war are, in their majority, for Obama. However you want to slice it, he has a base of support in the working class here. But it's very tight, the Clintons and McCain are using all sorts of crap, and we'll see tomorrow. Clinton was ahead by 18 points going into this; we'll see if it shrinks.

I have little pull with Obama's speaking schedule, but I've read his speeches at other sites of plant closings, including some back in Illinois years ago. They're very good; and he doesn't shy away from the issue at all. Talk to the Dem Farm-Labor people in your state. You may get your wish .

As a matter of fact, the MN DFL’ers leading the drive for support of Obama, are among the most corrupt politicians in Minnesota. Anti-communism, red-baiting and smearing people in every conceivable way is their stock in trade in trying to avoid any real issues of importance to working people.


It matters to us whether McCain is in the White House. If it matters to you, do something about it.

As you are well aware, it does matter to me that McCain does not sit in the White House. That is why I wonder why any “progressives” would bother wasting their time with a “Progressives for Obama” campaign… I would suggest that you would be better off spending your time and resources organizing around the real issues of importance to working people… if Obama then wants these votes he can come ask for the votes by explaining what he will do if elected concerning solving the problems of working people. If you are telling me that Obama supports the Apollo Alliance as the basis for supporting him, this is all I need to know to tell me I shouldn’t bother wasting my time working to get him into the White House.

Carl, come to the Twin Cities to rally against the Republicans in September… bring along Obama and “The Boss” to join our picket line demanding passage of SF 607 and public ownership of the St. Paul Ford Twin Cities Assembly Plant and the hydro dam so we can save two-thousand jobs and pave the way for similar struggles to protect the livelihoods of workers “Born in the USA.”

Yours in the struggle for peace and social & economic justice,

Alan L. Maki


Keep On Keepin' On!

Carl Davidson

http://carldavidson.blogspot.com
http://ussen.org
http://solidarityeconomy.net
http://progressivesforobama.blogspot.com



From: Alan Maki [mailto:amaki000@centurytel.net]

Sent: Monday, April 21, 2008 1:10 AM

To: carld717@aol.com; WCS-A@yahoogroups.com

Cc: 'Carolyn Laine'

Subject: RE: Are Democrats about to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory? Three Views... a reply to Carl Davidson

Carl,

If I had any influence with Springsteen I would certainly suggest he look a little closer at the real issues facing working people, as I would you, before endorsing Obama.

Let us get one thing straight, neither Clinton nor Obama are “progressive;” neither have a “progressive” position on any issue at all.

Isn’t it simply good enough to say: “Vote against McCain?”

I’m not making any more of a “backhandedly” attempt to help Clinton or McCain then what you “Progressives for Obama” have done with the issues of working people.

As far as I can see, and if the IAM’s Buffenbarger is telling the truth about Obama, there is no reason why progressives should be endorsing him or working for him. There was a time when the term “progressive” meant that one had to align themselves with being for peace and social and economic justice and demonstrate a clear concern for the rights and problems of working people.

Since no one ever asked my opinion of starting “Progressives for Obama” I’m not asking for anyone’s opinion or approval in what I have to say. I am merely voicing an opinion which isn’t getting attention even though I find many working people agreeing with me.

Maybe you should consider asking Obama to tour the St. Paul Ford Twin Cities Assembly Plant telling the workers exactly what he intends to do regarding the plant and saving these two-thousand jobs?

Perhaps you could post the position of “Progressives for Obama” on the plant closing issue on your web site?

You might want to check out my blog below for further comments about all of this.

Quite frankly, Carl, this is one time I “hope” I am wrong but there is nothing to suggest that I am… Obama is every bit the equal of Hillary Clinton, and that does not bode well for the country or for the working class.

Alan L. Maki
58891 County Road 13
Warroad, Minnesota 56763
Phone: 218-386-2432
Cell phone: 651-587-5541
E-mail: amaki000@centurytel.net

Check out my blog:

Thoughts From Podunk

http://thepodunkblog.blogspot.com/




-----Original Message-----

From: Carl Davidson [mailto:carld717@aol.com]

Sent: Friday, April 18, 2008 12:28 PM

To: 'Alan Maki'; WCS-A@yahoogroups.com

Cc: 'Carolyn Laine'

Subject: RE: Are Democrats about to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory? Three Views

I don't have to come to Minnesota to talk with workers losing their jobs, or who've already lost them. There's plenty right here in Beaver County, PA, where the 'Progressives for Obama' website is run from. And I'm talking with them every day.

I'm will to make a small wager, though. There's plenty of discontent here with elections generally, both parties, and all three candidates, some more than others. Even so, I'll bet more working-class votes turn out this time than any election in recent memory.

Our http://progressivesforobama.blogspot.com project is independent of the campaign, critical of Obama and pushes him on jobs and the war. So unless you want us to sit it out, or run our project to backhandedly help Clinto or McCain, I'm not sure of the reason behind your little dig at us. It's not like there aren't working class people invlved in it, as well as a few Hollywood folks lending their names. Or would you have Springsteen take back his endorsement?

Keep On Keepin' On!

Carl Davidson

http://carldavidson.blogspot.com
http://ussen.org
http://solidarityeconomy.net
http://progressivesforobama.blogspot.com



From: Alan Maki [mailto:amaki000@centurytel.net]

Sent: Friday, April 18, 2008 1:06 PM

To: WCS-A@yahoogroups.com

Cc: 'Carl Davidson'; 'Carolyn Laine'

Subject: Are Democrats about to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory? Three Views
Are Democrats about to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory?


From Friday, April 18, 2008, New York Times Digest

DAVID BROOKS

Obama’s Decline

In Iowa, Barack Obama promised to be
something new — a leader who would confront
unpleasant truths, embrace novel policies and
unify the country. If he had knocked Hillary
Clinton out in New Hampshire and entered
general election mode early, this enormously
thoughtful man would have become that.

But he did not knock her out, and the aura
around Obama has changed. He sprinkled
his debate performance Wednesday with the
sorts of fibs, evasions and hypocrisies that
are the stuff of conventional politics. He also
made a pair of cynical promises.

He made a sweeping pledge never to raise
taxes on anybody making less than $200,000 to
$250,000 a year. That will make it impossible
to address entitlement reform. It will also
make it much harder to afford the vast array
of tax breaks, health care reforms and energy
projects that he promises to deliver.

Then he made an iron vow to get the troops
out of Iraq within 16 months. Neither Obama
nor anyone else has any clue what conditions
will be like when the next president takes office.
If Obama is elected, he will either go back
on this pledge, destroying his credibility, or he
will risk genocide in the region and a political
war at home.

Then there are the cultural issues. When
Obama goes to a church infused with liberation
theology, when he makes ill-informed
comments about working-class voters, when
he bowls a 37 for crying out loud, voters are
going to wonder if he’s one of them.

It was inevitable that the period of “Yes We
Can!” deification would come to an end. It was
not inevitable that Obama would now look so
vulnerable. He’ll win the nomination, but in a
matchup against John McCain, he is behind in
Florida, Missouri and Ohio, and merely tied
in must-win states like Michigan, Minnesota,
New Jersey and Pennsylvania. A generic
Democrat now beats a generic Republican by
13 points, but Obama is trailing his own party.
One in five Democrats say they would vote for
McCain over Obama.

General election voters are different from
primary voters. Among them, Obama is lagging
among seniors and men. Instead of winning
over white high school-educated voters
who are tired of Bush and conventional politics,
he does worse than previous nominees.

John Judis and Ruy Teixeira have estimated a
Democrat has to win 45 percent of such voters
to take the White House. I’ve asked several of
the most skillful Democratic politicians over
the past few weeks, and they all think that’s
going to be hard.

A few months ago, Obama was riding his
talents. Clinton has ground him down, and we
are now facing an interesting phenomenon.

Republicans have long assumed they would
lose because of the economy and the sad state
of their party. Now, Democrats are deeply
worried their nominee will lose in November.

Welcome to 2008. Everybody’s miserable.


From Minnesotans for Peace and Social Justice

http://progressives2008.blogspot.com/

Thursday, April 17, 2008

For Peace, Jobs and Social Justice

The political pundits and think tanks continue to try to divide working class voters into liberals, progressives and conservatives; a new and shameful twist in trying to divide the working class along racial lines by political ideology as Democrats seek to explain their dwindling support in the polls in spite of massive working class rejection of the Republican Party.

It is almost like the Democrats are conceding defeat to the Republicans before the election is held as they attempt to affix blame for the defeat on working people rather than upon themselves.

But, this is nothing new, since the Democrats have been caving in to the Republicans for over thirty years now, and acquiescing to wars and driving down the standards of living of working people.

These same pundits and think-tank gurus continue to evade the problem of why so many working class people refuse to vote.

We think there is a reason why workers are not voting.

The reason is no one is bringing forward a progressive agenda based upon the needs of working people to solve pressing problems of rising food prices, home foreclosures and evictions along with high rents, poverty wages, plant closings, unemployment, the high cost of education, lack of access to health care, polluted & contaminated waters, land and air, the crisis of global warming and a dirty war for oil and regional domination in Iraq--- together with the robbery at the pumps... to name just a few of the problems, for starters, which the Democratic Party refuses to address.

Addressing these problems by bringing forward real solutions is not the same as acknowledging these problems which the Democrats are so eager to do as they continue to play political games with our lives and our futures.

Failure of the Democrats to address these issues with real solutions could lead to a defeat at the polls on Election Day. This would not be the first time Democrats have ignored the problems of working people only to snatch defeat from what should be a hands down, and overwhelming, victory.

In our opinion, the three key issues nationally, which should become the focus of the 2008 Election are:

• The need to end the war in Iraq

• The need for socialized health care

• The need for the minimum wage to be a legislated real living wage

We want to know why Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama have not articulated a very clear and specific program on these very basic issues of importance to working people?

A national organization called "Progressives for Obama" has begun to campaign for Obama. We don't understand why these progressives have done so while allowing Obama to leave these three issues off of his agenda.

What happens if Obama is elected and turns on these young voters who have become mesmerized with his baseless and meaningless calls, devoid of any specifics, to vote for "hope?" Will these young people revolt and coalesce around a progressive agenda; or, will they retreat in despair and discouragement from further political activity?

Here in Minnesota the issues of the Ford Plant closing has gone without being addressed by the Minnesota Democratic Farmer-Labor Party. The issue of the hydro dam which has powered this operation for over eighty years; and, most importantly, the jobs of two-thousand workers are at risk and in peril of vanishing forever.

As progressives, we ask: If the Democrats can not solve these very basic problems confronting working people, what problems can, or will, they solve?

As progressives, we believe both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama along with candidates for state legislative offices should fend for themselves until they can articulate very clearly what they intend to do towards finding solutions to these problems.

Here in Minnesota, we progressives don't believe any politician who refuses to publicly state support for S.F. 607--- legislation aimed at saving the St. Paul Ford Twin Cities Assembly Plant together with the hydro dam and two-thousand jobs--- should be given any consideration by working class voters. If ever there was a "litmus test" for candidates to pass, it is on this very basic working class issue. To date, the Minnesota Democratic Farmer-Labor Party has failed to pass this test.

Public ownership of the St. Paul Ford Twin Cities Plant and the hydro dam is the only solution... politicians have acknowledged all other alternatives have failed. It defies all reason and logic that these politicians would openly acknowledge and admit that saving this plant and the two-thousand jobs is what they want to do, but then cop out by failing to consider a very valid alternative to the plant closing: Public Ownership.

Failing to consider public ownership of the St. Paul Ford Twin Cities Assembly Plant and Hydro Dam demonstrates a complete lack of confidence in anything other than private/corporate ownership.

This is dead wrong.

This lack of confidence in public institutions and public enterprises by elected public officials is what has created a breakdown in support for our public schools, public health care, public libraries and public infrastructure including the bridges, roads and highways.

Minnesotans understand public institutions, cooperatives and publicly owned enterprises are the key to human survival and an integral part of maintaining a quality life and high standard of living for working people. From food coops to support for a myriad of public institutions with a view towards the successful use of public ownership by our neighbors to the north in Manitoba whose government saved a huge bus manufacturing operation in Winnipeg, to the publicly owned Green Bay Packers owned by our neighbors to the east, to the long-standing successful example of the publicly owned bank of North Dakota, Minnesotans know and understand that public ownership is the solution to saving the St. Paul Ford Twin Cities Assembly Plant.

Politicians should stop lying that they have tried every way to save the St. Paul Ford Twin Cities Assembly Plant when they have not even explored the public ownership alternative; nor have they bothered to consider that some kind of joint venture with the Chinese might be the solution as it was on the Iron Range with the taconite industry.

The Chinese could teach us a great deal about the benefits of publicly owned industries.

There is no reason why the St. Paul Ford Twin Cities Assembly Plant and Hydro Dam cannot produce a better, more environmentally friendly product under public ownership while saving two-thousand jobs than what the Ford Motor Company has done over the years; all the while having their corporate profits subsidized to the hilt by tax-payers as we never heard any complaints from the St. Paul Chamber of Commerce, the Summit Hill Club or the MN DFL Business Caucus.

But, as soon as it is suggested that tax-payers should own what they have invested in through their subsidizing the Ford Motor Company's St. Paul Ford Twin Cities Assembly Plant we hear a scream in unison from this business community which dominates both the Republican and Democratic Parties that they will not listen to the pleas of the people to save this Plant; nor, the pleas from Ford workers to save their jobs.

If anyone wants to look at the real reason why the Democrats could snatch defeat from what should be an overwhelming victory come Election Day, they need look no further than the abandonment, by the Democrats, of the working class here in Minnesota... thanks to State Senator James Metzen who abandoned Ford workers at the request of the St. Paul Chamber of Commerce, the Ford Motor Company, the Wall Street coupon clippers and money grubbing real estate investors and bankers who are not yet done kicking working class families out of their homes and they are already well on their way to destroying the livelihoods of two-thousand Ford workers in quest of even greater profits, which once again will all be subsidized by tax-payers who, again will end up holding nothing but another bag of debt as they pay for upscale housing in a new "green" yuppie community with which they intend to replace the St. Paul Ford Twin Cities Assembly Plant.

Maybe Barbara Ehrenreich, Bill Fletcher, Jr., Danny Glover, Tom Hayden, Robert Borosage and these other progressives should make a trip to the Twin Cities and have a chat with Ford workers about to lose their jobs as a perfectly good plant is turned to rubble and the hydro dam turned over to a foreign corporation before jumping the gun to endorse Obama.

If Obama can call for the boycott of the opening ceremonies of the Olympic Games in China in support of a bunch of feudal monks who have been living off the blood and sweat of poor peasants for hundreds of years, he certainly can support efforts aimed at saving the St. Paul Ford Twin Cities Assembly Plant and the jobs of two-thousand workers if he is at all worthy of becoming the next President of the United States of America.

Minnesotans and all Americans have a right to discuss these issues and questions addressed here, and we have a right to expect those who are now campaigning for Obama and Clinton under the guise of "progressivism" to stop trying to sweep these issues and questions under the rug for the purposes of political expediency.

Minnesotans for Peace and Social Justice
Posted by Progressives 2008 at 9:51 AM

Another perspective:

The working class...

By Alan Maki | April 12th, 2008 - 10:02pm GMT

Mr. Borosage,

I am glad to see you are finally using the term working class although you fail to mention that labor "leaders" and the Democrats have failed to advance one single specific program/solution to any pressing problems the entire working class is experiencing; thus creating divisions within the working class based upon sex, age; and, yes, race.

What I find is workers of all colors are fed up with the two-party system which they are coming to see more and more as a "trap" set to prevent the solutions to problems.
One solution which comes to mind is the minimum wage.

The time has come to redistribute the wealth in this country and by legislating a real living minimum wage which would be tied to the scientific calculations of the United States Department of Labor and the Bureau of Labor Standards using the real figures associated with what is required for a decent standard of living comprising a living--- non-poverty income--- wage... we could unite the entire working class; especially if unemployment compensation, welfare and Social Security were all based upon the same scientific calculations tied directly to legislation.

The wealthiest country in the world can afford to eliminate poverty and raise everyone who works to a decent and comfortable standard of living.

There is no reason that those who are forced into unemployment by a mean big-business driven corporate policy should not be living decent lives, either.

With programs and initiatives like this, real progressivism, we unite the entire working class.

I find most working people far more progressive than academics, who by the way, we are supposed to be able to rely upon to teach each generation the truth about what a rotten system capitalism is and the socialist solution. If working people are confused, it is because confusion is intentionally sown in the United States as one method of maintaining the status quo.

Your dividing the working class along racial lines according to "progressive" and "conservative" does not help matters any.

Start bringing forward real universal solutions to pressing problems and we will see the working class in its multiracial, multi-national, multi-ethnic make-up unite very quickly behind a progressive agenda.

Don't blame working people because after Roosevelt the Democratic Party lurched right-ward under the banner of anti-communism and abandoned the needs of working people in favor of corporate America as the capitalist sooth-sayers peddled a pro-war imperialist agenda that placed corporate profits before the needs of working people.
These capitalist sooth-sayers who remain at the helm of the Democratic Party , like the Republican Party, are responsible for the conservative, right-ward shift in American politics... not working people.

Even during this critical election where there is an urgent need to defeat the Republicans we find both well-heeled Democrats, Clinton and Obama, wallowing in the cesspool of neo-liberalism; i.e. conservatism... neither of whom have voiced anything remotely akin to a "progressive agenda" on any issue.

Give working people a truly progressive agenda and then let's see how conservative America's working class is; my hunch is that we will find the working class more progressive than most Democrats and the Wall Street coupon clippers would like.

Alan L. Maki
Director of Organizing,
Midwest Casino Workers Organizing Council


Alan L. Maki
58891 County Road 13
Warroad, Minnesota 56763
Phone: 218-386-2432
Cell phone: 651-587-5541
E-mail: amaki000@centurytel.net

Check out my blog:

Thoughts From Podunk

http://thepodunkblog.blogspot.com/

Sunday, April 20, 2008

Doing Elections

The essay below by Bill Fletcher, Jr. raises a number of very important questions... the most important question is: Should progressives follow the lead of Bill Fletcher, Jr. and the new group "Progressives for Obama?" I don't think progressives should follow these progressives in jumping off the bridge into muddy waters of undetermined depth.

Fletcher has repeatedly written in vague generalities, unwilling to confront specific problems like the St. Paul Ford Twin Cities Assembly Plant closing even though he has entered the debate in opposition to the most recent sell-out contract "negotiated" by the UAW.

Fletcher and one of the groups to which he belongs, the "Center for Labor Renewal" has focused on "two-tier" wages without any consideration that plant closings are an integral aspect of the "two-tier wage" problem.

Here we find Fletcher writing a column for the "Freedom Road Socialist Organization" stating that the left should reconcile itself for "decades" in developing any kind of credible alternative to the two-party trap. Fletcher writes as if the left has no experience with left forms and alternatives winning elections.

In fact, like the closing of the St. Paul Ford Twin Cities Assembly Plant, Fletcher, Freedom Road Socialist Organization and the Center for Labor Renewal intentionally ignore the successful left-wing alternatives to the Democrats and Republicans that have been very successful over the years... one of the best examples being the Farmer-Labor Party... perhaps its most successful campaigns were right here in Minnesota and it is not by chance that workers at the St. Paul Ford Twin Cities Assembly Plant played a most important role in the success of the Minnesota Farmer-Labor Party.

To listen to Fletcher and Freedom Road Socialist Organization, one would think the U.S. working class has no experience to build on, which simply is not true. Perhaps if this experience was widely written about as what kind of independent political action is possible we would see similar formations take shape very quickly, especially given the numerous problems besetting capitalism which are making life unbearable and miserable for working people--- I think we all know the problems. Less known and talked about are the solutions to these problems.

If Fletcher thinks alternatives to the Democratic and Republican Party are far into the future by "decades;" one can only surmise how far off into the future Fletcher would speculate that socialism is.

Putting time-tables to either finding alternatives to the two-party trap and socialist revolution is very dangerous because this becomes an impediment to bringing forward more advanced demands, which if fought for in the right way could hasten both.

Fletcher writes of "urgency" as if working people can wait until academia comes up with solutions to their problems... this isn't going to happen.

As Bill Fletcher, Jr., Freedom Road Socialist Organization and the Center for Labor Renewal are very well aware, working people made their greatest advances when the Communist Party USA was at its strongest; further ignored is the fact that Communist Party Clubs which were the think-tanks and action centers of these movements were at the heart of working people winning on both the electoral front and in the streets where these activities complemented each other.

Yet, knowing this, Fletcher, Freedom Road Socialist Organization and the Center for Labor Renewal put forward, in one way or another--- Freedom Road Socialist Organization openly state this erroneously:
"We believe that a multi-tendencied left can bring strength to the mass movements for progressive change in our country; movements that are crucial to the struggle for socialism."
This is very dangerous thinking because the working class will never be united in action with such thinking.

No thinking person can really believe that an Obama or Clinton victory over McCain will in any way advance any kind of progressive agenda or alternative. Clinton's and Obama's thoroughly reactionary stance regarding the Olympics in China is but one example; suffice it to say not one of those, including Bill Fletcher, Jr., identified with "Progressives for Obama" has made any attempt to challenge Obama on this issue. Why not? Because they know to do so will immediately put them at odds with Obama and many--- if not most--- of his supporters. The Olympics is all about people getting along and the lessening of tensions between peoples and nations and about cultivating friendships... if anything, the Olympics should be seen as a way to support China in trying to resolve the problems in Tibet; not supporting a bunch of parasitic feudal monks who want poor peasants to support them while they go on with a life of leisure.

I am sure Barack Obama will appreciate this essay below written by Bill Fletcher, Jr.; I am not so sure workers at the St. Paul Ford Twin Cities Assembly Plant will agree that the defense of their jobs should proceed at such a leisurely pace; lest the lack of urgency to respond by asking Obama or Clinton how they will resolve this issue proves an embarrassment to Clinton and Obama. I would note that Bill Fletcher, Jr. and his fellow "Progressives for Obama" has completely ignored International Association of Machinist President Buffenbargar's attack on Obama... why?

Perhaps not coincidentally, Bill Fletcher, Jr., Tom Hayden, Carl Davidson would like to evade the issue of "plant closings?"

Further, perhaps these "progressives," many, like Fletcher and Davidson, who claim to be for socialism, too, would like to evade this issue because the solution brings into view a remedy to the two-party trap which is the need for a labor party on the one hand, and calls into question the "legitimacy" of the capitalist system... in other words, bringing forward the public ownership question as the solution to individual plant closings, and the complete nationalization of entire industries like auto, steel, finance and power generation and distribution begins to place socialism on the table.

I find it very interesting that not one single one of the "Progressives for Obama," not even Bill Fletcher, Jr. have added their voices to supporting SF 607 here in Minnesota... the legislation aimed at keeping the St. Paul Ford Twin Cities Assembly Plant and hydro dam intact as an industrial unit aimed at saving two-thousand jobs.

One would think that Fletcher, Davidson and even "The Boss" Bruce Springsteen would have added their voices to support of SF 607 long ago if they were really interested in the "urgency of defeating McCain" because this is a real empirical issue that has the potential to unite the working class and with support from Obama or Clinton, preferably both, there would be an outpouring of working class voters on Election Day.

Instead, Fletcher, Hayden and Davidson would have us believe that "hope," or, "the hope for change" is good enough.

I'm all for "Doing Elections" but those running for public office should not receive any help from progressives unless, and until, we have something of substance from the candidates which merits this support.

Of course, what every worker does in the secrecy of the election booth is her/his own business and I don't think most working people--- definitely not progressives--- need Fletcher, Hayden or Davidson telling us that we don't need McCain in the White House. On the other hand, the working class does need progressive ideas addressing their urgent problems brought forward into the "public square" and the political arena.

Ironically, not only do we not know what Obama will do about plant closings, we don't even know where Bill Fletcher, Jr., Carl Davidson or Tom Hayden stand on what needs to be done to save the St. Paul Ford Twin Cities Assembly Plant... nor do we know where any of these organizations like Freedom Road Socialist Organization, the Center for Labor Renewal or the Democratic Party or any of the organizations with which the endorsers of the "Progressives for Obama" stand on something as simple and basic as SF 607 and public ownership of the St. Paul Ford Twin Cities Assembly Plant.

I couldn't care less that Obama isn't capable of scoring over 30 bowling. I would like to hear Obama's thinking on SF 607... maybe Fletcher, Hayden and Davidson could put this question to Obama... doing so might give them the courage to come forward on this issue, too.

Something to think about. But, remember, while thinking, there is an urgency to this question the Tibetan monks do not understand, and I don't think working people want to be told they should wait for real solutions to their problems for "decades;" and this is what Bill Fletcher, Jr. is asking working people to do... to be patient with capitalism. I find it strange that the Freedom Road Socialist Organization has a similar "patience" and tolerance for the social and economic injustices working people are experiencing. We Communists, never have--- and never will share this patience for social and economic injustice.

Of course, the problem isn't limited to the St. Paul Ford Twin Cities Assembly Plant; I could have cited the two-million casino workers employed in the more than 400 loud, noisy, smoke-filled Indian Gaming Casinos spread out across this country where workers receive poverty wages and have no rights under state or federal labor laws, forced to work at the mercy of sleaze-balls like the Fertitta Family whose ill-be-gotten financial gains are footing the bill for Hillary Clinton's campaign or the dollars that are pouring into the Obama campaign from Brownstein/Hyatt/Farber/Schreck--- a lobbying outfit none of the "Progressives for Obama" want to talk about... like the St. Paul Ford Twin Cities Assembly Plant; or I could have cited the problem with the minimum wage not being a legislated real living, non-poverty, wage.

Fletcher and the Freedom Road Socialist Organization like to promote



Doing Elections

by Bill Fletcher, Jr.
Sunday, 13 April 2008

Some recent controversy in connection with the statement on the US Presidential elections by Jamala Rogers posted on the FRSO website, along with a odd exchange that accompanied a piece that I wrote at The Black Commentator on the now-halted John Edwards campaign, caused me to reflect some more on the radical Left and elections. Is there a point for the radical Left to be thinking in terms of participating in elections, be they national or local? If so, in what capacity?

Contrary to those, such as the Greens, who suggest an immediate third-party run for national (and local) office, I believe that the actual conditions plus the nature of the electoral system do not justify it. To borrow from the remarks offered by long-time writer and activist Frances Fox Piven at the recent Left Forum in New York City, there are those who wish to engage in an electoral politics that does not exist in the USA and wish to avoid the electoral politics that does.

Central to a radical left practice must be a concrete analysis of concrete conditions. Among other things this means understanding the nature of the state in a particular social formation, including how it operates, its history and the class forces operating within it. The US state is extremely undemocratic, particularly when it comes to electoral politics, making it difficult for minor or third parties to operate and be considered relevant. This reality has often led many left activists to turn entirely away from electoral politics and focus on non-electoral social movement activity. While this work may at times be exemplary, it is often disconnected from the fight for political power and can be condemned to the realm of resistance-only activity. This is not a criticism of the work, but a criticism of the decision to turn away from electoral politics.

Another view is to engage in symbolic politics, such as the current Ralph Nader and Cynthia McKinney campaigns for President of the USA. Neither campaign has a chance of winning but both are posed by their supporters as ways of suggesting an alternative to the two-party system. While this is noble, it is not about serious political strategy. It is rooted in justifiable anger, but does very little to build the sort of social-political bloc that we need to combat the empire and introduce significant structural reforms (not to mention, to open discussions on the possibility of an alternative system).

Yet another view suggests that local electoral work may make sense, but that it is unlikely for the radical Left to have any real impact at the national level; therefore, in this case, the presidential elections are of little importance. This view is grounded in a more accurate assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of the radical Left and turns away from symbolic political activity. Yet it makes the mistake of missing the opportunity for significant action even within the context of candidacies that may not be left, and in some cases, may not be particularly progressive.

The radical Left can engage in electoral work to raise issues. This can take place at the level of local or statewide initiatives or referenda, or it can take place in the context of battling over the platform of a particular candidate. Initiatives and referenda are very straight to the point. With candidates such as that of Democratic nominee for Congress Donna Edwards (from Maryland), their candidacy can become a means to push a very progressive agenda--in her case, around the war.

At the national level it is certainly trickier, particularly given who is generally running. Yet here is where an assessment of the moment becomes very important. In our situation, for instance, a victory of John McCain would be most dangerous. He makes noises about (and actually sings about) bombing Iran; keeping the USA in Iraq for 100 years; and privatizing Social Security. His social base shares nothing in common with the progressive movement and he owes progressives nothing. He would continue the offensive, albeit with a softer voice, against the bottom 80 percent of this country.

So, one issue, as far as I am concerned, is that McCain needs to be defeated in the election. This is more than about educating people on the issues, though it is not enough, particularly when resource-strapped organizations need to make decisions about the level of involvement in a particular campaign--if any. The question is whether the radical Left and progressives can influence an anti-McCain candidate. My sense is that it is definitely possible but not on all or often most issues. Thus, a Clinton or Obama win might open up the chances of pushing genuine national healthcare, but only if there is a social base that is organized and can demonstrate its organization. If there is anything that can and should be learned from the practice of the Christian Right, it is this point.

An additional factor, which is particularly relevant to the Obama campaign, is the level of energy that it has produced and inspired and the deep desire for change that appears to be inspiring record numbers of voters. This energy, however, is very unfocused and will more than likely dissipate following the election season unless there are vehicles to channel it. It is with this in mind that it is worth considering two initiatives that I proposed in a column at www.blackcommentator.com. One, a "progressives for Obama" initiative that could either be a very loose network or a platform that unites those that wish to find a means to support the Obama candidacy, but do so without reserving their principled criticisms of his policies, e.g., on the Middle East. A second approach, which is more long-term, is the development of locally based mass electoral organizations along the lines of the original conception of Mel King's, and later Jesse Jackson's Rainbow Coalition. Specifically, independent political organizations that are not political parties but can engage in locally based legislative and electoral work (inside or outside of the Democratic Party). Work to build such organizations can start now, but with a set of objectives that go way beyond the November 2008 election.

Much can be said about the idea of locally based organizations, but by way of conclusion let me suggest that locally based organizations do not aim to replace non-electoral social movement activity. They are not being suggested as something into which every activist should jump. Rather, this form of organization is suggested as a means of linking together social struggles and giving voice to them in the electoral arena. The aim is to think in terms of building local social-political blocs that can move to win local political power, ultimately aiming to affect a national political realignment. Such formations can be one means to channel those who get motivated by the excitement of a national political campaign, e.g., Obama's, but are unsure how they will continue to operate at the end of the election cycle.

We on the radical Left must be thinking in terms of decades. While urgency is critical, the development of a viable social-political bloc that can win power is a process that is deeply connected to both electoral and non-electoral activism. There is no straight line of stages in moving to electoral politics. We must be building the links from the very beginning because a well-considered and grounded strategy for power is the real source of the hope that millions so desperately desire.

Bill Fletcher, Jr. is the executive editor of The Black Commentator and the co-founder of both the Black Radical Congress and the Center for Labor Renewal.

This is one of the dumbest open letters I have ever read...

A lot of people are expressing similar concerns along the lines of this letter; however, I would note that neither Obama nor Clinton ever objected to any of the trivial questions they received, nor has either Obama or Clinton talked about anything of substance during their campaigns.

There hasn't been one single proposal from either Clinton or Obama when it comes to solving any of the problems working people or the entire country are experiencing.

Furthermore, I haven't seen any of the publications any of the signers represent bringing forward any real solutions to problems either.

Just read my blog that follows this one and you will get the point.

I think this entire "race" is one big fiasco and those who put any effort into supporting Clinton and Obama are just wasting their time... progressives should be out organizing around the issues and drawing people into real struggles around solving problems by bringing forward real progressive alternatives.

Unless we do this, Clinton and Obama set the stage for a frivolous campaign devoid of talking about real issues and what they intend to do to solve real problems.

Alan L. Maki


About ABC

US elections 2008: An open letter deploring Wednesday's
debate from a group of prominent American journalists
and commentators


The Guardian April 18, 2008

http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/open_letter/2008/04/about_abc.html

We the undersigned deplore the conduct of ABC's George
Stephanopoulos and Charles Gibson at the Democratic
presidential debate on April 16. The debate was a
revolting descent into tabloid journalism and a gross
disservice to Americans concerned about the great
issues facing the nation and the world. This is not the
first Democratic or Republican presidential debate to
emphasise gotcha questions over real discussion.
However, it is, so far, the worst.

For 53 minutes, we heard no question about public
policy from either moderator. ABC seemed less
interested in provoking serious discussion than in
trying to generate cheap -shot soundbites for later
rebroadcast. The questions asked by Mr Stephanopoulos
and Mr Gibson were a disgrace, and the subsequent
attempts to justify them by claiming that they reflect
citizens' interests are an insult to the intelligence
of those citizens and ABC's viewers. Many thousands of
those viewers have already written to ABC to express
their outrage.

The moderators' occasional later forays into substance
were nearly as bad. Mr Gibson's claim that the
government can raise revenues by cutting capital gains
tax is grossly at odds with what taxation experts
believe. Both candidates tried, repeatedly, to bring
debate back to the real problems faced by ordinary
Americans. Neither moderator allowed them to do this.

We're at a crucial moment in our country's history,
facing war, a terrorism threat, recession and a range
of big domestic challenges. Large majorities of our
fellow Americans tell pollsters they're deeply worried
about the country's direction. In such a context,
journalists moderating a debate - who are, after all,
entrusted with free public airwaves - have a particular
responsibility to push and engage the candidates in
serious debate about these matters. Tough, probing
questions on these issues clearly serve the public
interest. Demands that candidates make pledges about a
future no one can predict or excessive emphasis on
tangential "character" issues do not. This applies to
candidates of both parties.

Neither Mr Gibson nor Mr Stephanopoulos lived up to
these responsibilities. In the words of Tom Shales of
the Washington Post, Mr Gibson and Mr Stephanopoulos
turned in "shoddy, despicable performances". As Greg
Mitchell of Editor and Publisher, describes it, the
debate was a "travesty". We hope that the public uproar
over ABC's miserable showing will encourage a return to
serious journalism in debates between the Democratic
and Republican nominees this fall. Anything less would
be a betrayal of the basic responsibilities that
journalists owe to their public.

Spencer Ackerman, The Washington Independent
Eric Alterman, City University of New York
Dean Baker, The American Prospect Online
Steven Benen, The Carpetbagger Report
Julie Bergman Sender, Balcony Films
Ari Berman, The Nation
Brian Beutler, The Media Consortium
Michael Berube, Crooked Timber, the University of Pennsylvania
Joel Bleifuss, In These Times
Sam Boyd, The American Prospect
Lakshmi Chaudry, In These Times
Joe Conason, Journalist and Author
Brad DeLong, Brad DeLong's Semi-Daily Journal and UC Berkeley
Kevin Drum, The Washington Monthly
Henry Farrell, Crooked Timber, George Washington University
James Galbraith, University of Texas at Austin
Todd Gitlin, Columbia University, TPM Cafe
Merrill Goozner (formerly Chicago Tribune)
Ilan Goldenberg, The National Security Network
Robert Greenwald, Brave New Films
Christopher Hayes, The Nation
Don Hazen, Alternet
Michael Kazin, Georgetown University
Ed Kilgore, The Democratic Strategist
Richard Kim, The Nation
Ezra Klein, The American Prospect
Mark Kleiman, UCLA/The Reality Based Community
Scott McLemee, Inside Higher Ed
Ari Melber, The Nation
Rick Perlstein, Campaign for America's Future
Katha Pollitt, The Nation
David Roberts, Grist
Thomas Schaller, Columnist, The Baltimore Sun
Mark Schmitt, The New America Foundation
Adele Stan, The Media Consortium
Jonathan Stein, Mother Jones Magazine
Mark Thoma, The Economist's View
Michael Tomasky, The Guardian
Cenk Uygur, The Young Turks
Tracy Van Slyke, The Media Consortium
Kai Wright, The Root

Friday, April 18, 2008

2008 Elections are the Democrats to lose: Three Views

Are Democrats about to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory?



From Friday, April 18, 2008, New York Times Digest



DAVID BROOKS

Obama’s Decline


In Iowa, Barack Obama promised to be

something new — a leader who would confront

unpleasant truths, embrace novel policies and

unify the country. If he had knocked Hillary

Clinton out in New Hampshire and entered

general election mode early, this enormously

thoughtful man would have become that.


But he did not knock her out, and the aura

around Obama has changed. He sprinkled

his debate performance Wednesday with the

sorts of fibs, evasions and hypocrisies that

are the stuff of conventional politics. He also

made a pair of cynical promises.


He made a sweeping pledge never to raise

taxes on anybody making less than $200,000 to

$250,000 a year. That will make it impossible

to address entitlement reform. It will also

make it much harder to afford the vast array

of tax breaks, health care reforms and energy

projects that he promises to deliver.


Then he made an iron vow to get the troops

out of Iraq within 16 months. Neither Obama

nor anyone else has any clue what conditions

will be like when the next president takes office.


If Obama is elected, he will either go back

on this pledge, destroying his credibility, or he

will risk genocide in the region and a political

war at home.


Then there are the cultural issues. When

Obama goes to a church infused with liberation

theology, when he makes ill-informed

comments about working-class voters, when

he bowls a 37 for crying out loud, voters are

going to wonder if he’s one of them.


It was inevitable that the period of “Yes We

Can!” deification would come to an end. It was

not inevitable that Obama would now look so

vulnerable. He’ll win the nomination, but in a

matchup against John McCain, he is behind in

Florida, Missouri and Ohio, and merely tied

in must-win states like Michigan, Minnesota,

New Jersey and Pennsylvania. A generic

Democrat now beats a generic Republican by

13 points, but Obama is trailing his own party.

One in five Democrats say they would vote for

McCain over Obama.


General election voters are different from

primary voters. Among them, Obama is lagging

among seniors and men. Instead of winning

over white high school-educated voters

who are tired of Bush and conventional politics,

he does worse than previous nominees.


John Judis and Ruy Teixeira have estimated a

Democrat has to win 45 percent of such voters

to take the White House. I’ve asked several of

the most skillful Democratic politicians over

the past few weeks, and they all think that’s

going to be hard.


A few months ago, Obama was riding his

talents. Clinton has ground him down, and we

are now facing an interesting phenomenon.


Republicans have long assumed they would

lose because of the economy and the sad state

of their party
. Now, Democrats are deeply

worried their nominee will lose in November
.

Welcome to 2008. Everybody’s miserable.


***********************


From: Minnesotans for Peace and Social Justice



http://progressives2008.blogspot.com/



Thursday, April 17, 2008

For Peace, Jobs and Social Justice

The political pundits and think tanks continue to try to divide working class voters into liberals, progressives and conservatives; a new and shameful twist in trying to divide the working class along racial lines by political ideology as Democrats seek to explain their dwindling support in the polls in spite of massive working class rejection of the Republican Party.

It is almost like the Democrats are conceding defeat to the Republicans before the election is held as they attempt to affix blame for the defeat on working people rather than upon themselves.

But, this is nothing new, since the Democrats have been caving in to the Republicans for over thirty years now, and acquiescing to wars and driving down the standards of living of working people.

These same pundits and think-tank gurus continue to evade the problem of why so many working class people refuse to vote.

We think there is a reason why workers are not voting.

The reason is no one is bringing forward a progressive agenda based upon the needs of working people to solve pressing problems of rising food prices, home foreclosures and evictions along with high rents, poverty wages, plant closings, unemployment, the high cost of education, lack of access to health care, polluted & contaminated waters, land and air, the crisis of global warming and a dirty war for oil and regional domination in Iraq--- together with the robbery at the pumps... to name just a few of the problems, for starters, which the Democratic Party refuses to address.

Addressing these problems by bringing forward real solutions is not the same as acknowledging these problems which the Democrats are so eager to do as they continue to play political games with our lives and our futures.

Failure of the Democrats to address these issues with real solutions could lead to a defeat at the polls on Election Day. This would not be the first time Democrats have ignored the problems of working people only to snatch defeat from what should be a hands down, and overwhelming, victory.

In our opinion, the three key issues nationally, which should become the focus of the 2008 Election are:

* The need to end the war in Iraq

* The need for socialized health care

* The need for the minimum wage to be a legislated real living wage

We want to know why Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama have not articulated a very clear and specific program on these very basic issues of importance to working people?

A national organization called "Progressives for Obama" has begun to campaign for Obama. We don't understand why these progressives have done so while allowing Obama to leave these three issues off of his agenda.

What happens if Obama is elected and turns on these young voters who have become mesmerized with his baseless and meaningless calls, devoid of any specifics, to vote for "hope?" Will these young people revolt and coalesce around a progressive agenda; or, will they retreat in despair and discouragement from further political activity?

Here in Minnesota the issues of the Ford Plant closing has gone without being addressed by the Minnesota Democratic Farmer-Labor Party. The issue of the hydro dam which has powered this operation for over eighty years; and, most importantly, the jobs of two-thousand workers are at risk and in peril of vanishing forever.

As progressives, we ask: If the Democrats can not solve these very basic problems confronting working people, what problems can, or will, they solve?

As progressives, we believe both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama along with candidates for state legislative offices should fend for themselves until they can articulate very clearly what they intend to do towards finding solutions to these problems.

Here in Minnesota, we progressives don't believe any politician who refuses to publicly state support for S.F. 607--- legislation aimed at saving the St. Paul Ford Twin Cities Assembly Plant together with the hydro dam and two-thousand jobs--- should be given any consideration by working class voters. If ever there was a "litmus test" for candidates to pass, it is on this very basic working class issue. To date, the Minnesota Democratic Farmer-Labor Party has failed to pass this test.

Public ownership of the St. Paul Ford Twin Cities Plant and the hydro dam is the only solution... politicians have acknowledged all other alternatives have failed. It defies all reason and logic that these politicians would openly acknowledge and admit that saving this plant and the two-thousand jobs is what they want to do, but then cop out by failing to consider a very valid alternative to the plant closing: Public Ownership.

Failing to consider public ownership of the St. Paul Ford Twin Cities Assembly Plant and Hydro Dam demonstrates a complete lack of confidence in anything other than private/corporate ownership.

This is dead wrong.

This lack of confidence in public institutions and public enterprises by elected public officials is what has created a breakdown in support for our public schools, public health care, public libraries and public infrastructure including the bridges, roads and highways.

Minnesotans understand public institutions, cooperatives and publicly owned enterprises are the key to human survival and an integral part of maintaining a quality life and high standard of living for working people. From food coops to support for a myriad of public institutions with a view towards the successful use of public ownership by our neighbors to the north in Manitoba whose government saved a huge bus manufacturing operation in Winnipeg, to the publicly owned Green Bay Packers owned by our neighbors to the east, to the long-standing successful example of the publicly owned bank of North Dakota, Minnesotans know and understand that public ownership is the solution to saving the St. Paul Ford Twin Cities Assembly Plant.

Politicians should stop lying that they have tried every way to save the St. Paul Ford Twin Cities Assembly Plant when they have not even explored the public ownership alternative; nor have they bothered to consider that some kind of joint venture with the Chinese might be the solution as it was on the Iron Range with the taconite industry.

The Chinese could teach us a great deal about the benefits of publicly owned industries.

There is no reason why the St. Paul Ford Twin Cities Assembly Plant and Hydro Dam cannot produce a better, more environmentally friendly product under public ownership while saving two-thousand jobs than what the Ford Motor Company has done over the years; all the while having their corporate profits subsidized to the hilt by tax-payers as we never heard any complaints from the St. Paul Chamber of Commerce, the Summit Hill Club or the MN DFL Business Caucus.

But, as soon as it is suggested that tax-payers should own what they have invested in through their subsidizing the Ford Motor Company's St. Paul Ford Twin Cities Assembly Plant we hear a scream in unison from this business community which dominates both the Republican and Democratic Parties that they will not listen to the pleas of the people to save this Plant; nor, the pleas from Ford workers to save their jobs.

If anyone wants to look at the real reason why the Democrats could snatch defeat from what should be an overwhelming victory come Election Day, they need look no further than the abandonment, by the Democrats, of the working class here in Minnesota... thanks to State Senator James Metzen who abandoned Ford workers at the request of the St. Paul Chamber of Commerce, the Ford Motor Company, the Wall Street coupon clippers and money grubbing real estate investors and bankers who are not yet done kicking working class families out of their homes and they are already well on their way to destroying the livelihoods of two-thousand Ford workers in quest of even greater profits, which once again will all be subsidized by tax-payers who, again will end up holding nothing but another bag of debt as they pay for upscale housing in a new "green" yuppie community with which they intend to replace the St. Paul Ford Twin Cities Assembly Plant.

Maybe Barbara Ehrenreich, Bill Fletcher, Jr., Danny Glover, Tom Hayden, Robert Borosage and these other progressives should make a trip to the Twin Cities and have a chat with Ford workers about to lose their jobs as a perfectly good plant is turned to rubble and the hydro dam turned over to a foreign corporation before jumping the gun to endorse Obama.

If Obama can call for the boycott of the opening ceremonies of the Olympic Games in China in support of a bunch of feudal monks who have been living off the blood and sweat of poor peasants for hundreds of years, he certainly can support efforts aimed at saving the St. Paul Ford Twin Cities Assembly Plant and the jobs of two-thousand workers if he is at all worthy of becoming the next President of the United States of America.

Minnesotans and all Americans have a right to discuss these issues and questions addressed here, and we have a right to expect those who are now campaigning for Obama and Clinton under the guise of "progressivism" to stop trying to sweep these issues and questions under the rug for the purposes of political expediency.

Minnesotans for Peace and Social Justice




Another perspective:



The working class...

A response to Robert Borosage

By Alan Maki | April 12th, 2008 - 10:02pm GMT

Mr. Borosage,

I am glad to see you are finally using the term working class although you fail to mention that labor "leaders" and the Democrats have failed to advance one single specific program/solution to any pressing problems the entire working class is experiencing; thus creating divisions within the working class based upon sex, age; and, yes, race.

What I find is workers of all colors are fed up with the two-party system which they are coming to see more and more as a "trap" set to prevent the solutions to problems.

One solution which comes to mind is the minimum wage.

The time has come to redistribute the wealth in this country and by legislating a real living minimum wage which would be tied to the scientific calculations of the United States Department of Labor and the Bureau of Labor Statistics using the real figures associated with what is required for a decent standard of living comprising a living--- non-poverty income--- wage... we could unite the entire working class; especially if unemployment compensation, welfare and Social Security were all based upon the same scientific calculations tied directly to legislation.

The wealthiest country in the world can afford to eliminate poverty and raise everyone who works to a decent and comfortable standard of living.

There is no reason that those who are forced into unemployment by a mean big-business driven corporate policy should not be living decent lives, either.

With programs and initiatives like this, real progressivism, we unite the entire working class.

I find most working people far more progressive than academics, who by the way, we are supposed to be able to rely upon to teach each generation the truth about what a rotten system capitalism is and the socialist solution. If working people are confused, it is because confusion is intentionally sown in the United States as one method of maintaining the status quo.

Your dividing the working class along racial lines according to "progressive" and "conservative" does not help matters any.

Start bringing forward real universal solutions to pressing problems and we will see the working class in its multiracial, multi-national, multi-ethnic make-up unite very quickly behind a progressive aganda.

Don't blame working people because after Roosevelt the Democratic Party lurched right-ward under the banner of anti-communism and abandoned the needs of working people in favor of corporate America as the capitalist sooth-sayers peddled a pro-war imperialist agenda that placed corporate profits before the needs of working people.

These capitalist sooth-sayers who remain at the helm of the Democratic Party , like the Republican Party, are responsible for the conservative, right-ward shift in American politics... not working people.

Even during this critical election where there is an urgent need to defeat the Republicans we find both well-heeled Democrats, Clinton and Obama, wallowing in the cesspool of neo-liberalism; i.e. conservatism... neither of whom have voiced anything remotely akin to a "progressive agenda" on any issue.

Give working people a truly progressive agenda and then let's see how conservative America's working class is; my hunch is that we will find the working class more progressive than most Democrats and the Wall Street coupon clippers would like.

Alan L. Maki

Director of Organizing,
Midwest Casino Workers Organizing Council





Alan L. Maki

58891 County Road 13

Warroad, Minnesota 56763

Phone: 218-386-2432

Cell phone: 651-587-5541

E-mail: amaki000@centurytel.net



Check out my blog:



Thoughts From Podunk



http://thepodunkblog.blogspot.com/

Tuesday, April 15, 2008

Minnesota Environmental Partnership... a front for Big Business polluters and corrupt politicians

-----Original Message-----

From: Alan Maki [mailto:amaki000@centurytel.net]

Sent: Tuesday, April 15, 2008 11:06 AM

To: stevemorse@MEPartnership.org; peter.makowski@mail.house.gov; jmyers@duluthnews.com; riverlot@paulbunyan.net; 'Jody Beaulieu'; secretary.state@state.mn.us

Cc: 'Al Juhnke'; brian.melendez@usa.net; susan.rego@embarqmail.com; 'Scott Elkins'; carl.pope@sierraclub.org; mcaul@startribune.com; bswenson@bemidjipioneer.com; newsroom@duluthnews.com; abuck@duluthnews.com; bgraber@duluthnews.com; lbloomquist@duluthnews.com; ppassi@duluthnews.com; scook@duluthnews.com

Subject: The Minnesota Environmental Partnership... a slight problem of ethics and accountability

Mr. Steve Morse, Executive Director, Minnesota Environmental Partnership;

I see you have altered the Minnesota Environmental Partnership Web Site since I posted the article from your site which clearly stated that U.S. Congressman James Oberstar was the “mover and the shaker” behind the peat mining venture in the Big Bog which will take place in the Pine Island State Forest. Mr. Oberstar now vehemently denies his involvement in this project. Gene Merriam can’t remember authorizing the permit for it. What can I say, except, “WOW!”

What a despicable coward you are when it comes to the truth!

Anyways, the article from your web site is still posted on my blog and it comes up in numerous searches on all the popular search engines and people have even taken to posting a link to “Water, water everywhere” { http://freeman-forum.blogspot.com/ } on their blogs and web sites so, I am sure this article will be read by many more people than would have read it on your site.

It is interesting now that U.S. Congressman James Oberstar pulled off his cute little act in front of a well-heeled group of DFL party hacks and public officials ranging from Mark Ritchie, Minnesota’s Secretary of State, to that old blue dog Democrat Roger Moe and the illustrious Gene Merriam who couldn’t remember signing the permit for peat mining in the Big Bog within the Pine Island State Forest and none other than the head of the Humphrey Institute and Mr. Freeman, the Hennepin County Attorney who has the utmost disdain for those who lie and perjure themselves… all of you are now saddled with the task of having to defend U.S. Congressman James Oberstar’s vicious slander against me as he so emphatically called me a “liar” in claiming he knew nothing about any peat mining in the Big Bog. And, oh yes, true to form, Congressman Oberstar even said, in an almost believable manner, that he resented me characterizing his speech as, “The most self-serving, hypocritical speech I have ever heard any politician ever make;” and I even heard Richard Nixon speak on several occasions.

Now, after all of this has been recorded for the University television station and we have the article from the Minnesota Environmental Partnership web site proving that United States Congressman James Oberstar is nothing more than a big-mouthed liar, how are you going to explain all of this to the some eighty organizations who have come together under the auspices of the Minnesota Environmental Partnership thinking that they are part of some marvelous coalition which is working to protect our living environment and ecosystems, when your only real objective is to continue electing a bunch of corporate serving blow-hard, liars like James Oberstar; and, trying to convince Minnesotans to increase their taxes to pay for the environmental damage caused by big-businesses to our air, water and land?

Oh, Shakespeare would have had a field day with the likes of you and James Oberstar. Maybe you should consider turning over the television recording of your “Water, water everywhere?” Freeman Forum Event to one of the theatrical societies in the Twin Cities?

Alan L. Maki
58891 County Road 13
Warroad, Minnesota 56763
Phone: 218-386-2432
Cell phone: 651-587-5541
E-mail: amaki000@centurytel.net

Check out my blog:

Thoughts From Podunk

http://thepodunkblog.blogspot.com/

The article from the Minnesota Environmental Partnership which has been removed to save United States Congressman James Oberstar embarrassment... Oberstar, in his response to my question about his involvement in peat mining in the Big Bog claimed no knowledge and called me a liar for saying he was part of this dirty, racist back-room deal... read for yourself what has been on the web site of the Minnesota Environmental Partnership for a long time:

Please note how Steve Morse and these dirty birds operate; this link used to take one to the article below on the Minnesota Environmental Partnership's web site, now they have made it link to their home page:
http://www.mepartnership.org/mep_whatsnew.asp?new_id=955+

There is nothing ambiguous about Congressman James Oberstar orchestrating this dirty, racist, backroom deal... why did the Freeman Forum try so hard to assist Oberstar in concealing these facts from the public?

Note: This article was taken directly from the Minnesota Environmental Partnership web site.

Peat mining project approved

Monday, December 13, 2004



A peat mining operation in a remote bog in the Pine Island State Forest has received federal permits after years of delays and opposition regarding environmental impacts.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has dropped its concerns and permits have been approved by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers that will allow development to begin on an 840-acre bog 24 miles west of Big Falls, federal and local officials revealed Friday.

A Quebec-based firm, Berger Ltd., has been recruited to develop the project, which will receive substantial state and county aid. Construction could start in 2005.

U.S. Rep. James Oberstar, officials from UMD's Natural Resources Research Institute, Berger representatives and Koochiching County officials will announce the permits Tuesday in Duluth, Oberstar's office announced Friday.

"This has been a great public-private partnership," Oberstar said in a prepared statement.

Minnesota has significant peat reserves but only a few commercial operations. NRRI scientists have tried for years to develop commercial uses and markets for the resource, so far with little success. Competition from low-cost Canadian peat and the relatively low economic value of bagged peat for plant bedding has kept interest low.

The Pine Island project has been in the works since the 1980s, when a report showed vast peat potential in the region. It's been pushed by the Koochiching County Board of Commissioners as sorely needed economic development in an area having little job opportunity, underscored by recent staff cuts at the Boise Cascade paper mill in International Falls.

The new peat operation will create about five full-time and 40 seasonal jobs. The positions, which will pay about $8 an hour, will have a $500,000 annual payroll, and the operation would pump about $2 million into the local economy, a 2001 study showed. Supporters predict spinoff jobs in pallet-making and trucking.

Mike Hanson, the Koochiching County Commissioner who represents Big Falls and who has headed the project in recent years, says the economic impact will help fill a void left when a Boise Cascade mill closed in Big Falls two decades ago.

Big Falls shrunk from 600 to 300 people, he said, and Koochiching County was one of only a few Minnesota counties to lose population in the last census.

"This is a big deal. I've been working on this since 1998. We just kept trying to move it forward, and patience paid off," Hanson said. "It's not just the jobs -- and every job counts up here -- it's being able to have local control over our natural resources. If we didn't win this battle, if we can't use our natural resources to create jobs up here, we won't be able to have any people living up here."

NRRI peat experts say the Pine Island site holds one of northern Minnesota's best deposits of semi-decayed plants, or sphagnum peat, the bedding material nurseries and gardeners use to grow plants.

The bog will be logged, drained and the topsoil removed. The so-called mine is more like a farming operation, with peat sucked off the surface with giant vacuums, then packaged and trucked across the Midwest to be used as bedding material.

Because only a couple inches of peat are vacuumed each year, there's a 30-year supply at the site.

The project's Environmental Impact Statement was approved in 2002. But the EPA had raised sharp concerns over the release of mercury and the quality of water downstream from the mine.

Moreover, Red Lake tribal officials said they didn't want the wild peat land developed near some of their land holdings.

Concerns included the release of methyl mercury, stored inside the peat after falling as pollution from the sky, into nearby ditches and eventually into the Black River that runs through forests to the north. A study conducted for the DNR Environmental Impact Statement shows that mercury levels likely will increase in downstream waters, but not much.

But "even the slightest increase in methyl mercury can be detrimental since direct as well as indirect consumption may lead to increased concentrations at every level of the food chain," a 2001 EPA letter on the project stated.

Federal officials also raised concerns about acidity of the waters, saying runoff from the peat operation could reach unacceptable pH levels. Other issues included dust, effects on wildlife and how the site should be restored to a natural bog after mining ends.

Other project opponents say it's a bad use of state and county taxpayers' money for relatively little economic benefit; some argue the relatively pristine area shouldn't be disturbed.

In recent months, however, both EPA and Red Lake tribal officials have dropped their opposition, clearing the way for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to issue necessary permits.

Related to:

Mercury
Water Quality & Quantity

Region(s):

Northeast

Friday, April 4, 2008

Resolution on Saving Manufacturing Jobs

Note: As I recently traveled through Wisconsin and Michigan many people wanted to know about our struggle to save the St. Paul Ford Twin Cities Assembly Plant through public ownership.

This resolution aimed at Presidential candidates is excellent and should be circulated at campaign rallies and meetings everywhere. This resolution should be posted in every union hall all over the United States... please feel free to copy and post widely... you might want to copy and post this to your blog and ask friends to do the same.

For additional resolutions checkout:


http://thepodunkblog.blogspot.com/2008_02_15_archive.html



With the continued attacks on workers and the endless layoffs and closings of plants, people in Michigan have followed the example of Minnesotans trying to save the St. Paul Ford Twin Cities Assembly Plant through public ownership and put together this resolution to use during this election season:


Thursday, April 3, 2008

Support Manufacturing Jobs!


Resolution on Saving Manufacturing Jobs


Whereas our manufacturing base is steadily being eroded and


Whereas this loss of jobs is harmful to our nation and the communities we live in and


Whereas those good paying jobs are frequently replaced with lower paying non-union ones that are driving down the standard of living for all working families and


Whereas the loss of our core manufacturing industry will mean the
loss of our technological edge and vital skills and reduced tax revenues for schools and public services and


Whereas every manufacturing job creates seven others and supports small business, directly and indirectly related to manufacturing and


Whereas the $170 billion we are annually spending on the war in Iraq takes away money that could be better used to rebuild our industrial base and retrain workers


Therefore in rebuilding our industrial base primary attention needs to be placed on locating these new facilities in communities with high unemployment and historic manufacturing centers, such as Detroit, Pontiac, Grand Rapids and Flint and


Therefore by rebuilding our industrial base and with it the construction of mass transit, environmentally friendly autos, affordable and energy efficient housing, and the modernization of our infrastructure, we will create jobs, provide cleaner air for all of us, lower individual family's energy bills, and allow greater energy independence for America


Therefore be it resolved that we call on the Presidential candidates to state their support for taking one-half of the money currently being spent in Iraq to be used instead to rebuild industry and provide jobs in the United States.

Posted by Melissa O'Rourke

Taken From: Labor Up Front


Provided courtesy of:

Alan L. Maki
58891 County Road 13
Warroad, Minnesota 56763
Phone: 218-386-2432
Cell phone: 651-587-5541
E-mail: amaki000@centurytel.net

Check out my blog:

Thoughts From Podunk

http://thepodunkblog.blogspot.com/