This comes from the Sierra Club... I find it interesting that it is claimed that few people of color use our National Parks... why not? I like to camp all seasons of the year... I went camping with my grand-kids for two weeks this past summer. One problem I see is that it costs way too much to use our State and National Parks.
I guess the well-heeled people who comprise the bulk of the contributors to the Sierra Club wouldn't be too concerned about costs.
Alan
Camping with Oprah
When Oprah Winfrey made a surprise camping trip to Yosemite, it may have been the biggest media event in the park since Teddy Roosevelt and John Muir posed together at Glacier Point.
Oprah decided to make the trip after receiving an impassioned letter from park ranger (and Sierra Club Books author) Shelton Johnson about his frustration that so few people of color visit our national parks.
When Oprah arrived, Shelton was there to welcome her, introduce her to the famous Giant Grizzly sequoia, and explain how to keep her s'mores fixings from attracting hungry bears and paparazzi. No word on whether Shelton's novel, Gloryland, will ever be selected for You-Know-Who's Book Club, but no need to wait -- you can order a copy now and learn what it was like to be a buffalo solider in Yosemite.
Tuesday, November 9, 2010
Democrats' Own Racism Has Done Them In
Letter to the Editor, submitted exclusively to the Bemidji Pioneer Press for publication;
The next political battle about to shape up in Minnesota is over redistricting.
Racist Democrats joined with racist Republicans to scheme to divide the Native American Indian vote over the years in order to keep Native Americans out of the Minnesota House and Senate and out of the U.S. Congress.
If Democrats are going to recover from their trouncing in northern Minnesota--- Jim Oberstar, Mary Olson and Brita Sailer soundly defeated, with Persell and Skoe most likely to be next to go; Democrats will have to fight for a redistricting plan that includes a U.S. House District that includes everything from Duluth west... taking in the Indian Reservations of Net Lake, Leech Lake, Red Lake and White Earth... this will assure Native American Indians have a voice in the Minnesota State Legislature as well as a voice in Washington representing Native American Indians from Minnesota... all working people will then have a voice in government.
Obviously Minnesota House and Senate Districts 4-A and 4 need to have their boundaries redrawn to enable Native American Indians to have voices at the real seat of power.
There is nothing new about using redistricting to assure full representation of people of color in the political process; the U.S. Supreme Court rulings on this are very clear.
Redistricting to end racism and enhance democracy for everyone is the way to enforce affirmative action in the electoral process the same way affirmative action (Executive Order #11246) is intended to end poverty by ending discrimination in employment... the Minnesota Democratic Farmer-Labor Party has a most dismal and disgraceful record in each area and "the chickens have come home to roost."
Now is the time for real change.
Alan L. Maki
Director of Organizing,
Midwest Casino Workers Organizing Council
The next political battle about to shape up in Minnesota is over redistricting.
Racist Democrats joined with racist Republicans to scheme to divide the Native American Indian vote over the years in order to keep Native Americans out of the Minnesota House and Senate and out of the U.S. Congress.
If Democrats are going to recover from their trouncing in northern Minnesota--- Jim Oberstar, Mary Olson and Brita Sailer soundly defeated, with Persell and Skoe most likely to be next to go; Democrats will have to fight for a redistricting plan that includes a U.S. House District that includes everything from Duluth west... taking in the Indian Reservations of Net Lake, Leech Lake, Red Lake and White Earth... this will assure Native American Indians have a voice in the Minnesota State Legislature as well as a voice in Washington representing Native American Indians from Minnesota... all working people will then have a voice in government.
Obviously Minnesota House and Senate Districts 4-A and 4 need to have their boundaries redrawn to enable Native American Indians to have voices at the real seat of power.
There is nothing new about using redistricting to assure full representation of people of color in the political process; the U.S. Supreme Court rulings on this are very clear.
Redistricting to end racism and enhance democracy for everyone is the way to enforce affirmative action in the electoral process the same way affirmative action (Executive Order #11246) is intended to end poverty by ending discrimination in employment... the Minnesota Democratic Farmer-Labor Party has a most dismal and disgraceful record in each area and "the chickens have come home to roost."
Now is the time for real change.
Alan L. Maki
Director of Organizing,
Midwest Casino Workers Organizing Council
Cougar seen on Wolf Lake trail camera
Published November 09 2010
From the Bemidji Pioneer Press
http://www.bemidjipioneer.com/event/article/id/100023437/group/News/
Cougar seen on Wolf Lake trail camera
As thousands of deer hunters fanned out across Minnesota’s woods Saturday, the buzz in tiny Wolf Lake was of a cougar captured on a trail camera two weeks ago.By: Sarah Smith, Park Rapids Enterprise
As thousands of deer hunters fanned out across Minnesota’s woods Saturday, the buzz in tiny Wolf Lake was of a cougar captured on a trail camera two weeks ago.
Scott Koskela set up the Bushnell trail cam near an alfalfa field on his father, Leroy’s property east of Wolf Lake.
Scott, who lives in Coon Rapids, didn’t check the images on the camera until about a week ago.
On Oct. 18 at 6:48 a.m. the infrared flash captured three images of a large cat with a rope-like tail sauntering through the field.
Scott Koskela said the images that he e-mailed to friends created an immediate stir.
“I didn’t realize the copies would circulate so fast,” he said a bit sheepishly. “I haven’t had time to call the DNR.”
Koskela declined to be photographed with his camera.
“I’m really not looking for publicity for myself,” he said.
One of the three images sits on the counter at the Wolf Lake Co-op.
Scott Brown, who lives nearby, said he’d seen a cougar on his property about two months ago.
“It was a small cougar, not like this one,” he said, nodding at the photo. “My kids have heard it when they’re out playing. They said it sounded like a woman screaming.”
Brown said when his father told the kids what the sound was, “they’re afraid to go outside,” he said.
If verified by the DNR, it would be the "fourth record" of a mountain lion's presence in Minnesota since August 18, 2010," said independent wildlife biologist Steve Loch of Babbitt.
The DNR believes that periodic cats wander this way from the Black Hills, but there’s no evidence of a breeding population in Minnesota.
Leroy Koskela said he recalls an occasional cougar in the area, but it’s been decades, he said.
Employees at the Co-op spoke of a large cat being seen near Sebeka lately.
“I had no doubt they’re around,” Scott Koskela said. He said he’s seen tracks periodically in the woods around the area.
The trail cam captured photos of the field before and after the cat wandered through and also caught several deer in the area.
More about Wolf Lake, Minnesota:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wolf_Lake,_Minnesota
Monday, November 8, 2010
No "democracy" in "e-democracy"
Mr. Perry, e-democracy Forum Manager;
I agree whole-heartedly with David Shove's characterization of e-democracy as a front for the MN DFL:
I agree whole-heartedly with David Shove's characterization of e-democracy as a front for the MN DFL:
E-dem is run in pro DFL capitalist bourgeois imperial powers that be
manner; you censor serious challenges to system evil; you don't allow any
response; and you ban those who don't fit. And what's more, you like it
that way and know we have no response. "Democracy" hah!
I have known this for a long time, and have been banned several times.
I have come to know that I have to be sneaky and indirect to get around
e-dem's serious love affair with censored parts of the powers that be.
--ds
And a further response from David Shove to "e-democracy:"
This is not so much you personally as e-dem generally - the several
branches in the several cities with the several moderators over as many
years - 10? - as it has been in existence. If records are kept, I have
been banned and warned several times, and often because the official
policy is to treat public people just like private people, as if public
people did not have in law LESS protection from charges, so that the
public could have MORE ability to expose and mobilize against bad
government and corporate etc policy. I have been written that public =
private, so it's not just an impression I have but a statement from e-dem.
-ds
I would go even further than Mr. Shove and state the true nature of e-democracy is to enable a bunch of foundation fronts for the DFL to receive grants and this money is then channeled in a way that supports DFL candidates and serves to evade all accountability.
I was banned because I continued to use phrase "AFFIRMATIVE ACTION" which Mr. Moen said was the same as "reparations" which for some reason is a banned topic on e-democracy even though "reparations" is a very important topic to many, many people who continue to suffer the affects of slavery, and the United States government does, according to many people--- including myself--- have a responsibility to award damages to this "class of people."
But, it was the epitome of racism for Mr. Rick Moen to ban me because I insisted on addressing the issue of "affirmative action" in opposition to HIS interpretation that "affirmative action" is the same as "reparations for slavery."
E-democracy is racist in every way, shape and form.
E-democracy is a front used by the DFL and its foundation whores financed by outfits like the extremely anti-labor and extremely racist Blandin Foundation.
Fortunately, as we have seen from this past Election on November 2, the way e-democracy is run by you two-faced racist hypocrites interested in maintaining the DFL as the same old corrupt party of slavery, banking, power generating, mining and forestry industries raping the land and exploiting the people while engaged in a genocidal campaign that continues to this very day as e-democracy has also banned all discussion of the "Compacts" the DFL created for the mobsters who manage the Indian Gaming Industry as it was even ruled an improper topic to continue talking about how workers are forced to work in these smoke-filled casinos at poverty wages without any rights under state or federal labor laws all created by a bunch of crooked and corrupt elements inside of the Minnesota DFL like "Skip" Humphrey--- none of this is allowed for discussion on e-democracy where it is prohibited, under the guise of "civility" to call corrupt politicians corrupt and racists racist... e-democracy through its racist and undemocratic behavior that EVERYONE identifies with Brian Melendez and the Zionist AIPAC apologists for the Israeli killing machine (language also "banned" on e-democracy in the name of "civility"--- well, e-democracy through its racist and undemocratic--- as well as anti-labor--- disposition as a front for the Summit Hill Club and the MNDFL Business Caucus, has contributed to doing the DFL in at the polls... and for this I and 40,000 casino workers in Minnesota rejoice as the very racist and very anti-labor and pro-business DFL candidates you have sought to shield from the criticism have now been defeated:
James Oberstar
State Senator Mary Olson
House Member Brita Sailer
House Member David Olin
House Member Bernie Leider
Good riddance; instead of using e-democracy where there is no democracy; we took our campaign to defeat these racist bastards and bigots out to the people in a variety of other ways.
Thank you e-democracy for forcing us out into the communities where our electoral actvities met with great success as we encouraged voters not to vote for these racist bigots whose campaigns were financed by the racist John McCarthy and the Minnesota Indian Gaming Association which manipulated and maneuvered to have me banned from e-democracy.
Another subject taboo on e-democracy is the fact that not one single Native American Indian has a seat in the 200-member plus Minnesota State Legislature in spite of the fact that Minnesota has one of the largest Native American Indian populations in the United States of America with 11 Indian Nations that are supposed to be "sovereign" yet have to come begging to the State of Minnesota and the United States government for "permission" for everything they do... another topic I was warned not to comment on on your "e-democracy" which is obviously mis-named.
Mr. Perry, you can take your "e-democracy" and shove it far up into a place where the sun never shines.
In closing I would note that you have allowed Sally Fineday, another mouthpiece for the Minnesota Indian Gaming Association, to conduct the most disgusting campaign of lies against me personally and the Midwest Casino Workers Organizing Council at the behest of her handlers, John McCarthy and Stanley Crooks who exploits over 5,000 casino workers in his Mystic Lake Casino empire and forces them to sign, as conditions of employment, a statement saying that they understand they will be immediately terminated if they are found to be engaging in any union organizing efforts... something that is completely contrary to every human right and labor rights standard as recognized by the civilized international community--- again, a topic you have banned from discussion on your "e-democracy."
Mr. Perry, why don't you explain the stance of "e-democracy" on "net neutrality?" Lol!
Other topics "e-democracy" has banned from discussion include:
ending U.S. aid to Israel and divestment of state funds from Israel
a national public health care system
a national public day care system
On the other hand, even after I was banned from "e-democracy;" all of you "moderators" allowed me to be attacked without let up based upon the most vicious anti-communist, racist, anti-Semitic and anti-labor campaign... true to the Minnesota Democratic Party's founding roots of defending slavery and the genocidal campaigns waged against the Native American Indian people and its support for big-agribusiness against small family farmers and its unrelenting campaign against organized labor that culminated with the "great liberal" Hubert H. Humphrey writing the Communist Control Act which still governs "e-democracy."
I am glad to see that ever larger numbers of people are coming to see "e-democracy" for what it really is... as David Shove has pointed out, you are nothing but "shills for the MNDFL."
Mr. Perry, have I provided you with enough "specifics?" I hope you will take this e-mail to the full board of "e-democracy" and provide copies to the Minnesota Indian Gaming Association, Brian Melendez the Chair of the MNDFL and the Blandin Foundation.
In closing, I would note that I was prohibited from advocating for Mark Dayton's candidacy on "e-democracy" because I noted he was for the enforcement of "Affirmative Action" (Executive Order # 11246) so I don't find it strange that "e-democracy" is now trying to thwart and stymie any discussion about how the DFL leadership, working with Karl Roves attorneys under the guise of a "fair election" is trying to deny Mark Dayton his position as Governor of Minnesota an elected position he won by 9,000 votes... since when is winning by a slim margin now an opportunity to challenge an election without having to cite any irregularities... but, what the heck, it is no different than another topic that has been ruled as banned from e-democracy: the right of employers to challenge unemployment benefits due employees without having to provide a reason... and, it is right in line with another topic banned from discussion on "e-democracy," the Draconian "at-will hiring; at-will firing" legislation which remains on the books because it is supported by the DFL Summit Hill Club and the MNDFL Business Caucus along with their Republican friends... all now working in cahoots with Republicans to deny Mark Dayton his hard worked for victory where you moderators preach "civility" but you allowed Mark Dayton to be attacked to no end as being "crazy;" and then, when challenged, you claimed it was acceptable behavior because Mark Dayton admitted to be under the care of a psychiatrist and was being medicated as a result... how pitifully bigoted and biased "e-democracy" is while claiming just the opposite.
Oh, yes; and lest we forget... it was in 2007 I was warned I could not call Barack Obama "a flim-flam man and con-artist working for Wall Street."
Mr. Perry; since you obviously were inviting my comments by sending this e-mail exchange on to me I decided to provide my input even though trying to discuss anything with you DFL party hacks is a waste of time; but, I am passing my comments along to others... and for those not receiving this "Bcc'ed;" you can tell your friends to read this on my popular blog that has more readers than "e-democracy" has participants:
http://thepodunkblog.blogspot.com/
So, like with your daily newspaper, when reading anything on "e-democracy," make sure you "read between the lines."
Sincerely,
Alan L. Maki
Director of Organizing,
Midwest Casino Workers Organizing Council
Quoting Matt Perry:
> Mr. Shove,
>
> Thanks for taking the time to provide feedback.
>
> It appears you are implying bias, but without specifics, I cannot
> respond to such a charge. You don't know my politics from the forum. I
> make a point of not posting to the forum although that is my right so as
> to even further reduce the possibility of the perception of bias. Please
> do share any data you have related to this concern.
>
> I would value getting specific examples of the general concerns you
> raise. If I am being inconsistent or favoring one group (or issue
> position) over another then I can make adjustments. That helps me do a
> better job as forum manager.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Matt Perry
> East Harriet Farmstead/Minneapolis
> Forum Manager
>
> David Shove wrote:
>
> >E-dem is run in pro DFL capitalist bourgeois imperial powers that be
> >manner; you censor serious challenges to system evil; you don't allow any
> >response; and you ban those who don't fit. And what's more, you like it
> >that way and know we have no response. "Democracy" hah!
> >
> >I have known this for a long time, and have been benned several times.
> >
> >I have come to know that I have to be sneaky and indirect to get around
> >e-dem's serious love affair with censored parts of the powers that be.
> >
> >--ds
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >On Mon, 8 Nov 2010, Matt Perry wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >>Folks,
> >>
> >>There are many aspects of the Minnesota Politics & Issues Forum that make it a
> unique and positive experience for "information sharing and discussion of
> Minnesota public policy issues and politics."
> >>
> >>A key component are the civility rules of this forum. The use of inflamed
> speech is a violation of the forum participation rules. For example, posing
> questions like "Do you take personal responsibility for the deaths caused by
> Democratic policies" is inflamed speech.
> >>
> >>If you cannot make your point in a civil manner, then this is not the forum
> for you.
> >>
> >>4. Be Civil - No insults, name calling or inflamed speech. Personal one-on-one
> arguments, disagreements or personality conflicts are not appropriate on the
> public discussion forum. The Forum Manager shall provide guidance to
> participants on what is appropriate and what is not allowed. Attempts at humor
> or sarcasm should be labeled ... ;-), :-), etc.
> >>
> >>It is possible to make your point in an impassioned, even unvarnished way
> while keeping it civil. Please let us all do so.
> >>
> >>As a reminder, discussion of the forum management in the forum is not allowed.
> Instead, please contact me directly and *offlist* if you have questions or
> comments about this post or other forum management issues.
> >>
> >>Thank you.
> >>
> >>Matt Perry
> >>East Harriet Farmstead/Minneapolis
> >>Forum Manager
> >>
> >>
> >>Matt Perry
> >>East Harriet Farmstead, Minneapolis
> >>About Matt Perry: http://forums.e-democracy.org/p/4U0LZe6OT3dFlu3DaAjylX
> >>
> >>View full topic, share on Facebook, Twitter, etc:
> >> http://forums.e-democracy.org/r/topic/1HcwODRY0XfUAPBz6V3TCZ
> >>- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> >> To post, e-mail: mn-politics@forums.e-democracy.org or "Reply-to-All" to
> post publicly.
> >> To leave or for daily digest, type "unsubscribe" OR "digest on" in subject
> instead.
> >>
> >> Forum home: http://forums.e-democracy.org/groups/mn-politics
> >>- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> >>Need help? http://e-democracy.org/support Hosting thanks:
> http://OnlineGroups.Net
> >>Follow us on Facebook: http://facebook.com/edemocracyorg
> >>
> >> Rules: Be civil - No name calling, personal attacks, etc.
> >> http://forums.e-democracy.org/groups/mn-politics/charter
> >>Complaints to: mn-politics-fm@e-democracy.org
> >>
> >>
> >>
>
>
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:
http://thepodunkblog.blogspot.com/
Sincerely,
Alan L. Maki
Director of Organizing,
Midwest Casino Workers Organizing Council
Quoting Matt Perry
> Mr. Shove,
>
> Thanks for taking the time to provide feedback.
>
> It appears you are implying bias, but without specifics, I cannot
> respond to such a charge. You don't know my politics from the forum. I
> make a point of not posting to the forum although that is my right so as
> to even further reduce the possibility of the perception of bias. Please
> do share any data you have related to this concern.
>
> I would value getting specific examples of the general concerns you
> raise. If I am being inconsistent or favoring one group (or issue
> position) over another then I can make adjustments. That helps me do a
> better job as forum manager.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Matt Perry
> East Harriet Farmstead/Minneapolis
> Forum Manager
>
> David Shove wrote:
>
> >E-dem is run in pro DFL capitalist bourgeois imperial powers that be
> >manner; you censor serious challenges to system evil; you don't allow any
> >response; and you ban those who don't fit. And what's more, you like it
> >that way and know we have no response. "Democracy" hah!
> >
> >I have known this for a long time, and have been benned several times.
> >
> >I have come to know that I have to be sneaky and indirect to get around
> >e-dem's serious love affair with censored parts of the powers that be.
> >
> >--ds
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >On Mon, 8 Nov 2010, Matt Perry wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >>Folks,
> >>
> >>There are many aspects of the Minnesota Politics & Issues Forum that make it a
> unique and positive experience for "information sharing and discussion of
> Minnesota public policy issues and politics."
> >>
> >>A key component are the civility rules of this forum. The use of inflamed
> speech is a violation of the forum participation rules. For example, posing
> questions like "Do you take personal responsibility for the deaths caused by
> Democratic policies" is inflamed speech.
> >>
> >>If you cannot make your point in a civil manner, then this is not the forum
> for you.
> >>
> >>4. Be Civil - No insults, name calling or inflamed speech. Personal one-on-one
> arguments, disagreements or personality conflicts are not appropriate on the
> public discussion forum. The Forum Manager shall provide guidance to
> participants on what is appropriate and what is not allowed. Attempts at humor
> or sarcasm should be labeled ... ;-), :-), etc.
> >>
> >>It is possible to make your point in an impassioned, even unvarnished way
> while keeping it civil. Please let us all do so.
> >>
> >>As a reminder, discussion of the forum management in the forum is not allowed.
> Instead, please contact me directly and *offlist* if you have questions or
> comments about this post or other forum management issues.
> >>
> >>Thank you.
> >>
> >>Matt Perry
> >>East Harriet Farmstead/Minneapolis
> >>Forum Manager
> >>
> >>
> >>Matt Perry
> >>East Harriet Farmstead, Minneapolis
> >>About Matt Perry: http://forums.e-democracy.org/p/4U0LZe6OT3dFlu3DaAjylX
> >>
> >>View full topic, share on Facebook, Twitter, etc:
> >> http://forums.e-democracy.org/r/topic/1HcwODRY0XfUAPBz6V3TCZ
> >>- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> >> To post, e-mail: mn-politics@forums.e-democracy.org or "Reply-to-All" to
> post publicly.
> >> To leave or for daily digest, type "unsubscribe" OR "digest on" in subject
> instead.
> >>
> >> Forum home: http://forums.e-democracy.org/groups/mn-politics
> >>- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> >>Need help? http://e-democracy.org/support Hosting thanks:
> http://OnlineGroups.Net
> >>Follow us on Facebook: http://facebook.com/edemocracyorg
> >>
> >> Rules: Be civil - No name calling, personal attacks, etc.
> >> http://forums.e-democracy.org/groups/mn-politics/charter
> >>Complaints to: mn-politics-fm@e-democracy.org
> >>
> >>
> >>
>
>
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:
http://thepodunkblog.blogspot.com/
Sunday, November 7, 2010
Peace = health care + child care + over 15,000,000 new jobs
Neither Paul Krugman nor Evan Bayh place the questions about the economy correctly by asking this very important and fundamental question:
How is Obama's war economy working for you?
One has to ask how it can possibly be that neither Krugman the economist nor Bayh the politician don't even mention these extremely costly dirty wars in Iraq and Afghanistan in either of their op/ed pieces when putting an end to this massive waste is what is required if we our going to solve our many problems.
In fact, Bayh talks about Obama making a mistake about putting health care reform before creating jobs while Krugman turns around and says that Bayh is wrong.
Well, the fact is both Krugman and Bayh are wrong because Obama and the Democrats could have killed three birds with one stone by ending these dirty wars and using the money saved to finance a National Public Health Care System providing the American people with free health care through a national network of 30,000 public health care centers which would have created around ten-million new decent good-paying jobs.
Peace = health care + jobs
There would have been enough money left to create a National Public Child Care System, too; thus solving another major problem for most working class families while creating over 5 million new jobs.
Peace = health care + child care + over 15,000,000 new jobs
Why is it so hard for these economists and politicians to figure out the most jobs are created by putting people to work solving the problems of working people while creating a more just and humane society?
If additional funding is needed you simply tax the hell out of the rich who have been stashing away their profits for four or five generations so what we need to do is take their money to redistribute this massive wealth that working people created and Wall Street coupon clippers socked away.
If need be a tax similar to the Social Security tax could be implemented to pay for national public health care and national public child care... no one would or could object since they would be getting something of real value instead of the bloody mess that comes with wars that cost way more than health care or child care ever would cost.
Paul Krugman says he wants to hear answers so this is my answer to him and the politicians.
I don't get it; how can any reasonably intelligent person not understand that by implementing both National Public Health Care and National Public Child Care programs you create jobs at the same time?
Chances are, like the wars, which the majority of the American people want to end... the majority of the American people would favor creating both a National Public Health Care System and a National Public Child Care System when given the facts.
Would anyone care to venture how it is an economist the stature of the award-winning Paul Krugman and a long-time serving U.S. Senator like Evan Bayh could not come up with any of this?
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/05/opinion/05krugman.html?src=me&ref=general
November 4, 2010
The Focus Hocus-Pocus
By PAUL KRUGMAN
Democrats, declared Evan Bayh in an Op-Ed article on Wednesday in The Times, “overreached by focusing on health care rather than job creation during a severe recession.” Many others have been saying the same thing: the notion that the Obama administration erred by not focusing on the economy is hardening into conventional wisdom.
But I have no idea what, if anything, people mean when they say that. The whole focus on “focus” is, as I see it, an act of intellectual cowardice — a way to criticize President Obama’s record without explaining what you would have done differently.
After all, are people who say that Mr. Obama should have focused on the economy saying that he should have pursued a bigger stimulus package? Are they saying that he should have taken a tougher line with the banks? If not, what are they saying? That he should have walked around with furrowed brow muttering, “I’m focused, I’m focused”?
Mr. Obama’s problem wasn’t lack of focus; it was lack of audacity. At the start of his administration he settled for an economic plan that was far too weak. He compounded this original sin both by pretending that everything was on track and by adopting the rhetoric of his enemies.
The aftermath of major financial crises is almost always terrible: severe crises are typically followed by multiple years of very high unemployment. And when Mr. Obama took office, America had just suffered its worst financial crisis since the 1930s. What the nation needed, given this grim prospect, was a really ambitious recovery plan.
Could Mr. Obama actually have offered such a plan? He might not have been able to get a big plan through Congress, or at least not without using extraordinary political tactics. Still, he could have chosen to be bold — to make Plan A the passage of a truly adequate economic plan, with Plan B being to place blame for the economy’s troubles on Republicans if they succeeded in blocking such a plan.
But he chose a seemingly safer course: a medium-size stimulus package that was clearly not up to the task. And that’s not 20/20 hindsight. In early 2009, many economists, yours truly included, were more or less frantically warning that the administration’s proposals were nowhere near bold enough.
Worse, there was no Plan B. By late 2009, it was already obvious that the worriers had been right, that the program was much too small. Mr. Obama could have gone to the nation and said, “My predecessor left the economy in even worse shape than we realized, and we need further action.” But he didn’t. Instead, he and his officials continued to claim that their original plan was just right, damaging their credibility even further as the economy continued to fall short.
Meanwhile, the administration’s bank-friendly policies and rhetoric — dictated by fear of hurting financial confidence — ended up fueling populist anger, to the benefit of even more bank-friendly Republicans. Mr. Obama added to his problems by effectively conceding the argument over the role of government in a depressed economy.
I felt a sense of despair during Mr. Obama’s first State of the Union address, in which he declared that “families across the country are tightening their belts and making tough decisions. The federal government should do the same.” Not only was this bad economics — right now the government must spend, because the private sector can’t or won’t — it was almost a verbatim repeat of what John Boehner, the soon-to-be House speaker, said when attacking the original stimulus. If the president won’t speak up for his own economic philosophy, who will?
So where, in this story, does “focus” come in? Lack of nerve? Yes. Lack of courage in one’s own convictions? Definitely. Lack of focus? No.
And why would failing to tackle health care have produced a better outcome? The focus people never explain.
Of course, there’s a subtext to the whole line that health reform was a mistake: namely, that Democrats should stop acting like Democrats and go back to being Republicans-lite. Parse what people like Mr. Bayh are saying, and it amounts to demanding that Mr. Obama spend the next two years cringing and admitting that conservatives were right.
There is an alternative: Mr. Obama can take a stand.
For one thing, he still has the ability to engineer significant relief to homeowners, one area where his administration completely dropped the ball during its first two years. Beyond that, Plan B is still available. He can propose real measures to create jobs and aid the unemployed and put Republicans on the spot for standing in the way of the help Americans need.
Would taking such a stand be politically risky? Yes, of course. But Mr. Obama’s economic policy ended up being a political disaster precisely because he tried to play it safe. It’s time for him to try something different.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/03/opinion/03bayh.html?partner=rssnyt&emc=rss
OP-ED CONTRIBUTOR
Where Do Democrats Go Next?
Brian Stauffer
By EVAN BAYH
Published: November 2, 2010
DEMOCRATS can recover from the disappointments of this election and set the stage for success in 2012. But to do so we must learn from Tuesday’s results.
Many of our problems were foreseeable. A public unhappy about the economy will take it out on the party in power, even if the problems began under previous management. What’s more, when one party controls everything — the House, the Senate, the White House — disgruntled voters have only one target for their ire. And the president’s party almost always loses seats in midterm elections.
Nonetheless, recurring patterns of history, broad economic forces and the laws of politics don’t entirely account for the Democrats’ predicament. To a degree we are authors of our own misfortune, and we must chart a better path forward.
It is clear that Democrats over-interpreted our mandate. Talk of a “political realignment” and a “new progressive era” proved wishful thinking. Exit polls in 2008 showed that 22 percent of voters identified themselves as liberals, 32 percent as conservatives and 44 percent as moderates. An electorate that is 76 percent moderate to conservative was not crying out for a move to the left.
We also overreached by focusing on health care rather than job creation during a severe recession. It was a noble aspiration, but $1 trillion in new spending and a major entitlement expansion are best attempted when the Treasury is flush and the economy strong, hardly our situation today.
And we were too deferential to our most zealous supporters. During election season, Congress sought to placate those on the extreme left and motivate the base — but that meant that our final efforts before the election focused on trying to allow gays in the military, change our immigration system and repeal the George W. Bush-era tax cuts. These are legitimate issues but unlikely to resonate with moderate swing voters in a season of economic discontent.
With these lessons in mind, Democrats can begin to rebuild. Where to start?
First, we have more than a communications problem — the public heard us but disagreed with our approach. Democrats need not reassess our goals for America, but we need to seriously rethink how to reach them.
Second, don’t blame the voters. They aren’t stupid or addled by fear. They are skeptical about government efficacy, worried about the deficit and angry that Democrats placed other priorities above their main concern: economic growth.
So, in the near term, every policy must be viewed through a single prism: does it help the economy grow?
A good place to start would be tax reform. Get rates down to make American businesses globally competitive. Reward savings and investment. Simplify the code to reduce compliance costs and broaden the base. In 1986, this approach attracted bipartisan support and fostered growth.
The stereotype of Democrats as wild-eyed spenders and taxers has been resurrected. To regain our political footing, we must prove to moderates that Democrats can make tough choices. Democrats should ban earmarks until the budget is balanced. The amount saved would be modest — but with ordinary Americans sacrificing so much, the symbolic power of politicians cutting their own perks is huge.
Democrats should support a freeze on federal hiring and pay increases. Government isn’t a privileged class and cannot be immune to the times.
The most important area for spending restraint is entitlement reform. Democrats should offer changes to the system that would save hundreds of billions of dollars while preserving the safety net for our neediest. For instance, we could introduce “progressive indexation,” which would provide lower cost-of-living increases for more affluent Social Security recipients, or devise a more accurate measure of inflation’s effects on all recipients’ income.
Democrats should also improve legislation already enacted. Health care reform, financial regulation and other initiatives were first attempts at solving complex problems, not holy writ. The administration’s grant of sensible exemptions to the health care bill, permitting some employers to offer only basic coverage, is an example of common-sense, results-oriented fine-tuning.
If President Obama and Congressional Democrats were to take these and other moderate steps on tax reform, deficit reduction and energy security, they would confront Republicans with a quandary: cooperate to make America more prosperous and financially stable, running the risk that the president would likely receive the credit, or obstruct what voters perceive as sensible solutions.
Having seen so many moderates go down to defeat in this year’s primaries, few Republicans in Congress will be likely to collaborate. And as the Republicans — including the party’s 2012 presidential candidates — genuflect before the Tea Party and other elements of the newly empowered right wing, President Obama can seize the center.
I’m betting the president and his advisers understand much of this. If so, assuming the economy recovers, President Obama can win re-election; Democrats can set the stage for historic achievements in a second term. The extremes of both parties will be disappointed. But the vast center yearning for progress will applaud, and the country will benefit.
Evan Bayh, a Democratic senator from Indiana, is retiring from the Senate in January.
How is Obama's war economy working for you?
One has to ask how it can possibly be that neither Krugman the economist nor Bayh the politician don't even mention these extremely costly dirty wars in Iraq and Afghanistan in either of their op/ed pieces when putting an end to this massive waste is what is required if we our going to solve our many problems.
In fact, Bayh talks about Obama making a mistake about putting health care reform before creating jobs while Krugman turns around and says that Bayh is wrong.
Well, the fact is both Krugman and Bayh are wrong because Obama and the Democrats could have killed three birds with one stone by ending these dirty wars and using the money saved to finance a National Public Health Care System providing the American people with free health care through a national network of 30,000 public health care centers which would have created around ten-million new decent good-paying jobs.
Peace = health care + jobs
There would have been enough money left to create a National Public Child Care System, too; thus solving another major problem for most working class families while creating over 5 million new jobs.
Peace = health care + child care + over 15,000,000 new jobs
Why is it so hard for these economists and politicians to figure out the most jobs are created by putting people to work solving the problems of working people while creating a more just and humane society?
If additional funding is needed you simply tax the hell out of the rich who have been stashing away their profits for four or five generations so what we need to do is take their money to redistribute this massive wealth that working people created and Wall Street coupon clippers socked away.
If need be a tax similar to the Social Security tax could be implemented to pay for national public health care and national public child care... no one would or could object since they would be getting something of real value instead of the bloody mess that comes with wars that cost way more than health care or child care ever would cost.
Paul Krugman says he wants to hear answers so this is my answer to him and the politicians.
I don't get it; how can any reasonably intelligent person not understand that by implementing both National Public Health Care and National Public Child Care programs you create jobs at the same time?
Chances are, like the wars, which the majority of the American people want to end... the majority of the American people would favor creating both a National Public Health Care System and a National Public Child Care System when given the facts.
Would anyone care to venture how it is an economist the stature of the award-winning Paul Krugman and a long-time serving U.S. Senator like Evan Bayh could not come up with any of this?
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/05/opinion/05krugman.html?src=me&ref=general
November 4, 2010
The Focus Hocus-Pocus
By PAUL KRUGMAN
Democrats, declared Evan Bayh in an Op-Ed article on Wednesday in The Times, “overreached by focusing on health care rather than job creation during a severe recession.” Many others have been saying the same thing: the notion that the Obama administration erred by not focusing on the economy is hardening into conventional wisdom.
But I have no idea what, if anything, people mean when they say that. The whole focus on “focus” is, as I see it, an act of intellectual cowardice — a way to criticize President Obama’s record without explaining what you would have done differently.
After all, are people who say that Mr. Obama should have focused on the economy saying that he should have pursued a bigger stimulus package? Are they saying that he should have taken a tougher line with the banks? If not, what are they saying? That he should have walked around with furrowed brow muttering, “I’m focused, I’m focused”?
Mr. Obama’s problem wasn’t lack of focus; it was lack of audacity. At the start of his administration he settled for an economic plan that was far too weak. He compounded this original sin both by pretending that everything was on track and by adopting the rhetoric of his enemies.
The aftermath of major financial crises is almost always terrible: severe crises are typically followed by multiple years of very high unemployment. And when Mr. Obama took office, America had just suffered its worst financial crisis since the 1930s. What the nation needed, given this grim prospect, was a really ambitious recovery plan.
Could Mr. Obama actually have offered such a plan? He might not have been able to get a big plan through Congress, or at least not without using extraordinary political tactics. Still, he could have chosen to be bold — to make Plan A the passage of a truly adequate economic plan, with Plan B being to place blame for the economy’s troubles on Republicans if they succeeded in blocking such a plan.
But he chose a seemingly safer course: a medium-size stimulus package that was clearly not up to the task. And that’s not 20/20 hindsight. In early 2009, many economists, yours truly included, were more or less frantically warning that the administration’s proposals were nowhere near bold enough.
Worse, there was no Plan B. By late 2009, it was already obvious that the worriers had been right, that the program was much too small. Mr. Obama could have gone to the nation and said, “My predecessor left the economy in even worse shape than we realized, and we need further action.” But he didn’t. Instead, he and his officials continued to claim that their original plan was just right, damaging their credibility even further as the economy continued to fall short.
Meanwhile, the administration’s bank-friendly policies and rhetoric — dictated by fear of hurting financial confidence — ended up fueling populist anger, to the benefit of even more bank-friendly Republicans. Mr. Obama added to his problems by effectively conceding the argument over the role of government in a depressed economy.
I felt a sense of despair during Mr. Obama’s first State of the Union address, in which he declared that “families across the country are tightening their belts and making tough decisions. The federal government should do the same.” Not only was this bad economics — right now the government must spend, because the private sector can’t or won’t — it was almost a verbatim repeat of what John Boehner, the soon-to-be House speaker, said when attacking the original stimulus. If the president won’t speak up for his own economic philosophy, who will?
So where, in this story, does “focus” come in? Lack of nerve? Yes. Lack of courage in one’s own convictions? Definitely. Lack of focus? No.
And why would failing to tackle health care have produced a better outcome? The focus people never explain.
Of course, there’s a subtext to the whole line that health reform was a mistake: namely, that Democrats should stop acting like Democrats and go back to being Republicans-lite. Parse what people like Mr. Bayh are saying, and it amounts to demanding that Mr. Obama spend the next two years cringing and admitting that conservatives were right.
There is an alternative: Mr. Obama can take a stand.
For one thing, he still has the ability to engineer significant relief to homeowners, one area where his administration completely dropped the ball during its first two years. Beyond that, Plan B is still available. He can propose real measures to create jobs and aid the unemployed and put Republicans on the spot for standing in the way of the help Americans need.
Would taking such a stand be politically risky? Yes, of course. But Mr. Obama’s economic policy ended up being a political disaster precisely because he tried to play it safe. It’s time for him to try something different.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/03/opinion/03bayh.html?partner=rssnyt&emc=rss
OP-ED CONTRIBUTOR
Where Do Democrats Go Next?
Brian Stauffer
By EVAN BAYH
Published: November 2, 2010
DEMOCRATS can recover from the disappointments of this election and set the stage for success in 2012. But to do so we must learn from Tuesday’s results.
Many of our problems were foreseeable. A public unhappy about the economy will take it out on the party in power, even if the problems began under previous management. What’s more, when one party controls everything — the House, the Senate, the White House — disgruntled voters have only one target for their ire. And the president’s party almost always loses seats in midterm elections.
Nonetheless, recurring patterns of history, broad economic forces and the laws of politics don’t entirely account for the Democrats’ predicament. To a degree we are authors of our own misfortune, and we must chart a better path forward.
It is clear that Democrats over-interpreted our mandate. Talk of a “political realignment” and a “new progressive era” proved wishful thinking. Exit polls in 2008 showed that 22 percent of voters identified themselves as liberals, 32 percent as conservatives and 44 percent as moderates. An electorate that is 76 percent moderate to conservative was not crying out for a move to the left.
We also overreached by focusing on health care rather than job creation during a severe recession. It was a noble aspiration, but $1 trillion in new spending and a major entitlement expansion are best attempted when the Treasury is flush and the economy strong, hardly our situation today.
And we were too deferential to our most zealous supporters. During election season, Congress sought to placate those on the extreme left and motivate the base — but that meant that our final efforts before the election focused on trying to allow gays in the military, change our immigration system and repeal the George W. Bush-era tax cuts. These are legitimate issues but unlikely to resonate with moderate swing voters in a season of economic discontent.
With these lessons in mind, Democrats can begin to rebuild. Where to start?
First, we have more than a communications problem — the public heard us but disagreed with our approach. Democrats need not reassess our goals for America, but we need to seriously rethink how to reach them.
Second, don’t blame the voters. They aren’t stupid or addled by fear. They are skeptical about government efficacy, worried about the deficit and angry that Democrats placed other priorities above their main concern: economic growth.
So, in the near term, every policy must be viewed through a single prism: does it help the economy grow?
A good place to start would be tax reform. Get rates down to make American businesses globally competitive. Reward savings and investment. Simplify the code to reduce compliance costs and broaden the base. In 1986, this approach attracted bipartisan support and fostered growth.
The stereotype of Democrats as wild-eyed spenders and taxers has been resurrected. To regain our political footing, we must prove to moderates that Democrats can make tough choices. Democrats should ban earmarks until the budget is balanced. The amount saved would be modest — but with ordinary Americans sacrificing so much, the symbolic power of politicians cutting their own perks is huge.
Democrats should support a freeze on federal hiring and pay increases. Government isn’t a privileged class and cannot be immune to the times.
The most important area for spending restraint is entitlement reform. Democrats should offer changes to the system that would save hundreds of billions of dollars while preserving the safety net for our neediest. For instance, we could introduce “progressive indexation,” which would provide lower cost-of-living increases for more affluent Social Security recipients, or devise a more accurate measure of inflation’s effects on all recipients’ income.
Democrats should also improve legislation already enacted. Health care reform, financial regulation and other initiatives were first attempts at solving complex problems, not holy writ. The administration’s grant of sensible exemptions to the health care bill, permitting some employers to offer only basic coverage, is an example of common-sense, results-oriented fine-tuning.
If President Obama and Congressional Democrats were to take these and other moderate steps on tax reform, deficit reduction and energy security, they would confront Republicans with a quandary: cooperate to make America more prosperous and financially stable, running the risk that the president would likely receive the credit, or obstruct what voters perceive as sensible solutions.
Having seen so many moderates go down to defeat in this year’s primaries, few Republicans in Congress will be likely to collaborate. And as the Republicans — including the party’s 2012 presidential candidates — genuflect before the Tea Party and other elements of the newly empowered right wing, President Obama can seize the center.
I’m betting the president and his advisers understand much of this. If so, assuming the economy recovers, President Obama can win re-election; Democrats can set the stage for historic achievements in a second term. The extremes of both parties will be disappointed. But the vast center yearning for progress will applaud, and the country will benefit.
Evan Bayh, a Democratic senator from Indiana, is retiring from the Senate in January.
Thursday, November 4, 2010
Minnesota Republicans and Democrats to fight like cats and dogs over 9,000 votes to figure out who will be the next governor...
Letter to the Editor; Submitted for publication exclusively to the Bemidji Pioneer.
As an ardent supporter of Governor-elect Mark Dayton, I hesitate to bring this issue forward; however, I feel in the interest of fairness in the electoral process there is something that needs to be considered.
Ironically, Dayton could be done in because of the racism in the Democratic Farmer-Labor Party perpetrated through its collaboration with the Minnesota Indian Gaming Association which has schemed to elect Democratic Party politicians beholden to enforcing a cheap pool of Indian labor which is responsible for the poverty on Minnesota's Indian Reservations--- pay casino workers poverty wages and then deprive them of all rights accorded other workers under state and federal labor laws, and the workers and their families and the entire community will be poor.
As Frances Perkins, President Franklin D. Roosevelt's Secretary of Labor repeatedly pointed out: Workers without rights are not likely to organize labor unions to defend their rights and livelihoods or strive to have a voice at work; the consequences are obvious: termination.
So, in order to assure and secure the required number of votes for these Democratic Party politicians who can be counted on to enforce the racist poverty inherent in the anti-labor "Compacts" creating the Indian Gaming Industry, one of the front groups of the Minnesota Indian Gaming Association, the Native Vote Alliance of Minnesota, was allowed to register voters improperly in a manner in which residences could not be verified in any manner; and, election officials, many of whom are backed with campaign contributions from the Minnesota Indian Gaming Association, failed to enforce state voter registration laws so no one has any way of knowing if the tens of thousands of Minnesotans registered to vote by the Native Vote Alliance of Minnesota are even real people and if they are actually live in the districts in which they are voting.
Ironically, it was the Minnesota Democratic Farmer-Labor Party, the recipient of tens of millions of dollars in campaign contributions from the Minnesota Indian Gaming Association, which used these very voter registration rules to prevent the Warriors for Justice from attaining ballot status.
Now what will happen if the same rules as applied to the Warriors for Justice in keeping them off the ballot are applied to the votes cast in this November 2 Election?
Once these Voter Registrations are examined by the attorneys hand-picked by Karl Rove at the request of the Minnesota Republican Party to scrutinize everything, might Mark Dayton's votes derived from these "registered" voters be challenged? Thirty-thousand votes challenged; with a 9,000 vote lead. I wonder what some high-priced attorneys whose intent it is to overturn the will of the people through legal shenanigans might do with all of this? Have the Democrats done themselves in by keeping the Warriors for Justice off the ballot? Certainly the United States Supreme Court is going to rule that if these thirty-thousand votes casts by "illegally" registered "voters" are appropriate; the signatures obtained by the Warriors for Justice are also valid... now what happens; an expensive new election is ordered just because these disgusting DFL leaders and elected public officials beholden to the Minnesota Indian Gaming Association are intolerant towards allowing others on the ballot to compete with them for votes have no tolerance for democracy when their casino profits and campaign contributions are at stake?
I wonder what is in store for Native American Indians when boundaries are redrawn and redistricting takes place?
Will anyone be seeing to it that redistricting takes place in a fair way enabling Native American Indians to have a chance to get elected to the real seats of power in Minnesota: the Minnesota State House and Senate?
I venture to guess that there are many Minnesotans, just like me, who are fed up with Democrats and Republicans who want our votes but do nothing for us as they look after the interests on the health insurance companies and the casino managements who fund their campaigns; people, fed up just like me, who would appreciate the opportunity to vote for people like the Warriors for Justice who really care about all of us, ending poverty, protecting the environment and the general welfare of the public.
As Republicans and Democrats now quibble and fight like cats and dogs over 9,000 votes... who do we have among the politicians just elected who will fight with the same determination to see to it that casino workers enjoy the same rights as all other workers protected by state and federal labor laws? Who among these newly elected politicians will stand up a fight to end poverty with the same determination they now fight over 9,000 votes?
By-the-way; does anyone find it strange that the Native Vote Alliance of Minnesota has no interest in electing Native American Indians to the Minnesota State Legislature? Why not? Would the issue of poverty be too much for these cheating and lying casino managements who force casino workers to work in smoke-filled casinos at poverty wages without any rights to withstand? Or, would the issue of poverty constantly being brought forward be too much for a group of two-hundred plus legislators who don't receive any campaign contributions from the poor be too awkward to deal with?
I find it interesting how election laws can be twisted and perverted in interpretation by the well-heeled who think they, and only they, have the right to engage in politics while hypocritically claiming to be representing all of us when they really only care about the financial interests of those funding their campaigns.
Come on, let's not be afraid to talk about what is going on in Minnesota; do politicians getting campaign contributions from the Minnesota Indian Gaming Association care as much about the plight of 40,000 casino workers and their families as they care about John McCarthy, the head of the Minnesota Indian Gaming Association, living high on the hog up on a hill in an exclusive neighborhood as a direct result of the poverty the Indian Gaming Association forces upon Native American Indians and their communities so that cheap labor, the source of all the wealth that continues to flow into their coffers.
Someone, anyone, from our great free mainstream media please go take a picture of the home and neighborhood where John McCarthy lives and the homes casino workers forced into poverty on reservations live.
Come on... let's have an explanation from former DFL State Senator Mary Olson explaining how it is that she and her campaign manager John McCarthy live in such luxury so many of her former constituents have to live in the most deplorable housing and scrounging and scraping to get by from day to day.
Wouldn't it be nice if we had elected public officials who would step forward and fight for workers' rights and for an end to poverty the way Republicans and Democrats are now fighting over 9,000 votes to determine who the next governor will be!
And then we have these worthless party hacks and worthless politicians like Jim Oberstar crying a trail of tears wondering why people don't vote!
Alan L. Maki
Director of Organizing,
Midwest Casino Workers Organizing Council
58891 County Road 13
Warroad, Minnesota 56763
Phone: 218-386-2432
Cell: 651-587-5541
As an ardent supporter of Governor-elect Mark Dayton, I hesitate to bring this issue forward; however, I feel in the interest of fairness in the electoral process there is something that needs to be considered.
Ironically, Dayton could be done in because of the racism in the Democratic Farmer-Labor Party perpetrated through its collaboration with the Minnesota Indian Gaming Association which has schemed to elect Democratic Party politicians beholden to enforcing a cheap pool of Indian labor which is responsible for the poverty on Minnesota's Indian Reservations--- pay casino workers poverty wages and then deprive them of all rights accorded other workers under state and federal labor laws, and the workers and their families and the entire community will be poor.
As Frances Perkins, President Franklin D. Roosevelt's Secretary of Labor repeatedly pointed out: Workers without rights are not likely to organize labor unions to defend their rights and livelihoods or strive to have a voice at work; the consequences are obvious: termination.
So, in order to assure and secure the required number of votes for these Democratic Party politicians who can be counted on to enforce the racist poverty inherent in the anti-labor "Compacts" creating the Indian Gaming Industry, one of the front groups of the Minnesota Indian Gaming Association, the Native Vote Alliance of Minnesota, was allowed to register voters improperly in a manner in which residences could not be verified in any manner; and, election officials, many of whom are backed with campaign contributions from the Minnesota Indian Gaming Association, failed to enforce state voter registration laws so no one has any way of knowing if the tens of thousands of Minnesotans registered to vote by the Native Vote Alliance of Minnesota are even real people and if they are actually live in the districts in which they are voting.
Ironically, it was the Minnesota Democratic Farmer-Labor Party, the recipient of tens of millions of dollars in campaign contributions from the Minnesota Indian Gaming Association, which used these very voter registration rules to prevent the Warriors for Justice from attaining ballot status.
Now what will happen if the same rules as applied to the Warriors for Justice in keeping them off the ballot are applied to the votes cast in this November 2 Election?
Once these Voter Registrations are examined by the attorneys hand-picked by Karl Rove at the request of the Minnesota Republican Party to scrutinize everything, might Mark Dayton's votes derived from these "registered" voters be challenged? Thirty-thousand votes challenged; with a 9,000 vote lead. I wonder what some high-priced attorneys whose intent it is to overturn the will of the people through legal shenanigans might do with all of this? Have the Democrats done themselves in by keeping the Warriors for Justice off the ballot? Certainly the United States Supreme Court is going to rule that if these thirty-thousand votes casts by "illegally" registered "voters" are appropriate; the signatures obtained by the Warriors for Justice are also valid... now what happens; an expensive new election is ordered just because these disgusting DFL leaders and elected public officials beholden to the Minnesota Indian Gaming Association are intolerant towards allowing others on the ballot to compete with them for votes have no tolerance for democracy when their casino profits and campaign contributions are at stake?
I wonder what is in store for Native American Indians when boundaries are redrawn and redistricting takes place?
Will anyone be seeing to it that redistricting takes place in a fair way enabling Native American Indians to have a chance to get elected to the real seats of power in Minnesota: the Minnesota State House and Senate?
I venture to guess that there are many Minnesotans, just like me, who are fed up with Democrats and Republicans who want our votes but do nothing for us as they look after the interests on the health insurance companies and the casino managements who fund their campaigns; people, fed up just like me, who would appreciate the opportunity to vote for people like the Warriors for Justice who really care about all of us, ending poverty, protecting the environment and the general welfare of the public.
As Republicans and Democrats now quibble and fight like cats and dogs over 9,000 votes... who do we have among the politicians just elected who will fight with the same determination to see to it that casino workers enjoy the same rights as all other workers protected by state and federal labor laws? Who among these newly elected politicians will stand up a fight to end poverty with the same determination they now fight over 9,000 votes?
By-the-way; does anyone find it strange that the Native Vote Alliance of Minnesota has no interest in electing Native American Indians to the Minnesota State Legislature? Why not? Would the issue of poverty be too much for these cheating and lying casino managements who force casino workers to work in smoke-filled casinos at poverty wages without any rights to withstand? Or, would the issue of poverty constantly being brought forward be too much for a group of two-hundred plus legislators who don't receive any campaign contributions from the poor be too awkward to deal with?
I find it interesting how election laws can be twisted and perverted in interpretation by the well-heeled who think they, and only they, have the right to engage in politics while hypocritically claiming to be representing all of us when they really only care about the financial interests of those funding their campaigns.
Come on, let's not be afraid to talk about what is going on in Minnesota; do politicians getting campaign contributions from the Minnesota Indian Gaming Association care as much about the plight of 40,000 casino workers and their families as they care about John McCarthy, the head of the Minnesota Indian Gaming Association, living high on the hog up on a hill in an exclusive neighborhood as a direct result of the poverty the Indian Gaming Association forces upon Native American Indians and their communities so that cheap labor, the source of all the wealth that continues to flow into their coffers.
Someone, anyone, from our great free mainstream media please go take a picture of the home and neighborhood where John McCarthy lives and the homes casino workers forced into poverty on reservations live.
Come on... let's have an explanation from former DFL State Senator Mary Olson explaining how it is that she and her campaign manager John McCarthy live in such luxury so many of her former constituents have to live in the most deplorable housing and scrounging and scraping to get by from day to day.
Wouldn't it be nice if we had elected public officials who would step forward and fight for workers' rights and for an end to poverty the way Republicans and Democrats are now fighting over 9,000 votes to determine who the next governor will be!
And then we have these worthless party hacks and worthless politicians like Jim Oberstar crying a trail of tears wondering why people don't vote!
Alan L. Maki
Director of Organizing,
Midwest Casino Workers Organizing Council
58891 County Road 13
Warroad, Minnesota 56763
Phone: 218-386-2432
Cell: 651-587-5541
Wednesday, November 3, 2010
Racist Minnesota DFL State Senator Mary Olson owned by Minnesota Indian Gaming Association is defeated...
McCarthy is the racist sleazeball who became filthy rich off the poverty the gaming industry has imposed on the Indian Nations.
The Minnesota Indian Gaming Association pumped millions of dollars into Republican Party coffers after DFL'er Mark Dayton made it a point to say he would work to build a state-owned, state-managed casino industry to compete with McCarthy and his mobsters who use the Indian Nations to front for their "Indian" gaming industry in which not one single Indian or Indian tribe owns a slot machine or even the decks of cards used for table games.
The Indian Nations acquire the debts of the inappropriately named "Indian gaming industry" while white mobsters who inherited the Meyer Lansky family business run off like thieves in the night with all the profits leaving Indians forced into poverty wage jobs without any benefits other than heart and lung problems and the cancers brought on from second-hand smoke.
An opening for liberals, progressives and the left... defeat racism and the corporate agenda
Now is the time for liberals, progressives and the left to come out fighting clearly articulating an agenda for real change where the needs of people come before Wall Street's corporate profits, and real reforms are paid for with peace dividends derived from ending these dirty wars and the redistribution of wealth derived from taxing the hell out of the rich.
The sooner we free ourselves from the two-party trap the better and now is the time to begin doing this... Mark Dayton will be facing opposition from not only Republicans but most of his own Democrats who are opposed to affirmative action and taxing the rich... what a shame... will Dayton come to the same conclusion Rudy Perpich did that real change will only come through the creation of a new political party? Hopefully Dayton draws this conclusion sooner rather than later because the closer he placed himself to Obama the more he placed his own campaign in jeopardy... we are very fortunate there wasn't time for another Obama or Biden visit to Minnesota.
Brian Melendez and the corporate Democrats should be driven from the leadership of the MNDFL... these corporate Democrats distributed more Margaret Anderson-Kelliher t-shirts for the state DFL convention than what they produced in yard signs for Mark Dayton.
Mark Dayton received mere lip-service support from this corporate DFL leadership which had labeled him as "crazy."
In fact, Mark Dayton owes his victory to the Warriors for Justice who nominated him directly on the state DFL convention floor which showed Minnesota Democrats and all Minnesotans that Margaret Anderson-Kelliher, the choice of corporate Democrats, was a loser. Without this massive demonstration of support shown for Dayton from the grassroots DFL'ers on the state convention floor, the nomination of Margaret Anderson-Kelliher would have been a done deal and we would have another worthless Republican Governor.
We have seen how independent political initiatives properly organized around an issue like affirmative action and against racist poverty spun by racist unemployment can bring about real change... if Mark Dayton is smart he will meet with Nicole Beaulieu and Greg Paquin, the leaders of the Warriors for Justice, as one of his first orders of business to determine how affirmative action will be enforced in Minnesota as he promised at his press conference held on the steps of the State Capitol. Mark Dayton owes his victory to the movement to have affirmative action enforced in Minnesota... without the support Mark Dayton received from the Warriors for Justice he would not have survived the Primary race.
The racist arrogance of Jim Oberstar finally was responsible for doing him in... it is just too bad that liberals, progressives and the left didn't rise to the occasion to defeat this epitome of corrupt politics long ago.
Racist, anti-labor Democrat, Senator Mary Olson, also reaped what she has sown as did racist, anti-labor DFL State Representatives Brita Sailor, Dave Olin and Bernie Lieder.
The Warriors for Justice in carrying forward a clear message for real change inside and outside of the Minnesota Democratic Farmer-Labor Party based upon a liberal, progressive and left agenda of placing the needs of people and protection of the environment before corporate profits should be viewed as a clear signal that Minnesotans continue to respond to the ideas first articulated by Floyd Olson, Elmer Benson and John Bernard as they struggled to bring the Minnesota Farmer-Labor Party to power--- such struggles in the streets and in the electoral arena are required even more today during these very troubling times.
The time is now to discuss what will be done to make sure that Native American Indians get the seats they are entitled to in the Minnesota State Legislature--- remember, redistricting is the very next battle we will be confronting and districts should be re-drawn to make it possible for Native American Indians to attain a voice in Minnesota politics at the seats of real political influence and power. The racism of poverty spun by racist unemployment needs to be resolved... now, not later.
Let us hope Mark Dayton is organizing to defend his victory against the corporate monsters who will now employ an army of lawyers to try to use a re-count to challenge his victory. I would encourage people, especially liberals, progressives and leftists, in every county to participate as observers in the vote recount that is almost certain to take place. We must not allow a bunch of corporate lawyers directed by Karl Rove and the billionaire Tea Baggers like the Koch family of John Birchers to deprive Minnesotans of this very important victory.
The sooner we free ourselves from the two-party trap the better and now is the time to begin doing this... Mark Dayton will be facing opposition from not only Republicans but most of his own Democrats who are opposed to affirmative action and taxing the rich... what a shame... will Dayton come to the same conclusion Rudy Perpich did that real change will only come through the creation of a new political party? Hopefully Dayton draws this conclusion sooner rather than later because the closer he placed himself to Obama the more he placed his own campaign in jeopardy... we are very fortunate there wasn't time for another Obama or Biden visit to Minnesota.
Brian Melendez and the corporate Democrats should be driven from the leadership of the MNDFL... these corporate Democrats distributed more Margaret Anderson-Kelliher t-shirts for the state DFL convention than what they produced in yard signs for Mark Dayton.
Mark Dayton received mere lip-service support from this corporate DFL leadership which had labeled him as "crazy."
In fact, Mark Dayton owes his victory to the Warriors for Justice who nominated him directly on the state DFL convention floor which showed Minnesota Democrats and all Minnesotans that Margaret Anderson-Kelliher, the choice of corporate Democrats, was a loser. Without this massive demonstration of support shown for Dayton from the grassroots DFL'ers on the state convention floor, the nomination of Margaret Anderson-Kelliher would have been a done deal and we would have another worthless Republican Governor.
We have seen how independent political initiatives properly organized around an issue like affirmative action and against racist poverty spun by racist unemployment can bring about real change... if Mark Dayton is smart he will meet with Nicole Beaulieu and Greg Paquin, the leaders of the Warriors for Justice, as one of his first orders of business to determine how affirmative action will be enforced in Minnesota as he promised at his press conference held on the steps of the State Capitol. Mark Dayton owes his victory to the movement to have affirmative action enforced in Minnesota... without the support Mark Dayton received from the Warriors for Justice he would not have survived the Primary race.
The racist arrogance of Jim Oberstar finally was responsible for doing him in... it is just too bad that liberals, progressives and the left didn't rise to the occasion to defeat this epitome of corrupt politics long ago.
Racist, anti-labor Democrat, Senator Mary Olson, also reaped what she has sown as did racist, anti-labor DFL State Representatives Brita Sailor, Dave Olin and Bernie Lieder.
The Warriors for Justice in carrying forward a clear message for real change inside and outside of the Minnesota Democratic Farmer-Labor Party based upon a liberal, progressive and left agenda of placing the needs of people and protection of the environment before corporate profits should be viewed as a clear signal that Minnesotans continue to respond to the ideas first articulated by Floyd Olson, Elmer Benson and John Bernard as they struggled to bring the Minnesota Farmer-Labor Party to power--- such struggles in the streets and in the electoral arena are required even more today during these very troubling times.
The time is now to discuss what will be done to make sure that Native American Indians get the seats they are entitled to in the Minnesota State Legislature--- remember, redistricting is the very next battle we will be confronting and districts should be re-drawn to make it possible for Native American Indians to attain a voice in Minnesota politics at the seats of real political influence and power. The racism of poverty spun by racist unemployment needs to be resolved... now, not later.
Let us hope Mark Dayton is organizing to defend his victory against the corporate monsters who will now employ an army of lawyers to try to use a re-count to challenge his victory. I would encourage people, especially liberals, progressives and leftists, in every county to participate as observers in the vote recount that is almost certain to take place. We must not allow a bunch of corporate lawyers directed by Karl Rove and the billionaire Tea Baggers like the Koch family of John Birchers to deprive Minnesotans of this very important victory.
Monday, November 1, 2010
Some thoughts about the "populist economics" being pushed by the Democrats as a way to evade any mention of wars and real health care reform, etc...
In fact, health care and child care should have become free universal public programs and together between these two programs over 15 million new jobs could have been created.
Of course, the Democrats could have financed health care and childcare by ending these dirty wars and taxing the hell out of the rich.
Creating public universal social programs meeting the needs of the people is the way to create jobs... instead, Democrats, like Republicans, continue to pander to the false idea that small business creates the most jobs.
We will need a massive coalition of liberals, progressives and the left to articulate real job creation programs based on solving the problems of the people as an alternative to what the Democrats and Republicans have to offer.
Of course, the Democrats could have financed health care and childcare by ending these dirty wars and taxing the hell out of the rich.
Creating public universal social programs meeting the needs of the people is the way to create jobs... instead, Democrats, like Republicans, continue to pander to the false idea that small business creates the most jobs.
We will need a massive coalition of liberals, progressives and the left to articulate real job creation programs based on solving the problems of the people as an alternative to what the Democrats and Republicans have to offer.
Both Democrats and Republicans are pushing the false idea that by helping small business expand this is the way to create the most new jobs... both Democrats and Republicans tout supporting "private enterprise" and the "free market" as the ...way to create new jobs which is just as false as relying on small business to create jobs because the fact is, private enterprise and the free market destroyed all these jobs to begin with and the corporations continue to use the economic collapse to try to get fewer workers to produce more through speed-up and longer hours as they continue to lay off more workers as they push fewer workers to produce more.
Only massive government job creation programs will put people to work, and we might as well have these unemployed workers providing working people with healthcare and childcare... thus solving our unemployment problems and healthcare and childcare problems at the same time.
Only massive government job creation programs will put people to work, and we might as well have these unemployed workers providing working people with healthcare and childcare... thus solving our unemployment problems and healthcare and childcare problems at the same time.
Small businesses are going bust left and right as the economy continues to collapse so more jobs are being lost than created in the sphere of small business. Plus, the majority of jobs created by small business are poverty wage jobs seldom providing working people with decent benefits and usually very poor working conditions... the idea behind having a job is to have a real living income and a quality life not to have a job that keeps you in conditions of poverty. Millions of working people in this country have to work two or three poverty wage jobs in the small business sector and they still can't feed their families and pay the rent.
I hardly call workers providing healthcare and childcare being "on the public dole." Public employees who work providing us with universal social programs are entitled to real living wages and a decent quality of life... we should be looking at providing all workers with a standard of living comparable to most public employees not trying to drag public employees down; the idea is to provide better lives and livelihoods for ALL working people.
We need a FULL EMPLOYMENT ECONOMY which would also solve any problems being encountered with Social Security and would enable the Social Security program to be expanded with more and better benefits.
We need a FULL EMPLOYMENT ECONOMY which would also solve any problems being encountered with Social Security and would enable the Social Security program to be expanded with more and better benefits.
Liberals, progressives and the left need to formulate an alternative to Wall Streets warmongering agenda abroad and austerity at home and we need to wage struggles in every local community across the Nation in the streets and at the ballot box.
I believe I have correctly framed the way we should be articulating this agenda to where public policy becomes part of solving real problems instead of mere posturing around framing issues not intended to solve problems but intended solely to get votes.
There is no doubt that politicians have to a large extent perverted the public sector by trying to turn it into one more form of corruption where they seek to provide their friends with easy and often unnecessary jobs as a way to shore up a very corrupt political system... we see good examples of this kind of corruption from one end of the country to the other. But, I think public education, the Social Security Administration, Veterans Administration and the Indian Health Service are good examples of public programs where jobs are created in the public sphere providing services required by people and society. There are many other such examples, too--- from garbage collection to water and sewage, etc.
Of course, we want to advance progressive, not regressive, tax policies: tax the rich.
Of course, we want to advance progressive, not regressive, tax policies: tax the rich.
The age of retirement should be lowered so as to provide jobs for the unemployed and a better quality of life for working people. This can be accomplished very easily by the redistribution of wealth.
Democrats are playing their old games with our lives. In this election, the Democrats actually want us to believe there are no wars raging claiming many innocent lives and wasting our tax dollars and resources when the fact is these wars ar...e destroying the economy as they kill jobs just like they kill people.
In fact, it is not a matter of viewing issues like these wars, unemployment and healthcare and childcare as separate and distinct issues because it will take the tremendous resources now being consumed in carrying out these wars to fund universal public programs like healthcare and childcare which will provide the American people--- especially working people--- with services needed for quality lives which at the same time create millions of new jobs.
I would never support just any Democrats. I too have called many people to support ONE Democrat--- Mark Dayton for Governor of Minnesota who has made "tax the rich" the centerpiece of his campaign as he calls for enforcement of affirmative action.
If I lived in Michigan I would be calling for support for Virg Bernero the Democrat for Governor because he has had the courage to call for the creation of a state bank like the State Bank of North Dakota.
Both Dayton and Bernero understand the relationship between a crumbling capitalist economy and these dirty wars. Both Dayton and Bernero understand the need to struggle against racism and discrimination, and both Dayton and Bernero understand the need to support--- not attack--- public employees who are the front-line defenders of our universally needed public programs.
I would never support nor waste my vote on any Democrat who tries to use jobs versus healthcare while pretending these dirty wars don't exist as they vote to continue funding the deadly, racist and genocidal Israeli killing machine.
There are definitely--- in my opinion--- a few (not many) good Democrats worth supporting but we need to give Democrats our support very selectively as we move to find a way to create a new political movement backed by a new political party giving voice to liberals, progressives and leftists seeking real change... the kind of change that puts the needs of people for peace, jobs and social & economic justice before Wall Streets drive for greater profits enhanced by a voraciousness and rapacious greed achieved through wars abroad and austerity measures at home on top of the "normal" exploitation of working people.
The simple fact is that most Democrats are just as big warmongers and Wall Street apologists as your run-of-the-mill thoroughly reactionary Republicans... I challenge anyone to prove me wrong by providing a list of U.S. Senate and House candidates and those Democrats running for state and local offices and where they stand on the issues.
Even Mark Dayton and Virg Bernero are very weak when it comes to articulating support for massive public programs like healthcare and childcare as the way to create jobs instead of relying on the "private sector and free market" to create jobs when we know that unemployment is caused by this "private sector" and the way it operates in this "free market economy."
We need to push pro-people, pro-peace, pro-worker solutions based on the expansion and development of universal programs to problems inside of the Democratic Party while simultaneously trying to free ourselves from this two-party trap set for us by Wall Street while building a new political party reflecting the liberal, progressive and left views comprising the overwhelming majority of the working class wanting peace and social and economic justice.
The solutions to our problems won't be found in struggles in the streets alone but when we creatively find a way to take our struggles from the streets into the voting booth and then backing up our candidates again out in the streets... I don't see the solutions as either we struggle in the streets or we take our struggles to the voting booth... we need to find ways where one method of struggle is constantly complementing the other; thus providing our movements for real change with greater strength.
In fact, it is not a matter of viewing issues like these wars, unemployment and healthcare and childcare as separate and distinct issues because it will take the tremendous resources now being consumed in carrying out these wars to fund universal public programs like healthcare and childcare which will provide the American people--- especially working people--- with services needed for quality lives which at the same time create millions of new jobs.
I would never support just any Democrats. I too have called many people to support ONE Democrat--- Mark Dayton for Governor of Minnesota who has made "tax the rich" the centerpiece of his campaign as he calls for enforcement of affirmative action.
If I lived in Michigan I would be calling for support for Virg Bernero the Democrat for Governor because he has had the courage to call for the creation of a state bank like the State Bank of North Dakota.
Both Dayton and Bernero understand the relationship between a crumbling capitalist economy and these dirty wars. Both Dayton and Bernero understand the need to struggle against racism and discrimination, and both Dayton and Bernero understand the need to support--- not attack--- public employees who are the front-line defenders of our universally needed public programs.
I would never support nor waste my vote on any Democrat who tries to use jobs versus healthcare while pretending these dirty wars don't exist as they vote to continue funding the deadly, racist and genocidal Israeli killing machine.
There are definitely--- in my opinion--- a few (not many) good Democrats worth supporting but we need to give Democrats our support very selectively as we move to find a way to create a new political movement backed by a new political party giving voice to liberals, progressives and leftists seeking real change... the kind of change that puts the needs of people for peace, jobs and social & economic justice before Wall Streets drive for greater profits enhanced by a voraciousness and rapacious greed achieved through wars abroad and austerity measures at home on top of the "normal" exploitation of working people.
The simple fact is that most Democrats are just as big warmongers and Wall Street apologists as your run-of-the-mill thoroughly reactionary Republicans... I challenge anyone to prove me wrong by providing a list of U.S. Senate and House candidates and those Democrats running for state and local offices and where they stand on the issues.
Even Mark Dayton and Virg Bernero are very weak when it comes to articulating support for massive public programs like healthcare and childcare as the way to create jobs instead of relying on the "private sector and free market" to create jobs when we know that unemployment is caused by this "private sector" and the way it operates in this "free market economy."
We need to push pro-people, pro-peace, pro-worker solutions based on the expansion and development of universal programs to problems inside of the Democratic Party while simultaneously trying to free ourselves from this two-party trap set for us by Wall Street while building a new political party reflecting the liberal, progressive and left views comprising the overwhelming majority of the working class wanting peace and social and economic justice.
The solutions to our problems won't be found in struggles in the streets alone but when we creatively find a way to take our struggles from the streets into the voting booth and then backing up our candidates again out in the streets... I don't see the solutions as either we struggle in the streets or we take our struggles to the voting booth... we need to find ways where one method of struggle is constantly complementing the other; thus providing our movements for real change with greater strength.
We need to constantly point out that a full employment economy is the solution to any problems associated with Social Security, too...when everyone is paying in, everyone gets more out.
Wednesday, October 27, 2010
Physician Panel Prescribes The Fees Paid by Medicare:
You might want to get a copy of todays Wall Street Journal (Oct. 27, 2010) to carry around and show people the front page article:
Physician Panel Prescribes The Fees Paid by Medicare:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704657304575540440173772102.html?mod=ITP_pageone_0
People need to see this article!
Alan
Physician Panel Prescribes The Fees Paid by Medicare:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704657304575540440173772102.html?mod=ITP_pageone_0
People need to see this article!
Alan
A few questions for voters...
Are these wars raging in Iraq and Afghanistan any less horrible since they are being waged by Democrats instead of Republicans?
Is the impact of unemployment any better for an unemployed worker under a Democratic Administration then under a Republican Administration?
Is it any better to be without health care with Obama and the Democrats in charge then under the Republicans?
Send Democrats a message they will understand:
No peace; no votes.
No real health care reform; no votes.
No national public child care system; no votes.
No jobs; no votes.
Only vote for candidates who will create jobs putting people to work solving the problems of people and our society financed with money saved from ending these dirty wars and taxing the rich.
Vote selectively based upon those politicians you can trust to reorder the priorities in this country away from war and military spending while focusing on putting the needs of people before Wall Street profits.
It is all about accountability... not voting out of fear.
Is the impact of unemployment any better for an unemployed worker under a Democratic Administration then under a Republican Administration?
Is it any better to be without health care with Obama and the Democrats in charge then under the Republicans?
Send Democrats a message they will understand:
No peace; no votes.
No real health care reform; no votes.
No national public child care system; no votes.
No jobs; no votes.
Only vote for candidates who will create jobs putting people to work solving the problems of people and our society financed with money saved from ending these dirty wars and taxing the rich.
Vote selectively based upon those politicians you can trust to reorder the priorities in this country away from war and military spending while focusing on putting the needs of people before Wall Street profits.
It is all about accountability... not voting out of fear.
Tuesday, October 26, 2010
Something to think about before you vote...
The upcoming elections can't be a referendum on Obama's two years in office because no Democrats dare to run in support of what Obama has done... occupied Iraq and expanded the wars in Afghanistan, his reactionary health legislation and the Wall Street bailouts not to mention his failure to protect working people losing their homes in foreclosures and their jobs as Obama tries to destroy public education and begins to attack Social Security.
The one and only point that Democrats are running on at a national level is that we should all fear the Republicans.
Might I suggest to those Democratic Party hacks now attacking me all over the Internet, on blogs and where ever I go, that all of you get out and talk to working people as to how Obama's Wall Street war economy is hurting people and killing the economy and destroying jobs just like Obama's wars are killing people.
I find it very interesting that the very Democrats who are telling you to vote for them in spite of their support for wars abroad and austerity at home because you should be so afraid of the Republicans, are themselves saying they intend to be "conciliatory" towards the Republicans!
But, we all know these very same Democrats went right along with Bush and the Republicans instead of fighting these evil monsters, don't we?
In fact, the record is very clear, most of these Democrats, with very few exceptions, are just as evil as all of the Republicans, and most Democrats acquiesced to the Republicans during the Republican years... from Richard Nixon to Ronald Reagan to George Bush and we can expect no better from these Democrats; if Republicans gain control in the House and Senate... the same thing in state legislatures and right on down through the townships, counties, cities and school boards.
In the face of Republican evil we can, at best, expect Democrats to acquiesce and at worst be conciliatory when they aren't in complete agreement with these evil Republicans we are being told we must be in such fear of that we need to vote for a bunch of worthless Democrats beholden to Wall Street's thoroughly warmongering and reactionary austerity agenda.
In fact, working people should fear both Democrats and Republicans.
Our only defense against both of these two parties of Wall Street is if we build a powerful all people's united front uniting the working class around a broad-based agenda bringing together liberals, progressives and the left around a common program advancing real solutions to our problems.
We need peace, not wars.
We need to create good jobs paying real living wages by putting people to work solving the problems of the people through developing massive universal social programs like a national public health care system and a national public child care system paid for with funds saved by ending these dirty wars and slashing the military budget combined with taxing the hell out of the rich--- a massive transfer of wealth is the only way to solve our problems, and affirmative action must be enforced in all job creation programs.
In my opinion it is the epitome of hypocrisy to be lectured by Barack Obama and these Democratic Party hacks about the evils we will face from Republicans when:
1. These Democrats are no better than Republicans.
and...
2. The very same Democrats telling us we need to vote for them are already stating they intend to work with these Republicans instead of fighting them. This is the epitome of hypocrisy.
All this talk from both the Democrats and Republicans about how the "free market" needs to be used to create jobs is the biggest crock of shit of all...
It has been the "free market" and private enterprise that created this economic mess to begin with.
And all this talk of assisting "small business" as the way to create jobs is an equally ridiculous notion because the only jobs created by small business are poverty wage jobs and the reason to have a job is to get out, and stay out of, poverty.
Tell the Democrats and all politicians:
No peace; no votes.
No real health care reform; no votes.
No child care; no votes.
No jobs; no votes.
Remember, the only way to create the massive amounts of jobs required to end unemployment is to put people to work solving the problems of the people... a public health care system providing people free health care through a network of public community-based health care centers would create; some ten-million new jobs; similarly, a national public child care system would create millions of more new jobs--- the time has come to place human needs before corporate greed and profits.
Another crock of shit we are being told is that opposition to Obama's and the Democrat's agenda is the same as supporting Republicans when these same Democrats are carrying out these wars that destroy the economy and kill jobs just like they kill people.
It makes me sick that these worthless professional Democratic Party hacks try to bully, badger and intimidate us into accepting these Wall Street Democrats by saying anyone who opposes Obama's thoroughly reactionary agenda is helping the Republicans when the only real issue is who is helping Wall Street and who is standing up for the rights and needs of working people.
The one and only point that Democrats are running on at a national level is that we should all fear the Republicans.
Might I suggest to those Democratic Party hacks now attacking me all over the Internet, on blogs and where ever I go, that all of you get out and talk to working people as to how Obama's Wall Street war economy is hurting people and killing the economy and destroying jobs just like Obama's wars are killing people.
I find it very interesting that the very Democrats who are telling you to vote for them in spite of their support for wars abroad and austerity at home because you should be so afraid of the Republicans, are themselves saying they intend to be "conciliatory" towards the Republicans!
But, we all know these very same Democrats went right along with Bush and the Republicans instead of fighting these evil monsters, don't we?
In fact, the record is very clear, most of these Democrats, with very few exceptions, are just as evil as all of the Republicans, and most Democrats acquiesced to the Republicans during the Republican years... from Richard Nixon to Ronald Reagan to George Bush and we can expect no better from these Democrats; if Republicans gain control in the House and Senate... the same thing in state legislatures and right on down through the townships, counties, cities and school boards.
In the face of Republican evil we can, at best, expect Democrats to acquiesce and at worst be conciliatory when they aren't in complete agreement with these evil Republicans we are being told we must be in such fear of that we need to vote for a bunch of worthless Democrats beholden to Wall Street's thoroughly warmongering and reactionary austerity agenda.
In fact, working people should fear both Democrats and Republicans.
Our only defense against both of these two parties of Wall Street is if we build a powerful all people's united front uniting the working class around a broad-based agenda bringing together liberals, progressives and the left around a common program advancing real solutions to our problems.
We need peace, not wars.
We need to create good jobs paying real living wages by putting people to work solving the problems of the people through developing massive universal social programs like a national public health care system and a national public child care system paid for with funds saved by ending these dirty wars and slashing the military budget combined with taxing the hell out of the rich--- a massive transfer of wealth is the only way to solve our problems, and affirmative action must be enforced in all job creation programs.
In my opinion it is the epitome of hypocrisy to be lectured by Barack Obama and these Democratic Party hacks about the evils we will face from Republicans when:
1. These Democrats are no better than Republicans.
and...
2. The very same Democrats telling us we need to vote for them are already stating they intend to work with these Republicans instead of fighting them. This is the epitome of hypocrisy.
All this talk from both the Democrats and Republicans about how the "free market" needs to be used to create jobs is the biggest crock of shit of all...
It has been the "free market" and private enterprise that created this economic mess to begin with.
And all this talk of assisting "small business" as the way to create jobs is an equally ridiculous notion because the only jobs created by small business are poverty wage jobs and the reason to have a job is to get out, and stay out of, poverty.
Tell the Democrats and all politicians:
No peace; no votes.
No real health care reform; no votes.
No child care; no votes.
No jobs; no votes.
Remember, the only way to create the massive amounts of jobs required to end unemployment is to put people to work solving the problems of the people... a public health care system providing people free health care through a network of public community-based health care centers would create; some ten-million new jobs; similarly, a national public child care system would create millions of more new jobs--- the time has come to place human needs before corporate greed and profits.
Another crock of shit we are being told is that opposition to Obama's and the Democrat's agenda is the same as supporting Republicans when these same Democrats are carrying out these wars that destroy the economy and kill jobs just like they kill people.
It makes me sick that these worthless professional Democratic Party hacks try to bully, badger and intimidate us into accepting these Wall Street Democrats by saying anyone who opposes Obama's thoroughly reactionary agenda is helping the Republicans when the only real issue is who is helping Wall Street and who is standing up for the rights and needs of working people.
Tuesday, October 12, 2010
A most important question...
Are these wars killing the economy the same way they are killing jobs and people?
Something to think about and discuss around the kitchen table as we move closer to Election Day.
Alan
Something to think about and discuss around the kitchen table as we move closer to Election Day.
Alan
Sunday, October 10, 2010
We need to push Barack Obama aside to make way for a real peace candidate in 2012...
I think Reaganomics definitely pushed this country into darkness... however, it was the defeat of George McGovern that set this country on the steep slippery slope to perdition.
Liberals, progressives and the left should now begin looking for a real honest-to-goodness progressive like George McGovern to run in 2012... Obama is a loser and if he doesn't resign he should be either "primaried out" or face a real progressive running independent of the Democrats and Republicans; its time, long over-due, to finally set this country on a progressive course that will benefit, not only our own country, but the entire world.
It was the same warmongering Wall Street backed Democrats now backing Barack Obama who betrayed George McGovern and the peace majority of this country by with-holding their support from McGovern who now tell us we need to vote for them out of fear of the Republicans when it was these very sell-out Democrats who gave us Richard Nixon... and the rest is history.
Liberals, progressives and the left should drive Barack Obama from office the same way we drove Lyndon Johnson from office for expanding the war in Vietnam.
There is no way liberals, progressives and the left should tolerate being intimidated into voting for candidates who are for these dirty wars and who keep supporting the Israeli killing machine.
I will be traveling across Minnesota, Wisconsin and Michigan discussing with working people seeking real change how we might come together and be a catalyst for a progressive agenda challenging Wall Street wars abroad and austerity at home... it's time to tighten the belt of people's unity around the coupon clippers making profits from poverty, racism and war.
We need a real "party of no;" no to the military-financial-industrial complex.
On Election Day, November 2, 2010---
Liberals, progressives and the left need to take a stand:
No peace; no votes.
No jobs; no votes.
No real healthcare reform; no votes.
No childcare; no votes.
No enforcement of affirmative action; no votes.
Wall Street got what it wanted in return for its money...
We are entitled to peace and social & economic justice in return for our votes.
How is Obama's and the Democrats' war economy working for you?
Wars are killing our jobs just like they are killing people.
As I travel, I look forward to meeting with you and sharing your concerns and ideas around the kitchen table.
Yours in the struggle,
Alan
Liberals, progressives and the left should now begin looking for a real honest-to-goodness progressive like George McGovern to run in 2012... Obama is a loser and if he doesn't resign he should be either "primaried out" or face a real progressive running independent of the Democrats and Republicans; its time, long over-due, to finally set this country on a progressive course that will benefit, not only our own country, but the entire world.
It was the same warmongering Wall Street backed Democrats now backing Barack Obama who betrayed George McGovern and the peace majority of this country by with-holding their support from McGovern who now tell us we need to vote for them out of fear of the Republicans when it was these very sell-out Democrats who gave us Richard Nixon... and the rest is history.
Liberals, progressives and the left should drive Barack Obama from office the same way we drove Lyndon Johnson from office for expanding the war in Vietnam.
There is no way liberals, progressives and the left should tolerate being intimidated into voting for candidates who are for these dirty wars and who keep supporting the Israeli killing machine.
I will be traveling across Minnesota, Wisconsin and Michigan discussing with working people seeking real change how we might come together and be a catalyst for a progressive agenda challenging Wall Street wars abroad and austerity at home... it's time to tighten the belt of people's unity around the coupon clippers making profits from poverty, racism and war.
We need a real "party of no;" no to the military-financial-industrial complex.
On Election Day, November 2, 2010---
Liberals, progressives and the left need to take a stand:
No peace; no votes.
No jobs; no votes.
No real healthcare reform; no votes.
No childcare; no votes.
No enforcement of affirmative action; no votes.
Wall Street got what it wanted in return for its money...
We are entitled to peace and social & economic justice in return for our votes.
How is Obama's and the Democrats' war economy working for you?
Wars are killing our jobs just like they are killing people.
As I travel, I look forward to meeting with you and sharing your concerns and ideas around the kitchen table.
Yours in the struggle,
Alan
Saturday, October 9, 2010
Water map shows billions at risk of 'water insecurity'
While most of humanity places fresh water as a premium natural resource to be protected and used very wisely, Minnesota Democrats are engaged in the wanton destruction of the Big Bog in Northern Minnesota.
The Green Party remains silent in the face of this destruction and its candidate for governor omits any mention of what is taking place while Democratic Party stooges like Doris Marquit manipulates the Women's International League for Peace and Freedom here in Minnesota to evade discussion of what is taking place in the Big Bog while pretending to educate people on the threats to our water.
The League of Women Voters, always fronting for big-business interests and the DFL "Business Caucus," has refused to place any questions about peat mining in the Big Bog for candidates.
Here in Minnesota, the Minnesota Democratic Farmer-Labor Party (DFL) which is manipulated and controlled by big-business interests is engaged in destroying the largest freshwater aquifer in the Lower Forty-Eight by permitting peat mining to take place in the Big Bog.
Berger Peat, a multinational corporation out of Canada comprised of Canadian, U.S. and French "investors" who have made huge campaign contributions to United States Congressman James Oberstar and bribed the Minnesota Commissioner of Natural Resources and gave former Attorney General Mike Hatch expensive gifts along with making huge campaign contributions to Roger Moe, is now going to be requesting a permit to expand the peat mining from the original permit which allowed peat to be taken from a one-square mile area to over 14 square miles.
The reason for the expanded operation is that this peat will be used to clean up oil spills and once the peat soaks up the oil it will be used to fuel bio mass operations to generate electricity.
Roger Jourdain, the long-time former Chair of the Red Lake Nation described the Big Bog's freshwater aquifer as "the life-blood of my people and our Red Lake Nation." The present Red Lake Nation Tribal Council, whose primary interests are profiting from casinos and profiting from the drug trade, has refused to take action to save the Big Bog.
There has not been one peep of protest against this destruction of one of the world's last remaining pristine freshwater aquifers from "environmental organizations" like the Audubon Society or the Sierra Club.
After issuing the first permit which enabled Berger Peat to get its foot into the door and begin draining the bog so the peat can be mined here in Minnesota, the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources spent millions of dollars for a one-mile aluminum raised "Bog Walk" for tourist to understand the importance of this huge bog to the ecosystems!
Ironically, this Big Bog Boardwalk was raised at tremendous cost to tax-payers, some three feet off the ground, because "human footsteps would irreparably damage sensitive ecosystem of The Big Bog."
No wonder the Minnesota Supreme Court made its racist and undemocratic decision to deny the Warriors for Justice ballot status... saving the Big Bog and its very important ecosystems is one of their goals and objectives.
So far DFL candidate for governor Mark Dayton has refused to address the issue of saving and protecting the Big Bog.
Not one single scientist can be found to support peat mining in the Big Bog--- even the scientists employed by the Environmental Protection Agency and the United States Army Corps of Engineers came out in complete opposition to peat mining in the Big Bog. The heads of both agencies said they had their "arms twisted" by United States Congressman James Oberstar who threatened to use his powerful influence in Congress to cut funding to their programs if they did not issue permits. Oberstar is one of the most corrupt members of the United States Congress who has become fabulously wealthy taking bribes from the mining industries and road engineers and contractors--- so far, tax-payers have spent over twenty-million dollars building a road out into this pristine peat bog for Berger Peat and its investors to truck away the profits.
Other Democratic Party politicians who have reaped huge campaign contributions for supporting the destruction of the Big Bog include Rod Skoe, Brita Sailer, Mary Olson and John Persell. Dave Olin, the former prosecutor of Pennington County who publicly admits that he knew about the drug trade taking place for years in Red Lake Gaming Enterprises' three Seven Clans Casinos but did nothing to stop the drug trade, has received huge help in his campaign for re-election from the peat mining associations; this crooked and corrupt politician first took pay-offs from the drug dealers to allow their dirty, sleazy business to continue unhindered by law enforcement as he hypocritically prosecuted teenagers for using drugs these mobsters sold them, and now he is enabling the largest freshwater aquifer in the Lower Forty-Eight to be destroyed--- again, of course, for bribes. Democrat Dave Olin is the same politician who stood up in anger and lashed out against affirmative action--- now this racist slime-ball is receiving political and financial support, along with its endorsement, from the National Rifle Association.
United States Congressman James Oberstar boasted that this peat mining would create jobs in this economically depressed area where Marvin Windows and Doors, Polaris, Arctic Cat and casinos employ people at poverty wages; when asked by the news media how many jobs this operation was going to create for Minnesotans, Oberstar who is known for his great skills as an orator learned in over 40 years practicing deceit, hemmed and hawed and stuttered. His staff later said about thirty jobs would be created. When asked how much these jobs would pay they refused to comment. Months later it was announced that the jobs would be non-union per the agreement reached in then Attorney General Mike Hatch's office and the jobs would pay "up to $8.00 an hour. Berger Peat, operating out of Quebec, has said it has made arrangements through a Catholic church group to "help out some poor people from Ecuador to do most of the work on a seasonal basis."
Now, read this article and learn how stupid the big-business dominated, manipulated and controlled Minnesota Democratic Farmer-Labor Party and its willing accomplices are.
United States Congressman James Oberstar boasted that this peat mining would create jobs in this economically depressed area where Marvin Windows and Doors, Polaris, Arctic Cat and casinos employ people at poverty wages; when asked by the news media how many jobs this operation was going to create for Minnesotans, Oberstar who is known for his great skills as an orator learned in over 40 years practicing deceit, hemmed and hawed and stuttered. His staff later said about thirty jobs would be created. When asked how much these jobs would pay they refused to comment. Months later it was announced that the jobs would be non-union per the agreement reached in then Attorney General Mike Hatch's office and the jobs would pay "up to $8.00 an hour. Berger Peat, operating out of Quebec, has said it has made arrangements through a Catholic church group to "help out some poor people from Ecuador to do most of the work on a seasonal basis."
Now, read this article and learn how stupid the big-business dominated, manipulated and controlled Minnesota Democratic Farmer-Labor Party and its willing accomplices are.
Alan L. Maki
29 September 2010 Last updated at 13:01 ET
Researchers compiled a composite index of "water threats" that includes issues such as scarcity and pollution.
The most severe threat category encompasses 3.4 billion people.
Writing in the journal Nature, they say that in western countries, conserving water for people through reservoirs and dams works for people, but not nature.
They urge developing countries not to follow the same path.
The analysis is a global snapshot, and the research team suggests more people are likely to encounter more severe stress on their water supply in the coming decades, as the climate changes and the human population continues to grow.
They have taken data on a variety of different threats, used models of threats where data is scarce, and used expert assessment to combine the various individual threats into a composite index.
The result is a map that plots the composite threat to human water security and to biodiversity in squares 50km by 50km (30 miles by 30 miles) across the world.
Changing pictures
Water map shows billions at risk of 'water insecurity'
The study maps water availability and quality down to the regional level
About 80% of the world's population lives in areas where the fresh water supply is not secure, according to a new global analysis.
The most severe threat category encompasses 3.4 billion people.
Writing in the journal Nature, they say that in western countries, conserving water for people through reservoirs and dams works for people, but not nature.
They urge developing countries not to follow the same path.
"What we're able to outline is a planet-wide pattern of threat”
Instead, they say governments should invest in water management strategies that combine infrastructure with "natural" options such as safeguarding watersheds, wetlands and flood plains.
They have taken data on a variety of different threats, used models of threats where data is scarce, and used expert assessment to combine the various individual threats into a composite index.
The result is a map that plots the composite threat to human water security and to biodiversity in squares 50km by 50km (30 miles by 30 miles) across the world.
Changing pictures
"What we've done is to take a very dispassionate look at the facts on the ground - what is going on with respect to humanity's water security and what the infrastructure that's been thrown at this problem does to the natural world," said study leader Charles Vorosmarty from the City College of New York.
"What we're able to outline is a planet-wide pattern of threat, despite the trillions of dollars worth of engineering palliatives that have totally reconfigured the threat landscape."
Those "trillions of dollars" are represented by the dams, canals, aqueducts, and pipelines that have been used throughout the developed world to safeguard drinking water supplies.
Their impact on the global picture is striking.
"What we're able to outline is a planet-wide pattern of threat, despite the trillions of dollars worth of engineering palliatives that have totally reconfigured the threat landscape."
Those "trillions of dollars" are represented by the dams, canals, aqueducts, and pipelines that have been used throughout the developed world to safeguard drinking water supplies.
Their impact on the global picture is striking.
Natural
However, when the impact of the infrastructure that distributes and conserves water is added in - the "managed" picture - most of the serious threat disappears from these regions.
Africa, however, moves in the opposite direction.
"In fact we show them benefiting less than a billion people, so we're already excluding a large majority of the world's population," he told BBC News.
"But even in rich parts of the world, it's not a sensible way to proceed. We could continue to build more dams and exploit deeper and deeper aquifers; but even if you can afford it, it's not a cost-effective way of doing things."
According to this analysis, and others, the way water has been managed in the west has left a significant legacy of issues for nature.
Whereas Western Europe and the US emerge from this analysis with good scores on water stress facing their citizens, wildlife there that depends on water is much less secure, it concludes.
Concrete realities
Looking at the "raw threats" to people's water security - the "natural" picture - much of western Europe and North America appears to be under high stress.
Managed
However, when the impact of the infrastructure that distributes and conserves water is added in - the "managed" picture - most of the serious threat disappears from these regions.
Africa, however, moves in the opposite direction.
"The problem is, we know that a large proportion of the world's population cannot afford these investments," said Peter McIntyre from the University of Wisconsin, another of the researchers involved.
"But even in rich parts of the world, it's not a sensible way to proceed. We could continue to build more dams and exploit deeper and deeper aquifers; but even if you can afford it, it's not a cost-effective way of doing things."
According to this analysis, and others, the way water has been managed in the west has left a significant legacy of issues for nature.
Whereas Western Europe and the US emerge from this analysis with good scores on water stress facing their citizens, wildlife there that depends on water is much less secure, it concludes.
Concrete realities
One concept advocated by development organisations nowadays is integrated water management, where the needs of all users are taken into account and where natural features are integrated with human engineering.
One widely-cited example concerns the watersheds that supply New York, in the Catskill Mountains and elsewhere around the city.
That threatened to change in the 1990s, due to agricultural pollution and other issues.
The city invested in a programme of land protection and conservation; this has maintained quality, and is calculated to have been cheaper than the alternative of building treatment works.
Mark Smith, head of the water programme at the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) who was not involved in the current study, said this sort of approach was beginning to take hold in the developing world, though "the concrete and steel model remains the default".
"One example is the Barotse Floodplain in Zambia, where there was a proposal for draining the wetland and developing an irrigation scheme to replace the wetlands," he related.
"Some analysis was then done that showed the economic benefits of the irrigation scheme would have been less than the benefits currently delivered by the wetland in terms of fisheries, agriculture around the flood plain, water supply, water quality and so on.
"So it's not a question of saying 'No we don't need any concrete infrastructure' - what we need are portfolios of built infrastructure and natural environment that can address the needs of development, and the ecosystem needs of people and biodiversity."
Dollars short
One widely-cited example concerns the watersheds that supply New York, in the Catskill Mountains and elsewhere around the city.
"We would argue people should be even more worried if you start to account for climate change and population growth"Peter McIntyre University of Wisconsin
Water from these areas historically needed no filtering.
The city invested in a programme of land protection and conservation; this has maintained quality, and is calculated to have been cheaper than the alternative of building treatment works.
Mark Smith, head of the water programme at the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) who was not involved in the current study, said this sort of approach was beginning to take hold in the developing world, though "the concrete and steel model remains the default".
"One example is the Barotse Floodplain in Zambia, where there was a proposal for draining the wetland and developing an irrigation scheme to replace the wetlands," he related.
"Some analysis was then done that showed the economic benefits of the irrigation scheme would have been less than the benefits currently delivered by the wetland in terms of fisheries, agriculture around the flood plain, water supply, water quality and so on.
"So it's not a question of saying 'No we don't need any concrete infrastructure' - what we need are portfolios of built infrastructure and natural environment that can address the needs of development, and the ecosystem needs of people and biodiversity."
Dollars short
This analysis is likely to come in for some scrutiny, not least because it does contain an element of subjectivity in terms of how the various threats to water security are weighted and combined.
"This study, for the first time, brings all our knowledge together under one global model of water security and aquatic biodiversity loss."
For the team itself, it is a first attempt - a "placeholder", or baseline - and they anticipate improvements as more accurate data emerges, not least from regions such as Africa that are traditionally data-scarce.
Already, they say, it provides a powerful indicator that governments and international institutions need to take water issues more seriously.
For developed countries and the Bric group - Brazil, Russia, India and China - alone, "$800bn per year will be required by 2015 to cover investments in water infrastructure, a target likely to go unmet," they conclude.
For poorer countries, the outlook is considerably more bleak, they say.
"In reality this is a snapshot of the world about five or 10 years ago, because that's the data that's coming on line now," said Dr McIntyre.
"It's not about the future, but we would argue people should be even more worried if you start to account for climate change and population growth.
"Climate change is going to affect the amount of water that comes in as precipitation; and if you overlay that on an already stressed population, we're rolling the dice."
Richard.Black-INTERNET@bbc.co.uk
Developing countries are urged to think carefully about "concrete and steel" solutions
Nevertheless, Mark Smith hailed it as a "potentially powerful synthesis" of existing knowledge; while Gary Jones, chief executive of the eWater Co-operative Research Centre in Canberra, commented: "It's a very important and timely global analysis of the joint threats of declining water security for humans and biodiversity loss for rivers."This study, for the first time, brings all our knowledge together under one global model of water security and aquatic biodiversity loss."
For the team itself, it is a first attempt - a "placeholder", or baseline - and they anticipate improvements as more accurate data emerges, not least from regions such as Africa that are traditionally data-scarce.
Already, they say, it provides a powerful indicator that governments and international institutions need to take water issues more seriously.
For developed countries and the Bric group - Brazil, Russia, India and China - alone, "$800bn per year will be required by 2015 to cover investments in water infrastructure, a target likely to go unmet," they conclude.
For poorer countries, the outlook is considerably more bleak, they say.
"In reality this is a snapshot of the world about five or 10 years ago, because that's the data that's coming on line now," said Dr McIntyre.
"It's not about the future, but we would argue people should be even more worried if you start to account for climate change and population growth.
"Climate change is going to affect the amount of water that comes in as precipitation; and if you overlay that on an already stressed population, we're rolling the dice."
Richard.Black-INTERNET@bbc.co.uk
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
