Hi Lloyd

We're already working on a think tank.  Check out
www.solidarityeconomy.net and www.cyrev.net and www.net4dem.org/mayglobal

Let us know if you're interested

Carl Davidson

aipu2 wrote on 11/9/04, 1:52 PM:

  >
  >
  > Progressive Think Tank
  > Reply to: lkindr@ yahoo.com
  > Date: 2004-11-09, 1:34PM EST
  > Hi. Progressives need to have a think tank to solve societal
  > problems, instead of the many neo-con think tanks that think up ways
  > to create more problems. If you're a progressive, which means you're
  > someone who thinks, let me know and you can join our yahoogroup etc
  > and help solve problems. Okay? Many tanks. Lloyd Kinder
  >
  >
  >
  >
  >
  >
  >
  >
  >
  > Yahoo! Groups Links
  >
  >
  >
  >
  >
  >
  >

Hi to all,
      I am so happy that we are showing The People's History Night with Howard
Zinn tomorrow, Wed, 11/10 at Healing Earth Resources, the big yellow building,
1/2 block south of Belmont at 3111 N. Ashland, donation $2-$3 from 7-9pm. It is
a very uplifting and inspiring speech by Howard done last year, Nov 2nd 2003. We
all need to be inspired right now, so please come and let's get this Chicago
progressive community together! Parking on the street is paid or across the
street in the lot-free.
Dr. Lora

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

I was not able to access this web site but I did see Keither Oberman's ten
minute newscast on voter fraud, which included the report from the Cincinnati
Enquirer who talked about the Department of Homeland Security being in Ohio the
week before the election and Congressman John Conyers who along with five other
congressmen has asked the government Accounting Office to investigate the voter
irregularity in Ohio and Florida.  Ann

Lora Chamberlain <drlora@...> wrote:

Hello to all concerned citizens,
We are hot on the trail of election fraud this time, it won't take us as long as
in 2000, I guarantee it! We are not concerned that Kerry has already conceded,
that is not legally binding and we still have to hunt down election fraud, no
matter what the outcome, in order to protect our Democracy! But we need
everyone's help! Please go and volunteer or donate to www.blackboxvoting.org ,
check out this MSNBC news clip for a good summary of what's going on
http://home.comcast.net/~hugh.moore/countdown_on_voting . Also try very hard to
attend one of these public meetings put on by the League of Pissed of Voters and
the Ohio Citizens For Secure Elections(CASE):
Sat. 11/13, 1-4pm, In Columbus, OH, the New Faith Baptist Church, 955 Oak St on
the near east side of Columbus.

Mon, 11/15, 6-9pm, In Columbus, OH, the Franklin County Courthouse, room A, 373
S. High St, in downtown Columbus.

Myself and 3 others are going on Sat and I can fit 3 more people in my car, I
will be leaving from my house in Chicago at 6am, it takes 6 hours to drive
there, call if you want to be included in my car at 773-486-7660. Everyone will
have to find their own way to my house and back to their home again. I will give
you directions by phone.

Last by not least spread the word, pass this email to all and tell everyone you
know what is going on, call your local Dem-leaning newspapers, Democratic Reps
and Senators both State and Federal and talk them into becoming involved with
the investigation. Call Sens. John Kerry and Jon Edwards and tell them we are
going ahead with our investigations with or with out them but we would prefer
they were on board! We are not saying that we have absolute proof, we are saying
that there is enough to look at and that we will NOT accept the results without
a full investigation!!!

Attached is the announcement about the public meetings and a flyer with
recommendations about what people can do to further this investigation!

Sorry the date on my computer keeps switching, I keep changing it back and I
can't figure out what is happening!

Sincerely and in solidarity with all who love America and Democracy,
Dr. Lora Chamberlain in Chicago









[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





Yahoo! Groups Links










[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

I did see Keither Oberman's ten minute newscast yesterday on voter fraud, which
included the report from the Cincinnati Enquirer who talked about the Department
of Homeland Security being in Ohio the week before the election and Congressman
John Conyers who along with five other congressmen has asked the government
Accounting Office to investigate the voter irregularity in Ohio and Florida. 
Ann


Lora Chamberlain <drlora@...> wrote:
Hi to all,
I am so happy that we are showing The People's History Night with Howard Zinn
tomorrow, Wed, 11/10 at Healing Earth Resources, the big yellow building, 1/2
block south of Belmont at 3111 N. Ashland, donation $2-$3 from 7-9pm. It is a
very uplifting and inspiring speech by Howard done last year, Nov 2nd 2003. We
all need to be inspired right now, so please come and let's get this Chicago
progressive community together! Parking on the street is paid or across the
street in the lot-free.
Dr. Lora

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





Yahoo! Groups Links










[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Hey guys - make your voice heard on the latest bad move by Bush by
signing below.

                                          Shira C. Hammann
                                    Senior Programmer / Analyst
                                  Clearing House Systems Group
                                 Chicago Mercantile Exchange Inc.
                                        office: 312-930-3395
                                       mobile: 312-617-0251
                                         fax: 312-930-3187

                                CME: Customers Mean Everything
                        CME Customer Feedback Line: 312-648-3776

Here's the Petition:

President Bush has announced his plan to select Dr. W.
David Hager to
head up the Food and Drug Administration's (FDA)
Reproductive Health
Drugs Advisory Committee. The committee has not met
for more than two
years, during which time its charter lapsed. As a
result, the Bush
Administration is tasked with filling all eleven
positions with new
members. This position does not require Congressional
approval. The
FDA's Reproductive Health Drugs Advisory Committee
makes crucial
decisions on matters relating to drugs used in the
practice of
obstetrics, gynecology and related specialties,
including hormone
therapy, contraception, treatment for infertility, and
medical
alternatives to surgical procedures for sterilization
and pregnancy
termination.
Dr. Hager, the author of "As Jesus Cared for Women:
Restoring Women
Then
and Now." The book blends biblical accounts of Christ
healing Women
with
case studies from Hager's practice. His views of
reproductive health
care are far outside the mainstream for reproductive
technology. Dr.
Hager is a practicing OB/GYN who describes himself as
"pro-life" and
refuses to prescribe contraceptives to unmarried
women. In the book
Dr.Hager wrote with his wife, entitled "Stress and the
Woman's Body,"
he
suggests that women who suffer from premenstrual
syndrome should seek
help from reading the bible and praying. As an editor
and contributing
author of "The Reproduction Revolution: A Christian
Appraisal of
Sexuality Reproductive Technologies and the Family,"
Dr. Hager appears
to have endorsed the medically inaccurate assertion
that the common
birth control pill is an abortifacient.
  We are concerned that Dr. Hager's strong religious
beliefs may color
his assessment of technologies that are necessary to
protect women's
lives for to preserve and promote women's health.
Hager's track record
of using religious beliefs to guide his medical
decision-making makes
him a dangerous and inappropriate e candidate to serve
as chair of this
committee. Critical drug public policy and research
must not be held
hostage by antiabortion politics. Members of this
important panel
should
be appointed on the basis of science and medicine,
rather than politics
and religion. American women deserve no less. There is
something you
can
do. Below is a statement to be sent to the White
House, opposing the
placement of Hager.

  (1) Please copy and paste (DON'T forward) the entire
email into a fresh email; then sign your name below.
After you sign,
SEND THIS TO EVERY PERSON YOU KNOW WHO IS CONCERNED
ABOUT WOMEN'S
RIGHTS.
  (2) Every 10th person who signs the list (i.e., #10,
#20, #30, etc.) - please forward the entire e-mail to
president@...

    We oppose the appointment of Dr. W.
David Hager to the FDA Reproductive Health Drugs
Advisory Committee.
Mixing religion and medicine is unacceptable in a
policy-making
position. Using the FDA to promote a political agenda
is inappropriate
and seriously threatens women's health. Members of
this important panel
should be appointed on the basis of science and
medicine, rather than
politics and religion.
    American women deserve no less.



    1. Susan Tannenbaum ( Owings
Mills,Maryland) 2. Susan Levine (Silver
    Spring,MD) 3. Audrey Funk (Henderson,NV)
4. Susan Lowe Shlisky (Las
    Vegas,NV) 5. Michelle Straub-Wilensky
(Los Angeles,CA) 6. Patricia Phelan(San Francisco,CA)
7. Victoria
Einhorn(san anselmo, ca) 8. Brad
    Einhorn(Brooklyn,NY) 9. Bethany M
acMillan (Brooklyn,NY) 10. Amy Russell
    (Louisville,Kentucky) 11. Beverly D.
Moore (Louisville,Kentucky) 12. Connie O. Byrne
(Kannapolis,North
Carolina) 13. Janet C. Haas (Charlotte,North Carolina)
14. Heather V
rana (Charlotte,NC) 15. Clare M. Evans (Newport,VA)
16.Kathy Chadwick
17.Jim Chadwick 18.Claire Grimm Chadwick 19.Lindsay
Addison (Naples,FL)
20. Peggy Addison (Naples,FL) 21. David Addison
(Naples,FL) 22. Howard
Schumsky (Orlando,FL) 23. Kristie Born (Orlando,FL)
24. Paul Boyd
(Atlantic Highlands,NJ) 25. Lois Jensen (NYC, NY) 26.
Catherine
Rubenstein (Belvedere, CA) 27. Anne Rubenstein
(Belvedere, CA) 28. Dirk
Rubenstein (Belvedere, CA) 29. Barbara K. Westover
(Oakland, CA) 30.
Sharon Bjornson (Oakland, CA) 31. Rabbi Sue Levi
Elwell (Philadelphia,
PA) 32. Hana Elwell (Brooklyn,NY) 33. Jen Song
(Brooklyn, NY) 34. Janet
Lo (New York,NY) 35. Emily Horowitz (New York, NY) 36.
Daniel Horowitz
(New York, NY) 37.Josh Hyman (New York, NY) 38. Mona
Goldsmith
(Plainview, NY) 39.Kate Striano (Newtown, CT) 40.
Elissa Gellis (
Newtown, CT) 41. Diane Thompson (Sandy Hook, CT) 42.
LInda Parsloe
(Sandy Hook, CT) 43. Judy Juracek (Darien,
    CT) 44. Deborah Meisels (City Island,
NY) 45. P. Briggs Saroch (Greenfield, MA) 46. Diane
Fisher-Katz
(Northampton, MA) 47. Kirsten Cirincione (Florence,
MA) 48. Jane Lynch
(Florence, MA) 49. Kathleen Kennedy (Santa Barbara,
CA) 50. Leslie
Palmer (San Antonio, TX) 51. Julie Toland, Middletown,
RI 52. Josie
Merck,( Cos Cob, CT) 53. Elizabeth O'Neill (Boston,
MA) 54. Joan
O'Neill
(Traverse City, MI) 55. Barbara Becker (Concord, CA)
56. Ken Bruckmeier
(Oakland,CA) 57. Margret Elson (Oakland, CA) 58,
Marsha Sherman
(Portland, OR) 59. Marinell Eva (Santa Rosa, CA) 60.
Sharon Oman
(Petaluma, CA) 61. Adrienne Davis (Santa Rosa, CA) 62.
Barbara Carlson
(Santa Rosa, CA) 63. Karen Grace-Kaho (Sacramento ,
CA) 64. Mary Beth
Love (San Francisco, CA) 65. Ruth Finnerty (Oakland,
CA) 66. Rosalie
Holtz 67. Kay Corlett (Albany,
    CA) 68. Connie Barnes (Oakley, CA) 69.
Donna Ventura (Brentwood, CA) 70. Nancy Herman
(Lafayette,CA) 71.
Shirley Chang (Berkeley, CA) 72. Nola Chavez (El
Cerrito, CA) 73.
Elspeth Wells (Clayton, CA) 74. Phyllis Berger (Los
Angeles, CA) 75.
Joan Barnett (Boston, Ma.) 76. Karen Danaher(Los
Angeles,CA) 77. Susan
Rice (New York, NY) 78. Alan Wagner ( New York, NY)
79. Jane Altman
(New
York, NY) 80. Sheila Friedman (Yardley, PA) 81. Susan
Cooper
(Brookfield, CT) 82. Elissa Fisher (Pleasantville, NY)
83. Angela
Usobiaga (Pleasantville, NY) 84. Katherine Procopio
Goodman (Katonah,
NY) 85. Jessica White (Dobbs Ferry,
    NY) 86. Danielle Bottari (New York,NY)
87. Jennifer Getschmann (New York, NY) 88. Sung Pak
(New York, NY) 89.
Sharon Pak (New York, NY) 90. Pamela Gold(Jersey City,
NJ) 91. Mindy
Drossner (Lafayette Hill, PA) 92. Stephanie Choder
(Gladwyne, PA) 93.
Robin Stern (Lafayette Hill, PA) 94. Emily Newman
(Syracuse, NY) 95.
Mark Stern (syracuse, NY) 96. Robin Fink
(Philadelphia, PA 19102) 97.
Greg Rosen (New York, NY) 98, Durelle Schacter (San
MAteo, CA)
99,rachel
stewart (san anselmo ca) 100 Joyce Goldstein ( San
Francisco) 101 Kate
Slate (New York city) 102 Mardee Regan
(Cornwall-on-Hudson, NY) 103
Brad
Mehldau (Newburgh, NY) 104 Augusta Quirk
(Summerland,CA) 105. Carolyn
Furlong (St. Babs,CA) 106. Alexandra Morath (Santa
Barbara, CA) 107.
Talia Camarena (New York,
    NY) 108. Stuart Baldwin (New York, NY)
109. Julie Clarke (Chapel Hill,
    NC) 110. Vivian Chen (Chapel Hill, NC)
111.Sheryl Trager (New York, NY) 112. Debra Carbonaro
(New York, NY)
113. Bowie Maksrivorawa (New York, NY) 114. Dawn
Wetzel (Memphis, TN)
115. Posey Hedges (Memphis, TN) 116. Jim Spake
(Memphis, TN) 117.
Charlie Wood (Memphis, TN) 118. Kathy Kosins (
Birmingham, Michigan)
119. Dan Pliskow (Royal Oak, Mi.) 120. Susan B.
Anderson (Pacifica, CA)
121. Laurence D. Anderson (Pacifica,CA) 122. Irene
Spang (San
Francisco,
CA) 123. John L. Spang (San Francisco, CA) 124.
Katherine Albrecht (San
Francisco, CA) 125. Suzane Kavert (San Francisco, CA)
126. Chris Kavert
(San Francisco, CA) 127. Holly Milne (San Francisco,
CA) 128. Emma
Tresemer ( San Francisco, CA) 129. Jennifer Black
(Boulder, CO) 130.
Jesse Ritch (Boulder, CO) 131. Lily Fessenden
(Searsmont, ME) 132.
Terrence Keeney (East Montpelier, VT) 133. Penelope
Stout-Hammar
(Milton, VT) 134. Susannah Hammar (Medford, MA) 135.
Leslie Stephenson
(Riverdale, NY) 136. Marisa Mann (Woodmere, NY) 137.
Stacey Ganina
(Riverdale, NY) 138. Alex Kehl (New York, NY) 139.
Elissa Leonard
(Freeport, ME) 140. Maria Dewees (Waltham, MA) 141.
Bennet Leon
(Sudbury, MA) 142. Maria Jenness (Newport, VT) 145.
Allie Leib
(Ridgefield, CT) 146. Mathy Mezey (Ardsley, NY) 147.
Ariel Samuelson
(Newton, MA) 148. Lucy Joffe (Newton, MA) 149. Jake
Joffe (Newton, MA)
150. Robert L. Klein (Newton, MA)
    151. Kenneth Leeser (Newton, MA)
152.Melinda Brown (Newton, MA)
153. Lauren Rubin (Newton, MA)
154. Stephanie Barlow (Newton, MA)
155. Laura Gross (Newton, MA)
156.Susan Eisner Eley (NYC, NY)
157. Vicki Porges Eisner (NY, NY)
158. Mikal Finkelstein (NY, NY)
159. Melissa Glassman (NY, NY)
160. Melissa Dorfman (Brookline, MA)
161. Stephanie Rath (Chicago, IL)
162. Shira Hammann(Chicago, IL)

-----------------------------------
This message contains information that may be confidential and
proprietary. Unless you are the intended recipient (or authorized to
receive this message for the intended recipient), you may not use, copy,
disseminate or disclose to anyone the message or any information
contained in the message. If you have received the message in error,
please advise the sender by reply e-mail, and delete the message
immediately. Thank you very much.



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Lloyd,

I think you're right.  What is your group's address?

We need many think tanks.  We need really creative projects in political
science, culture, religion, and communications, not propaganda mills, like
the neo-cons have.

The right has spawned hundreds of think tanks.  They get lots of money to
produce a blizzard of papers, many of them redundant, that make the same
points over and over, with more or less elaboration.  Their "thinkers" flood
the communications media, as "expert" talking heads and scribblers.  They
maintain relations with people in academic and religious institutions, where
they try to intimidate progressives, through "campus watch" and "media watch"
type committees.  The right-wing think tanks are, in fact, organizers of
right wing activity and action in the streets and the neighborhoods, as we've
seen in the recent large-scale effort to suppress the vote among minority and
all working class people.

They are constantly probing not only what their message is, but how to
deliver their message.  They have developed sophisticated philosophical and
ideological frameworks that seem to embrace the everyday experiences of
people on the job, at home, and in the community.  Right-wing programs seem
to make sense within those frameworks, and progressive programs are not even
heard.  While they have many shades of difference between them they gravitate
toward unity on their core wedge issues.  They create a repressive atmosphere
in which "everyone knows" that white people are better, gay people are sick,
and rich people must be good.  They seem extreme to us, and Bush sounds like
an idiot, but to themselves they make perfect sense and even sound brilliant,
because within the neo-con framework they've erected they are.

From the recent campaign we've shown that tens of thousands of activists can
unite for a common purpose.  Let's not lose that.  I think every progressive
person who can should get involved in one or more study group or
organized "think tank".  We need to publish, on the web and in print.  We
need to organize to use these articles and papers, to get them in front of
the media.  We need to lobby our Legislatures and Congress.  We need to get
progressives into the mainstream media.  We shouldn't worry about repeating
what others are doing.  Let a hundred or a thousand flowers bloom.   Creating
a progressive atmosphere needs study, experimentation, and organized mass
struggle.

Ted




---------- Original Message -----------
From: "aipu2" <aipu2@...>
To: lpnufp@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tue, 09 Nov 2004 19:52:37 -0000
Subject: [lpnufp] Progressive Think Tank

> Progressive Think Tank
> Reply to: lkindr@ yahoo.com
> Date: 2004-11-09, 1:34PM EST
> Hi. Progressives need to have a think tank to solve societal
> problems, instead of the many neo-con think tanks that think up ways
> to create more problems. If you're a progressive, which means you're
> someone who thinks, let me know and you can join our yahoogroup etc
> and help solve problems. Okay? Many tanks. Lloyd Kinder
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
------- End of Original Message -------

Can someone compile a list of online progressive "think tanks,"
with a thumbnail description of each?

Regards,

Roy

[Please sign petition at http://www.mediafordemocracy.us/campaign/fallujah ]


Networks Return to the Front, and to TV Group Think
---------------------------------------------------

In one of his more telling interviews with network
journalists, The Daily Show's Jon Stewart asked
CNN's Wolf Blitzer why so many TV news outlets
failed, in 2003, to challenge the Bush
Administration's bogus case for war in Iraq.

The New York Times and The Washington Post have
since admitted to grave mistakes in their pre-war
coverage. As yet, no mainstream television news
network has done the same.

Following a Senate investigation of Iraq
intelligence failures, which accused America's spy
agencies of "group think," Stewart asked Blitzer
if the same was true of TV news coverage in the
run-up to war.

"Were you suffering from a case of group think,"
pressed Stewart, "or" - tossing Blitzer a curve
ball - "of retardation?" Faced with the choice,
Blitzer admitted to network group think.

Now, with embedded network journalists resurfacing
on the Iraqi front, new questions must be asked:
What if anything have the networks learned from
their past mistakes? Have they admitted to a
failure to provide Americans with timely and
thorough investigations of official claims of
Iraqi weapons of mass destruction? Have they
conducted media post mortems on their failure to
investigate Iraqi civilian casualties -- recently
tallied at more than 100,000?

Judging from the reporting that has accompanied
the recent bloodletting in Fallujah, it appears
that -- in the words of West Virginia Senator
Robert Byrd -- the media have, once again, bought
the Pentagon war narrative "hook, line and
sinker."


Soon after the invasion of Iraq began, military
commander Tommy Franks told a New Yorker reporter
that he considers the media a "fourth front" in
fighting the war -- NOT as an autonomous "fourth
estate" whose duty is to challenge official claims
and better inform the American public.

By limiting information and embedding journalists
in 2003, the government successfully spun the
media's coverage in favor of war. Anti-war views
were effectively marginalized. The cameras rolled
alongside the tanks into Baghdad. Establishment
media declared "victory" as Saddam Hussein's
statue fell in al-Fardos Square, and later,
"Mission Accomplished" with President Bush aboard
USS Abraham Lincoln.

Today, we know that the war did not end then. And
that few US media outlets prepared us for what was
to come.

In the last year, more and more media critics have
documented these media failures. None of their
criticisms seems to have broadened the media's war
coverage to include more diverse voices from
within Iraq and around the world. The coverage of
the war in this respect is similar to the coverage
we saw of the election, where Administration
"talking points" tended to dominate the evening
news, leaving little room for substantive and
contentious discussions of the issues that
Americans say mattered to them most.

Media for Democracy is calling on our members to
demand media integrity during wartime. Join us in
a petition that calls on the news executives at
NBC, CBS, ABC, Fox News and CNN to diversify their
sources, give more airtime to Iraqi and Afghan
voices, scrutinize Administration claims, report
on civilian casualties, and offer on-air analysis
that includes more anti-war perspectives.

Stay Tuned.





Sign this petition and notify:

ABC News President David Westin

CBS News President Andrew Heyward

CNN VP of News Susan Bunda

Fox News CEO Roger Ailes

NBC News President Neal Shapiro


I join other Media for Democracy members to call
on mainstream news networks to restore integrity
and balance to their war reporting by:

- diversifying your sources to include more
independent, non-military experts;

- giving more airtime to Iraqi and Afghan voices;

- more thoroughly scrutinizing for accuracy White
House and Pentagon claims;

- reporting on the full extent of civilian
casualties in Afghanistan and Iraq;

- offering balanced on-air analysis that includes
more anti-war perspectives.


To sign this petition, visit
http://www.mediafordemocracy.us/campaign/fallujah

---------- Forwarded Message -----------
From: "Peter Schurman, MoveOn.org" <moveon-help@...>

Dear MoveOn member,

Questions are swirling around whether the election was conducted honestly or
not.  We need to know -- was it or wasn't it?

If people were wrongly prevented from voting, or if legitimate votes were mis-
counted or not counted at all, we need to know so the wrongdoers can be held
accountable, and so we can prevent this from happening again.

Members of Congress are demanding an investigation to answer this question.
The decision on whether or not there will be an investigation could come as
soon as Monday.  Join us in supporting the call for one now, at:

   http://www.moveon.org/investigatethevote/

Then please invite your friends and colleagues to sign, as well.  We need to
show Congress that hundreds of thousands of Americans are serious about
protecting the integrity of the vote.

We're all hearing the stories and wondering what's true and what isn't.  But
at least two cases of serious problems are accepted beyond doubt:

* In Broward County, Florida, electronic voting machines counted
   backwards: as more people voted, the official vote count went down. [1]

* In one Columbus, Ohio suburb, election officials have acknowledged
   that electronic voting machines credited Bush with winning 4,258
   votes, even though only 638 people voted there. [2]

These are just cases where we know something went wrong.  There were also
lots of reports of people being denied ballots on Election Day.  So far,
these reports remain anecdotal, but they must be compiled and examined.  And
the Internet is abuzz with theories about why the official counts were so
different from the exit polls.

Do you have a story?  Were you prevented from voting?  Tell us, at:

   http://www.moveon.org/investigatethevote/

Six prominent members of Congress have called for an investigation.
Representatives Conyers (D-MI), Holt (D-NJ), Nadler (D-NY), Scott (D-VA),
Watt (D-NC) and Wexler (D-FL), have demanded that the U.S. General Accounting
Office:

   immediately undertake an investigation of the efficacy of voting
   machines and new technologies used in the 2004 election, how
   election officials responded to difficulties they encountered,
   and what we can do in the future to improve our election systems
   and administration. [3]

We've got to support their call by asking our own Representatives and
Senators to join them.

If you have a personal story of disenfranchisement, tell us.  These members
of Congress have agreed to include our stories and comments in their call for
an investigation.  Please sign now -- we'll deliver our compiled statements
to them on Friday.

Even if you don't have a personal story, your signature on our petition will
still help build support for an investigation.

To keep our faith in democracy, we need to know the facts.  Your signing this
petition, and sharing your story if you have one, will help.

Thank you.

Sincerely,

--Carrie, Joan, Lee, Marika, Noah, Peter, Rosalyn, and Wes
   The MoveOn.org Team
   November 11, 2004

Footnotes:

1. Broward Machines Count Backward, Palm Beach Post, November 5, 2004

2. Glitch Gave Bush Extra Votes in Ohio, AP carried on CNN, November 5, 2004

3. Letters from members of Congress to David Walker, Comptroller General of
the United States, demanding an investigation of the election: November 5th,
2004 & November 8th, 2004
________________
Subscription Management:
This is a message from MoveOn.org. To remove yourself (Theodore Pearson) from
this list, please visit our subscription management page at:
http://moveon.org/s?i=4986-1959461-oxR6AVOKZ3yZVjbKWPjaCQ
------- End of Forwarded Message -------





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Reply to Demand Investigation of the Vote
I'm sorry if this is old news, but it seems important - Ell
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 09:27:24 -0800
From: "Peter Schurman, MoveOn.org" moveon-help@...
Subject: Investigate the Vote

Six prominent members of Congress have requested an investigation
into the integrity of the vote. The decision could come as soon as
Monday. Sign our petition demanding a full investigation into whether
the election was conducted honestly or not. Also, share your personal
story if you have one -- members of Congress will use it in their
call for an investigation.

Dear MoveOn member,

Questions are swirling around whether the election was conducted
honestly or not. We need to know -- was it or wasn't it?

If people were wrongly prevented from voting, or if legitimate votes
were mis-counted or not counted at all, we need to know so the
wrongdoers can be held accountable, and so we can prevent this from
happening again.

Members of Congress are demanding an investigation to answer this
question. The decision on whether or not there will be an
investigation could come as soon as Monday. Join us in supporting the
call for one now, at:

http://www.moveon.org/investigatethevote/

Then please invite your friends and colleagues to sign, as well. We
need to show Congress that hundreds of thousands of Americans are
serious about protecting the integrity of the vote.
We're all hearing the stories and wondering what's true and what
isn't. But at least two cases of serious problems are accepted beyond
doubt:

In Broward County, Florida, electronic voting machines counted
backwards: as more people voted, the official vote count went down.
[1]

In one Columbus, Ohio suburb, election officials have acknowledged
that electronic voting machines credited Bush with winning 4,258
votes, even though only 638 people voted there. [2]

These are just cases where we know something went wrong. There were
also lots of reports of people being denied ballots on Election Day.
So far, these reports remain anecdotal, but they must be compiled and
examined. And the Internet is abuzz with theories about why the
official counts were so different from the exit polls.

Do you have a story? Were you prevented from voting? Tell us, at:

http://www.moveon.org/investigatethevote/

Six prominent members of Congress have called for an investigation.
Representatives Conyers (D-MI), Holt (D-NJ), Nadler (D-NY), Scott (D-
VA), Watt (D-NC) and Wexler (D-FL), have demanded that the U.S.
General Accounting Office:

immediately undertake an investigation of the efficacy of voting
machines and new technologies used in the 2004 election, how election
officials responded to difficulties they encountered, and what we can
do in the future to improve our election systems and administration.
[3]
We've got to support their call by asking our own Representatives and
Senators to join them.

If you have a personal story of disenfranchisement, tell us. These
members of Congress have agreed to include our stories and comments
in their call for an investigation. Please sign now -- we'll deliver
our compiled statements to them on Friday.

Even if you don't have a personal story, your signature on our
petition will still help build support for an investigation.

To keep our faith in democracy, we need to know the facts. Your
signature, and your story if you have one, will help.

Thank you.

Sincerely,

--Carrie, Joan, Lee, Marika, Noah, Peter, Rosalyn, and Wes
   The MoveOn.org Team
   November 11th, 2004

Footnotes:

1. Broward Machines Count Backward, Palm Beach Post, November 5, 2004
http://www.palmbeachpost.com/politics/content/news/epaper/2004/11/05/a
29a_BROWVOTE_1105.html

2. Glitch Gave Bush Extra Votes in Ohio, AP carried on CNN, November
5, 2004
http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/11/05/voting.problems.ap/

3. Letters from members of Congress to David Walker, Comptroller
General of the United States, demanding an investigation of the
election: November 5th, 2004 & November 8th, 2004
http://www.house.gov/judiciary_democrats/gaoinvestvote2004ltr11804.pdf
http://www.house.gov/judiciary_democrats/gaoinvestvote2004ltr11804.pdf

MSNBC Countdown with Keith Oberman Nov. 10 - his third report on voter
irregularity



OLBERMANN:  Seven little words in a headline in a major metropolitan daily
newspaper, a sentence that could encapsulate all the fears of the age of
electronic voting, glitch could force state to vote again.  Another Internet
aluminum foil hat nightmare scenario, nope.  The actual headlines screaming from
the Charlotte Observer.

Our third story on the COUNTDOWN, North Carolina may have to hold a second
election for some or all statewide offices, because of one failed computer
voting apparatus.  Professor David Dill on e-voting and “Newsweek”‘s Jonathan
Alter covering the coverage.

But, first, it‘s your tax dollars in action, day nine of the 2004 election
irregularities investigations.  The possible do-over in North Carolina owes to a
UniLect Corporation machine in Carteret County.  It ate 4,532 votes.  It just
stopped counting at 3,005.  There are two statewide races that could be decided
by less than that number of votes.  And the losing candidate would be entitled
to a new election.

But state law appears to prevent North Carolina from just holding a second vote
in the affected county, Carteret.  It reads—quote—“The new election shall be
held in the entire jurisdiction in which the original election was held.”  Does
that mean the whole state?  The head of North Carolina‘s Board of Elections
isn‘t sure.  And he does not know if North Carolina has ever had to conduct such
a second vote.

If it happens, though, it apparently will not impact the presidential vote from
North Carolina.

Same state, different problem.  Gaston has become the sixth North Carolina
county to revise its vote totals from Election Day.  Turnout was not 45 percent
there.  It was 57 percent.  They were off by nearly 12,000 votes.  Someone, said
county elections director Sandra Page, forgot to follow the point-and-click
procedure.

Speaking of forgetting procedures, somebody forgot something in Ohio.  That
mysterious lockdown in Warren County outside Cincinnati has gotten even
stranger.  The county commission president had said, officials of the FBI and
Homeland Security had repeatedly warned them in person that they faced a
terrorist threat that ranked a 10 on a scale of one to 10, so they walled off
the vote count there last Tuesday night.

Now officials at both the FBI and Homeland Security say they never notified
anybody in Warren County of any such terrorist threats, raising the question
anew, why did they seal that building off?

One Ohio mystery has been clear up, however, the infamous Cleveland area
precincts which appeared to have more votes than voters.  It was absentee
ballots, specifically ballots where, say, a congressman is shared among several
precincts.  All the absentee ballots would be assigned to just one of those
precincts, making it look as if more than 100 percent of voters had voted in
that precinct.

Boulder County, Colorado.  An optical scanning system may cost an election
official her job.  County Clerk Linda Salas now says, “I am sure they will want
to recall me or get rid of me, and that‘s fine,” after it took three days for
her office to produce vote totals for the local congressional race and which
party was in charge of the state legislature.

The optical scanners stretched or squashed thousands of paper ballots in Boulder
County, rendering their bar codes unreadable and causing Ms.  Salas and her
staff to have to count those ballots by hand.

Prospects for a recount in New Hampshire dimmed when Assistant Attorney General
Bud Fitch told COUNTDOWN today that not only would Ralph Nader have to pay a
$2,000 filing fee, but he would also be liable for the entire cost of a recount,
perhaps $50,000.

At a news conference today, Nader demanded recounts in four voting districts in
that state.  And he said the national vote had made this county—quote—“the
laughing stock of the world,” that—quote—

“this election is not over,” that the outcome in Ohio had been—quote—

“hijacked from A to Z” and that John Kerry should demand a recount there.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

RALPH NADER (I), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE:  I want him to say that he conceded too
quickly and that subsequent information that has come out indicates that there
needs to be a thorough recount and a thorough investigation.  And, second, he
should say even that if it doesn‘t change the outcome, he wants to fulfill his
promise.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

OLBERMANN:  There are really only three possible explanations for all of this. 
The first is hoped for virtually unanimously by supporters of every candidate
and every party, namely, that all those elected last Tuesday got in because
that‘s the way the people voted.

The second is that some of them got in through manipulation of a series of
insufficiently sophisticated, insufficiently secure computer voting machines
that might be hacked into by the nearest 9-year-old.  But the third possibility
is actually more heart-stopping, still, one that threatens the democracy in the
way 100 terrorist rings could not, that the president or the District 90 dog
catcher or other Republicans or other Democrats were elected because a series of
insufficiently sophisticated, insufficiently secure computer voting machines was
affected by bad design, bad use, damp ballots, power surges, and/or static
cling.

To talk about those computers, I‘m joined now by an expert in the field.  David
Dill is a professor of computer science at Stanford University, founder and
board director of the nonpartisan group Verified Voting Foundation.

Professor Dill, good evening.  Thanks for your time.

DAVID DILL, FOUNDER, VERIFIED VOTING FOUNDATION:  Good evening.

OLBERMANN:  I didn‘t make that up about the static cling.  One of the big
glitches has been attributed to static electricity.

Which of the overall explanations seems likelier to you, a combination of
malfunction and misuse or deliberate hacking to alter the results?

DILL:  Malfunction is usually, or incompetence sometimes, is usually the better
explanation when you have a choice.

There‘s a big difference between the Carteret story, where the votes are just
lost and maybe they have to hold a new election, and the stories of static cling
or wet ballots.  With the wet ballots, you can do a manual recount and we can
eventually get the answer without holding a new election.  With electronic
voting, there‘s no safety net.  And so, if you lose the votes, all you can do is
hold a new election.

OLBERMANN:  If there had been hacking, would there be evidence of it?  Or are
all these stories getting out about these disasters with the computers in fact
evidence that there hasn‘t been hacking because we found out about it?

DILL:  We don‘t know whether there‘s hacking or not.  I haven‘t seen convincing
evidence that there‘s been any kind of hacking.

I know that there are a lot of different ways to hack the machines.  And the
auditing that we ought to be doing to catch it is in many cases not being done. 
Yes, so, basically, I don‘t know.

OLBERMANN:  You say that the auditing that we need to be doing isn‘t being done.
Can you be specific?  What needs to be done that isn‘t being done?

DILL:  Well, first of all, you need audit records, right?  You need paper
ballots, I think, with the current technology we have.

And you need to do the audits.  In California, we recount 1 percent—or manually
count 1 percent of the precincts in places where we have paper ballots to count.
No other state does that, to my knowledge.  And that ought to be done
everywhere.  It ought to be very easy for candidates to just ask for a recount
at reasonable cost and get it.  That‘s not true in most states.  And because of
this, we never really know whether our elections are correct.

OLBERMANN:  I know this is an apples-and-oranges question.  And I‘m asking you
as an expert in one of the fields, but not necessarily both.

But it seems a lot of the skepticism about the presidential results and other
results in the election seems to boil down to this one question.  Would it be
easier to broadly fix the election electronically or to broadly fix the exit
polling?

DILL:  I think accidental error is the most likely explanation if there‘s a
problem with the exit poll.

But I‘m pretty upset about this whole exit poll problem.  And I think that the
American people should be.  If they‘re Bush supporters, they should be angry
that the legitimacy of the elected person has been called into question.  If
they‘re Kerry supporters, maybe they‘re suspicious.

I think that those exit poll companies owe an explanation to the American
people.  And they owe us the release of the data, so that independent experts
can check their claims.

OLBERMANN:  Professor David Dill of the computer science department at Stanford
and of the Verified Voting Foundation, great thanks for your time and your
insight, sir.

DILL:  Thank you.

OLBERMANN:  As you know, our reporting on the election irregularities began on
the Internet Sunday and on COUNTDOWN Monday.

Listen night, ABC News did a brief and dismissive report on the subject.  Today,
the subject appeared in “The Boston Globe,” late this afternoon on a CNN
political program.  And that remains about it for the coverage.

Joining me to try to figure out why and whether or not the media can help
influence the fixing of the manifold problems, I‘m joined again by “Newsweek”
senior editor and columnist and NBC News political analyst Jonathan Alter.

Jon, good evening.

JONATHAN ALTER, “NEWSWEEK”:  Hi, Keith.

OLBERMANN:  Even assuming there‘s nothing nefarious about the national election,
why has the cascade of irregularities around this country occurred virtually in
a news blackout?

ALTER:  Well, I‘m not justifying this, but, by way of explanation, I think it is
that there‘s no sense that, with a three and a half million vote difference,
that this would affect the outcome, even if there were widespread irregularities
found.

So, right off the bat, a lot of news organizations are going to say, well, this
is a local story about problems here or problems there, but nothing that would
turn this into a 2000 election repeat.

OLBERMANN:  So, if it‘s a local story, though, you‘re throwing not spotlights on
programs, but flashlights.  And if that‘s the case, how is anything about the
Rube Goldberg voting process of ours and the individual state-by-state Rube
Goldberg processes ever going to be fixed?

Because, obviously, the politicians are not going to volunteer to fix it,
because the system as it is benefits incumbents of any party.

ALTER:  Well, it‘s a problem.

I think we have to look to the political process here to fix it.  Congressman
Rush Holt has a bill in the House that would require a paper trail.  They have
legislated nationally already on elections.  Remember, these provisional ballots
that we‘ve heard about a lot this year, they were mandated by a federal law in
the year 2002.

If they can mandate provisional ballots, they can mandate other things
nationwide to make these elections cleaner and make the voters feel as if their
votes have been counted.  It‘s crazy that we‘re going to have elections soon in
Iraq and we can‘t get our act together here in the United States.  So this is
about the press and the people starting to exert political pressure.  Your
program is a great example of it in action, so that Congress takes some
responsibility.

If the next election is close, we won‘t have confidence in it.  The only reason
we dodged a bullet this time is because the margin was 3.5 million.

OLBERMANN:  But, as a last point—and I guess this is the sort of journalistic
thumb-sucking thing here—but if I said to you a county in the decisive state of
Ohio kept the media out, even briefly kept out one of the ballot count watchers
from the ballot count, announced it had been warned by the FBI and Homeland
Security that there was terror threat, a 10 on the scale, and a week later, the
FBI and Homeland Security say, we never warned anybody about anything, if you‘re
a reporter, magazine, TV, radio, Internet, you‘re the town crier, don‘t you just
say, regardless of the long-term impact, don‘t you say, what a story; I‘m
heading out there to find out what the hell happened?

ALTER:  Absolutely.  And they should be.

And you are absolutely right to be like a dog with a bone on this story.  And I
think you‘ll see over the next few days other reporters starting to get their
act together.  Remember, some of them are coming back from vacation.

OLBERMANN:  Yes.

ALTER:  They were pretty exhausted after the election.  And you‘ll hear more
about this story in the days and weeks to come.

OLBERMANN:  Yes.  This is twice in two nights that I‘ve kind of pounded other
people in this profession, and I don‘t mean to do that.

(CROSSTALK)

OLBERMANN:  Because it‘s the longest—on top of everything else, it was the
longest campaign we had.  And people just saw—when John Kerry conceded, they saw
an opportunity to get four days off in a row.

ALTER:  Don‘t give up on it, Keith.

OLBERMANN:  Thank you, Jon, Jonathan Alter of “Newsweek.”  And thanks, also, for
joining us, as always, sir.

ALTER:  Thanks.


aipu2 <aipu2@...> wrote:

Reply to Demand Investigation of the Vote
I'm sorry if this is old news, but it seems important - Ell
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 09:27:24 -0800
From: "Peter Schurman, MoveOn.org" moveon-help@...
Subject: Investigate the Vote

Six prominent members of Congress have requested an investigation
into the integrity of the vote. The decision could come as soon as
Monday. Sign our petition demanding a full investigation into whether
the election was conducted honestly or not. Also, share your personal
story if you have one -- members of Congress will use it in their
call for an investigation.

Dear MoveOn member,

Questions are swirling around whether the election was conducted
honestly or not. We need to know -- was it or wasn't it?

If people were wrongly prevented from voting, or if legitimate votes
were mis-counted or not counted at all, we need to know so the
wrongdoers can be held accountable, and so we can prevent this from
happening again.

Members of Congress are demanding an investigation to answer this
question. The decision on whether or not there will be an
investigation could come as soon as Monday. Join us in supporting the
call for one now, at:

http://www.moveon.org/investigatethevote/

Then please invite your friends and colleagues to sign, as well. We
need to show Congress that hundreds of thousands of Americans are
serious about protecting the integrity of the vote.
We're all hearing the stories and wondering what's true and what
isn't. But at least two cases of serious problems are accepted beyond
doubt:

In Broward County, Florida, electronic voting machines counted
backwards: as more people voted, the official vote count went down.
[1]

In one Columbus, Ohio suburb, election officials have acknowledged
that electronic voting machines credited Bush with winning 4,258
votes, even though only 638 people voted there. [2]

These are just cases where we know something went wrong. There were
also lots of reports of people being denied ballots on Election Day.
So far, these reports remain anecdotal, but they must be compiled and
examined. And the Internet is abuzz with theories about why the
official counts were so different from the exit polls.

Do you have a story? Were you prevented from voting? Tell us, at:

http://www.moveon.org/investigatethevote/

Six prominent members of Congress have called for an investigation.
Representatives Conyers (D-MI), Holt (D-NJ), Nadler (D-NY), Scott (D-
VA), Watt (D-NC) and Wexler (D-FL), have demanded that the U.S.
General Accounting Office:

immediately undertake an investigation of the efficacy of voting
machines and new technologies used in the 2004 election, how election
officials responded to difficulties they encountered, and what we can
do in the future to improve our election systems and administration.
[3]
We've got to support their call by asking our own Representatives and
Senators to join them.

If you have a personal story of disenfranchisement, tell us. These
members of Congress have agreed to include our stories and comments
in their call for an investigation. Please sign now -- we'll deliver
our compiled statements to them on Friday.

Even if you don't have a personal story, your signature on our
petition will still help build support for an investigation.

To keep our faith in democracy, we need to know the facts. Your
signature, and your story if you have one, will help.

Thank you.

Sincerely,

--Carrie, Joan, Lee, Marika, Noah, Peter, Rosalyn, and Wes
The MoveOn.org Team
November 11th, 2004

Footnotes:

1. Broward Machines Count Backward, Palm Beach Post, November 5, 2004
http://www.palmbeachpost.com/politics/content/news/epaper/2004/11/05/a
29a_BROWVOTE_1105.html

2. Glitch Gave Bush Extra Votes in Ohio, AP carried on CNN, November
5, 2004
http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/11/05/voting.problems.ap/

3. Letters from members of Congress to David Walker, Comptroller
General of the United States, demanding an investigation of the
election: November 5th, 2004 & November 8th, 2004
http://www.house.gov/judiciary_democrats/gaoinvestvote2004ltr11804.pdf
http://www.house.gov/judiciary_democrats/gaoinvestvote2004ltr11804.pdf








Yahoo! Groups Links










[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Hello to all
      I am Dr. Lora Chamberlain in Chicago of the Illinois Progressive Democrats.
I am helping the League of Pissed Off Voters, CASE and other citizens groups in
Ohio with their public hearings about election fraud and a rally for a full
criminal investigation into any and all election fraud during this past election
on Nov.2nd.
Reach Out, a citizen action group in Ohio is sponsoring the rally on Sat.
11/13th at the Capital Square in downtown Columbus, OH,  180 E. Broadway,
beginning at 10:30am and going until 12:30pm, then they will march to the public
hearings that will begin at 1pm and go until 4pm at the New Faith Baptist
Church, 955 Oak St., on the near east side of Columbus, OH. Additional public
hearings will occur on Mon, 11/15, 6-9pm at the Franklin County Courthouse, room
A, 373 S. High St in downtown Columbus. All interested citizens are encouraged
to attend. This rally and the hearings will be posted at www.indyvoter.org in
the calendar and at www.michiganIMC.org .
      We are calling for a full investigation into any and all election fraud and
full prosecution of any felonies that are discovered. We all agree that we have
a ZERO TOLERANCE FOR ANY ELECTION TAMPERING IN ALL OF THE STATES OF THE UNION!
We are calling for full investigations in Ohio and Florida first and then to
other states as the evidence warrants! We think there is already enough evidence
to call for the FBI to become involved in Florida and Ohio! Rep. John Conyers
has called for a GAO audit of this election but that is for correcting the
system for future elections and is NOT good enough for us at this time. We
understand that there are many ballots yet to be counted in Ohio, which will
happen this weekend but the outcome of this election, although interesting, is
not the final result that we are concerned with, we want any and all election
fraud that occurred during this past election to be investigated and prosecuted
to the full extent of the law!
      Sincerely,
      Dr. Lora Chamberlain, concerned American citizen.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Hello to all
      I am Dr. Lora Chamberlain in Chicago of the Illinois Progressive Democrats.
I am helping the League of Pissed Off Voters, CASE and other citizens groups in
Ohio with their public hearings about election fraud and a rally for a full
criminal investigation into any and all election fraud during this past election
on Nov.2nd.
Reach Out, a citizen action group in Ohio is sponsoring the rally on Sat.
11/13th at the Capital Square in downtown Columbus, OH,  180 E. Broadway,
beginning at 10:30am and going until 12:30pm, then they will march to the public
hearings that will begin at 1pm and go until 4pm at the New Faith Baptist
Church, 955 Oak St., on the near east side of Columbus, OH. Additional public
hearings will occur on Mon, 11/15, 6-9pm at the Franklin County Courthouse, room
A, 373 S. High St in downtown Columbus. All interested citizens are encouraged
to attend. This rally and the hearings will be posted at www.indyvoter.org in
the calendar and at www.michiganIMC.org .
      We are calling for a full investigation into any and all election fraud and
full prosecution of any felonies that are discovered. We all agree that we have
a ZERO TOLERANCE FOR ANY ELECTION TAMPERING IN ALL OF THE STATES OF THE UNION!
We are calling for full investigations in Ohio and Florida first and then to
other states as the evidence warrants! We think there is already enough evidence
to call for the FBI to become involved in Florida and Ohio! Rep. John Conyers
has called for a GAO audit of this election but that is for correcting the
system for future elections and is NOT good enough for us at this time. We
understand that there are many ballots yet to be counted in Ohio, which will
happen this weekend but the outcome of this election, although interesting, is
not the final result that we are concerned with, we want any and all election
fraud that occurred during this past election to be investigated and prosecuted
to the full extent of the law!
      Sincerely,
      Dr. Lora Chamberlain, concerned American citizen.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Hello to all
      I am Dr. Lora Chamberlain in Chicago of the Illinois Progressive Democrats.
I am helping the League of Pissed Off Voters, CASE and other citizens groups in
Ohio with their public hearings about election fraud and a rally for a full
criminal investigation into any and all election fraud during this past election
on Nov.2nd.
Reach Out, a citizen action group in Ohio is sponsoring the rally on Sat.
11/13th at the Capitol Square in downtown Columbus, OH,  180 E. Broadway,
beginning at 10:30am and going until 12:30pm, then they will march to the public
hearings that will begin at 1pm and go until 4pm at the New Faith Baptist
Church, 955 Oak St., on the near east side of Columbus, OH. Additional public
hearings will occur on Mon, 11/15, 6-9pm at the Franklin County Courthouse, room
A, 373 S. High St in downtown Columbus. All interested citizens are encouraged
to attend. This rally and the hearings will be posted at www.indyvoter.org in
the calendar and at www.michiganIMC.org .
      We are calling for a full investigation into any and all election fraud and
full prosecution of any felonies that are discovered. We all agree that we have
a ZERO TOLERANCE FOR ANY ELECTION TAMPERING IN ALL OF THE STATES OF THE UNION!
We are calling for full investigations in Ohio and Florida first and then to
other states as the evidence warrants! We think there is already enough evidence
to call for the FBI to become involved in Florida and Ohio! Rep. John Conyers
has called for a GAO audit of this election but that is for correcting the
system for future elections and is NOT good enough for us at this time. We
understand that there are many ballots yet to be counted in Ohio, which will
happen this weekend but the outcome of this election, although interesting, is
not the final result that we are concerned with. We want any and all election
fraud that occurred during this past election to be investigated and prosecuted
to the full extent of the law!Please go to
http://www.petitiononline.com/uselect/petition.html to sign a petition calling
for a criminal investigation and then go that extra step and pick up the phone
and start calling all the Democrats in Congress to ask for the same thing; the
FBI to be called in and a full criminal investigation of all of the election
fraud occuring during this election , you can use the 1-800-839-5276 number to
the congressional operator. It is going to take the efforts of each and everyone
of us to move this country away from accepting this lawlessness and fraud! If
you can help with donations, please do so at www.blackboxvoting.org or
www.helpamericarecount.org .
      Thank you and in solidarity for regaining our Democracy,
      Dr. Lora Chamberlain, a concerned American citizen.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

People;
      This is originally a message from Joel Finkel at
*Not in My Name.* What amazes me is these people are
so impolite. They apparently have never heard the idea
that one is "not to speak ill of the dead." And lying
about them is that much worse. I guess Sharon's
history of murder and pillage is archaic "terrorism."
See if the Tribune prints anything that we send
in...DD


Folks,



Please read the editorial in today’s Chicago Tribune.

http://tinyurl.com/69f5n



Then please write to them: ctc-TribLetter@...



Here is the letter I sent.





To the Editors,



It is one thing if individuals base their opinions on
popular myths.  It is another if an editorial board of
a major newspaper does so.  “Arafat’s bitter legacy’
(11/12/04) is an unfortunate example of the latter.
You write, “in late 2000 and early 2001…Arafat turned
away from what is likely to be the best deal the
Palestinians can hope to get.”  First of all, this is
factual incorrect.  Ehud Barak walked away from the
talks at Taba, a few months after Camp David, where
the deal was so much better that Arafat was about to
sign.  This information is hardly hidden to anyone who
wishes to read it.  Secondly, the very idea suggests
that Israel is not to blame for decades of occupation
and illegal colonization of the Occupied Palestinian
Territories, but that Arafat is to blame for not
legitimizing it.



The editorial continues, “Instead, as he had done so
many times before, Arafat chose violence.  Another
Intifada began, and he did nothing to stop it.”  This
is also contrary to historical facts.  As everyone in
the region knows—including members of the PA and PLO
as well as former heads of Shin Bet, the Israel secret
police—the Intifada was a popular and spontaneous
uprising against not only the Occupation but against
Arafat and the PA.  Indeed, it was a popular rejection
of the entire Oslo paradigm, which had been an
unmitigated disaster for Palestinians and for which
Arafat was seen as partly responsible.  Reformers in
the PA and PLO complained openly that their largest
failure was that they did not see it coming at could
not gain control over it.  Furthermore, the statement
fails to recognize that at the outset of the Intifada,
Israel responded with overwhelming fatal force against
largely unarmed youth, including Israeli Arabs.
Finally, it suggests that an oppressed an occupied
people do not have the right to struggle against their
oppressors.  This right is guaranteed under
international law, whereas Israel’s Occupation and
settlement colonies are entirely illegal under
international law.



The editorial also states that “[Arafat] helped invent
and define modern terrorism.”  The facts are that the
bus bomb was invented by the Jewish terrorist group,
the Irgun, which began blowing up Palestinian buses
and markets in Jerusalem, Jaffa, and Haifa in 1937.
Plane hijackings were invented by Cubans fleeing
Castro, and they were welcomed as heroes by the U.S.
government.  In addition, air travel in the Middle
East was first attacked by Israel, who used their air
force to down civilian aircrafts in the 1950s.



Finally, the editorial promulgates the myth that
“[Sharon] took a huge stride in pursuit of peace [with
his Gaza Disengagement Plan].”  That this is nonsense
was revealed quite clearly by Sharon’s top aid, Dov
Weisglass, when he stated that the goal of the Plan is
to freeze any political peace process and take the
concept of a Palestinian nation off of Israel’s agenda
permanently.  According to a report in Haaretz (Oct 4
2004), Weisglass stated, “"The disengagement is
actually formaldehyde.  It supplies the amount of
formaldehyde that is necessary so there will not be a
political process with the Palestinians."  He
continued, “…what I effectively agreed to with the
Americans was that part of the settlements would not
be dealt with at all, and the rest will not be dealt
with until the Palestinians turn into Finns. That is
the significance of what we did."



I believe it is time to start dealing with the facts.
The interests of neither Israelis nor the Palestinians
are served by myths, and they both deserve better.



Joel R Finkel

Member, NIMN



__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page.
www.yahoo.com

Ann,

Thanks much for the Oberman transcript.  Do you have the
URL for that report and for the first two?

Thanks again.

Regards,

Roy

Friends:  Excellent piece; try sending it again in a shortened/tighened up
version.  Newspapers always like cryptic pieces, and I think a careful edit
of this piece, without taking out any of its facts or punch, might help us
get it published.  Martin Deppe
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dennis Dixon" <denndx@...>
To: <noiraqwar@yahoogroups.com>; <lpnufp@yahoogroups.com>;
<ccds_midwest@yahoogroups.com>; <chicagomayday@yahoogroups.com>;
<chiantiwar@yahoogroups.com>; <neighborsforpeace@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, November 12, 2004 1:24 PM
Subject: [lpnufp] Tribune smear of Arafat needs answers


>
> People;
>     This is originally a message from Joel Finkel at
> *Not in My Name.* What amazes me is these people are
> so impolite. They apparently have never heard the idea
> that one is "not to speak ill of the dead." And lying
> about them is that much worse. I guess Sharon's
> history of murder and pillage is archaic "terrorism."
> See if the Tribune prints anything that we send
> in...DD
>
>
> Folks,
>
>
>
> Please read the editorial in today's Chicago Tribune.
>
> http://tinyurl.com/69f5n
>
>
>
> Then please write to them: ctc-TribLetter@...
>
>
>
> Here is the letter I sent.
>
>
>
>
>
> To the Editors,
>
>
>
> It is one thing if individuals base their opinions on
> popular myths.  It is another if an editorial board of
> a major newspaper does so.  "Arafat's bitter legacy'
> (11/12/04) is an unfortunate example of the latter.
> You write, "in late 2000 and early 2001.Arafat turned
> away from what is likely to be the best deal the
> Palestinians can hope to get."  First of all, this is
> factual incorrect.  Ehud Barak walked away from the
> talks at Taba, a few months after Camp David, where
> the deal was so much better that Arafat was about to
> sign.  This information is hardly hidden to anyone who
> wishes to read it.  Secondly, the very idea suggests
> that Israel is not to blame for decades of occupation
> and illegal colonization of the Occupied Palestinian
> Territories, but that Arafat is to blame for not
> legitimizing it.
>
>
>
> The editorial continues, "Instead, as he had done so
> many times before, Arafat chose violence.  Another
> Intifada began, and he did nothing to stop it."  This
> is also contrary to historical facts.  As everyone in
> the region knows-including members of the PA and PLO
> as well as former heads of Shin Bet, the Israel secret
> police-the Intifada was a popular and spontaneous
> uprising against not only the Occupation but against
> Arafat and the PA.  Indeed, it was a popular rejection
> of the entire Oslo paradigm, which had been an
> unmitigated disaster for Palestinians and for which
> Arafat was seen as partly responsible.  Reformers in
> the PA and PLO complained openly that their largest
> failure was that they did not see it coming at could
> not gain control over it.  Furthermore, the statement
> fails to recognize that at the outset of the Intifada,
> Israel responded with overwhelming fatal force against
> largely unarmed youth, including Israeli Arabs.
> Finally, it suggests that an oppressed an occupied
> people do not have the right to struggle against their
> oppressors.  This right is guaranteed under
> international law, whereas Israel's Occupation and
> settlement colonies are entirely illegal under
> international law.
>
>
>
> The editorial also states that "[Arafat] helped invent
> and define modern terrorism."  The facts are that the
> bus bomb was invented by the Jewish terrorist group,
> the Irgun, which began blowing up Palestinian buses
> and markets in Jerusalem, Jaffa, and Haifa in 1937.
> Plane hijackings were invented by Cubans fleeing
> Castro, and they were welcomed as heroes by the U.S.
> government.  In addition, air travel in the Middle
> East was first attacked by Israel, who used their air
> force to down civilian aircrafts in the 1950s.
>
>
>
> Finally, the editorial promulgates the myth that
> "[Sharon] took a huge stride in pursuit of peace [with
> his Gaza Disengagement Plan]."  That this is nonsense
> was revealed quite clearly by Sharon's top aid, Dov
> Weisglass, when he stated that the goal of the Plan is
> to freeze any political peace process and take the
> concept of a Palestinian nation off of Israel's agenda
> permanently.  According to a report in Haaretz (Oct 4
> 2004), Weisglass stated, ""The disengagement is
> actually formaldehyde.  It supplies the amount of
> formaldehyde that is necessary so there will not be a
> political process with the Palestinians."  He
> continued, ".what I effectively agreed to with the
> Americans was that part of the settlements would not
> be dealt with at all, and the rest will not be dealt
> with until the Palestinians turn into Finns. That is
> the significance of what we did."
>
>
>
> I believe it is time to start dealing with the facts.
> The interests of neither Israelis nor the Palestinians
> are served by myths, and they both deserve better.
>
>
>
> Joel R Finkel
>
> Member, NIMN
>
>
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page.
> www.yahoo.com
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

My apologies.  I do not.  He did another one last night.  Amazing that he is so
interested but it is hard to get more elected officials (Durbin is not
interested) and progressives involved.

Roy Lipscomb <lipscomb@...> wrote:
Ann,

Thanks much for the Oberman transcript. Do you have the
URL for that report and for the first two?

Thanks again.

Regards,

Roy





Yahoo! Groups Links










[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

NOv. 11

OLBERMANN:  About $193,000 is the margin separating this country from recounts
of the presidential election in New Hampshire and Ohio.

John Kerry has nothing to do with it.  In fact, his lawyers headed to Ohio in
essence prove that President Bush won there.

Our fifth story on the COUNTDOWN, making sure your vote counts.  while efforts
are underway to count it and everybody else‘s twice.  The Kerry/Edwards part of
the story first.  You tax dollars in action, day 10 of the 2004 election
irregularities investigations.  The senators‘ legal counsel for Ohio, Dan
Hoffheimer, says some of those election lawyers each side were wielding like
switch blades before the election are in Ohio or keeping symbolic watch on Ohio,
but not to try to get their hands on 20 electoral votes.

“Our effort is not in any way intended to overturn George Bush‘s victory in
Ohio,” Hoffheimer says.  “And we do not expect to find a pattern of voter
fraud.” He says, the goal is to assure that the laws are followed during
counting of the provisional, absentee, overseas and regular ballots.

But despite all those disclaimers, Kerry‘s Ohio attorney also refers to the
“Many problem that sullied Ohio‘s electoral process before and on election day.”
Kerry does not want a recount but has resources to burn.  Two other candidates
do want one but they may not have any resources at all.

But David Cobb and Michael Badnarik, who between them got 14,355 of Ohio‘s 2.8
million votes, may still force a recount in that state.  Cobb, the Green Party
candidate and Badnarik, his counterpart in the Libertarian Party, today
confirmed they intend to file for a recount in the Buckeye state.  Their
campaigns will have to pay for it in advance working on premise of $10 per
precinct.

That would mean raising around $113,000 between now and five days after Ohio‘s
secretary state, Kenneth Blackwell, certifies the election.  Since they will not
even start working on the provisional ballots until Saturday, that might give
Cobb and Badnarik two weeks to locate the scratch.  They say they will try to
raise via their Web sites.  They also ask Mr. Blackwell, who doubled as
President Bush‘s campaign leader if Ohio, to recuse himself from a recount. 
Incidently, in Ohio, Badnarik got 14,331 votes and Cobb got 24.

Ralph Nader got 4,470 votes in New Hampshire.  That and $2 will get him a gallon
of gas if he‘s lucky.  But that and a check now for $2,000, and some sort of
binding promise to pay additional costs later will get him a recount in the
granite state where incidentally, John Kerry won.  The Nader campaign confirming
this afternoon that the check was being sent to Concord today.  They‘ve even
already picked out the 11 specific wards they wanted recounted.  Those wards
were chosen with the help of a Michigan computer programmer and self described
math geek named, Ida Riggs (ph), who did a study comparing vote totals from the
current election with results from 2000, largely center in the urban areas, in
the southeast corner of the state.  All those precincts registered a significant
bounce for Mr.  Bush, anywhere from 7 to 12 points.  All of those precincts
using optical scanners made by Diebold or Sequoia Voting System.

And according to Miss Briggs, if you look at all 71 precincts where President
Bush improved upon his results from 2000, 73 percent of those used optical
scanners.  A reminder here that Mr. Bush lost the state of New Hampshire this
time around.  Nevertheless, after the ballots were fed into the optical scanners
are recounted by hand at a cost of perhaps $80,000, Miss Briggs and the Nader
campaign will crunch the number again to see if there are any discrepancies.

To reality check both the possible recounts and what the Kerry/Edwards legal
team is or isn‘t doing in Ohio, I‘m joined by John McCormick, “Chicago Tribune”
reporter who has been following the story of the voting mechanics in these
elections.  Mr. McCormick, good evening.  Thanks for your time.

JOHN MCCORMICK, “CHICAGO TRIBUNE”:  Thanks for having me.

OLBERMANN:  Is this trying to have your cake and eat it too, on behalf of the
Kerry campaign?

Kind of a betting recount or challenge of some sort without really running the
risk of suffering the potential political blow back.

MCCORMICK:  I haven‘t talked to anybody in the Kerry camp today.  I think there
is kind of a fine line here.  You don‘t want to be seen as a sore loser.  And
yet John Edwards came out on election night, and one of the first things he
said, we want to make sure all the votes are counted.  And we all know that
elections are pretty messy business.  Not a lot of attention was paid to this
stuff before the 2000 election and how close that one was.  But as—as people
geared up for this election, everybody knew that it would be lawyered to death. 
That when I was in Ohio before the election, literally, hundred of lawyers were
there watching.

OLBERMANN:  Now they may have something to do.  When you talk of a fine line,
speaking of a fine line.  If what they‘re saying is not a cover for a recount,
if the premise is exactly as Hoffheimer put it, which was to increase, not
diminish the public‘s confidence in our election laws.  In that sense, has not
Senator Kerry put himself in a rather odd position, spending his campaigns money
to double-check the fact that President Bush was reelected?

MCCORMICK:  Well, I suppose.  But both campaigns geared up for this.  They had a
legal and accounting funds where they raised millions of dollars in preparation
should a recount be necessary.  So, they have the money in place.  And you know,
it‘s probably not going to be that expensive a proposition to be in Ohio, to be
able to take complaints from voters, if there are some out there.  There‘s a lot
of stuff running around on the Internet these days about all kind of conspiracy
theories about people who have looked at statistical models on this and all
kinds of fairly tangential things.  The Democrats concede they did not win the
election.  And they don‘t expect any of this to change the outcome.

OLBERMANN:  It looks as if there will be, at least a partial recount in New
Hampshire.  At least their‘s the chance of one in Ohio.  And they would all be
sponsored by three non-mainstream candidates.  If there is a recount in Ohio,
how would that impact either Senator Kerry or the remnants of his campaign?

Would it impact them?

MCCORMICK:  Well, again, I don‘t think, if he wants to run for president again,
in ‘08, and there‘s some speculation that he does, obviously, it is too soon to
tell if they‘ll really do that.  But you don‘t want to be viewed as a sore
loser.  And if you are too closely tied to these recount efforts, that‘s a
potential risk.  But again, you know, all of these states have unique laws when
it comes to recount, and their voting procedure.  I mean, the nation‘s election
system is really a patch work of varying systems and technologies.  And in term
of recount, they all have their own different laws and regulations.  And it‘s
within any candidate‘s right, a three party or whatever, to make those requests.

OLBERMANN:  It‘s not just an emcee as you‘re drawing, our voting, means, it is
an emcee exhibition.

John McCormick of the “Chicago Tribune,” many thanks for your time, sir.

MCCORMICK:  Thank you.

OLBERMANN:  All of this, Kerry‘s auditors, if you will, for Ohio, the
Libertarian/Green Party bid to recount there, the Nader negations in New
Hampshire, may be entirely new to you.  Not if you‘re on the Internet.  Once
again, the amorphous world of ether and blogs, seems to have pointed mainstream
politics in this country in at least a slightly different direction.

Who better to analyze that than MSNBC‘s own Joe Trippi, former manager of Howard
Dean‘s presidential campaign.  Author of the “Revolution Will Not be Televised:
Democracy, the Internet, and the Overthrow of Everything,” and Mr. Web around
these parts.

Joe, good evening.

JOE TRIPPI, MSNBC POLITICAL ANALYST:  Good evening, Keith.

OLBERMANN:  Simply put, is the roar on the Internet about Ohio, the reason that
the Kerry folks have sort of side stepped back into that state now?

TRIPPI:  I don‘t think there‘s any question about it.  I mean, I think they were
willing to walk away from it on election night.  I think they wouldn‘t be
sending anybody on this mission unless, except for the fact that the blogosphere
went out, grabbed the story.  And you know, it was something we were seeing all
day at MSNBC.  Citizen journalists were commenting on our blog of problems that
they were seeing in Ohio.  We have the make your Count Vote Project that MSNBC
was running, has 2000 recorded complaints from Ohio.  So these complaints were
out there.  But it was blogosphere that picked them up, ran with then, and then
bloggerman yourself reported it.  And I think it sort of got—another one of
those stories that jumped in the mainstream media.  And now all these campaigns
are reacting to it, and I think even using it as a valid excuse to go in and see
what‘s there and try to, you know, at least count every vote.  Make sure some of
this stuff didn‘t happen.

OLBERMANN:  Kind of a passport into the prospects of a recount in Ohio.

The dynamic is kind of fascinating, too, about the coverage of the questionable
events, we‘ll call it that in the election.  The media do almost nothing
initially.  The bloggers get frenetic.  The media do reports but not so much on
the election or anything that happened during it.  But on how frenetic the blogs
are.  What is next?  Do the blogs ultimately push the story in the mainstream? 
Or does the media push back and send the bloggers into their own communicate
where they ignore the mainstream media?

TRIPPI:  No, you know what I think happens, the blogs really reflect -

·         that frenzy reflects a lot of concern out there among a lot of
Americans.

There are a lot of Americans who have a concern about this election being
stolen.  And so blogs just reflect that and point to any little tea leaves or
facts or evidence that they can.  What happened then was it got picked up by
people like yourself who reported what was going on.  Now what we‘re seeing is,
actual, the Kerry campaign sending people in on just a search and look mission. 
But in the end, if what comes out of this is all these concerns by Americans who
are worried about this election, conclude, because the Kerry campaign says, and
we all find out, nothing happened.  That‘s good.

If we all find out, wait, there‘s smoke, there‘s fire here.  That‘s good, too. 
So it‘s a process that I actually think is pretty healthy.  That the blogs are
just really churning what a lot of Americans are worried about, what concerns
they really have.  And then once those concerns are exposed, the people who are
supposed to go in and make sure everything happened right, the campaigns have a
responsibility to do that.  The press has a responsibility to do that.  We‘re
doing it now.

OLBERMANN:  And it is not just a question of stolen.  It can be altered by
static cling, is perfectly nightmarish enough.  MSNBC‘s webmeister, Joe Trippi. 
Thanks, Joe.  Good evening.  We‘ll see you later.

One unresolved election issue is not up for any kind of debate.  The state of
Washington still does not have a governor elect.  As of election night
Republican Dino Rossi and Democrat Christine Gregoire had essentially split the
1.9 million votes.  Rossi led by 1,064.  At one point late that evening Gregoire
had led by 32 votes.  But Washington does most of its voting by mail.  They are
still counting those ballots, evidently using tweezers.  And as of the end of
tallying yesterday Rossi was ahead by about 3,500.  It is going to be this way
until next week at least.  Washington does not even begin to count its
provisional votes until next Wednesday.  And any vote decided by less than 2,000
triggers an automatic recount.

Rossi has nonetheless held a news conference to announce his transition team.

Among those already ceded, the pressure continued today on moderate Pennsylvania
Republican Senator Arlen Specter.  Not over his remarks to the president about
the political realities of sending anti-abortion judicial nominees to a Senate
in which the Republican majority is not sufficient to break Democratic
filibusters against judicial nominees, but because of his vote on a judicial
nominee.

In 1987.  Robert Bork.  The “New York Times,” quotes a series of conservative
consultants and commentators who say they oppose Specter‘s candidacy to head the
Senate judiciary committee because of his vote against Bork‘s nomination to the
Supreme Court 17 years ago.  “We‘ll never forget what he did to Judge Bork,”
Republican and consultant Richard Vigery (ph) is quoted as saying.  The “Times”
says some conservative will acquiesce to Specter as the judiciary chair if he
will support changing the century-old Senate rule that permits filibusters to
block judicial nominations.

A note of partisanship tonight in the nomination of the new White House dog. 
The Associated Press with a scoop on the providence of her name.  Miss Beasley. 
That what‘s the Bush daughters have named the new Scottish terrier puppy, who
will join Barney among the presidential pooches just before Christmas.  They
said the name was inspired by a character named Uncle Beasley in Oliver
Butterworth‘s 1956 kid‘s book, “The Enormous Egg.”  The late Mr. Butterworth‘s
son Tim reveals that not only was his father a Democrat, but the book was
actually written as a response to the investigations conducted by the infamous
Senator Joseph McCarthy.

On the Democrat-Republican thing, says Tim Butterworth, his father would, quote,
“probably be smiling quite a bit because he liked irony.”




Roy Lipscomb <lipscomb@...> wrote:

Ann,

Thanks much for the Oberman transcript. Do you have the
URL for that report and for the first two?

Thanks again.

Regards,

Roy





Yahoo! Groups Links









[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

At one point in this article, Mr Berman states a
truism that opposing Gonzalez would be political
suicide since he would be the first Hispanic Attorney
General. I wanna know when a *reactionary is simply a
reactionary?* Everything I read about this character
(murderer) makes him worse.....DD

Giddy for Gonzalez--Ari Berman (The Daily Outrage)

Already many in the mainstream media, and more than a
few Democrats, are fawning over Alberto Gonzales, John
Ashcroft's successor as Attorney General and Karl
Rove's dream candidate to fill the next Supreme Court
vacancy. He's "courtly and low-key" according to
Newsweek and "soft- spoken, nondogmatic and viewed
with suspicion by conservatives," writes the
Washington Post. "I can tell you he's already a better
candidate than John Ashcroft," Democratic Senator
Chuck Schumer said.

Better than Ashcroft? That's like comparing Franco to
Mussolini.

"In some ways, Gonzales is more dangerous than
Ashcroft," says Michael Ratner of the Center for
Constitutional Rights. As White House Counsel,
Gonzales helped draft the Patriot Act, advocated
secret detentions at Guantanamo and wrote memos
effectively legalizing torture, calling the Geneva
Convention "quaint" and key provisions "obsolete." He
drastically restricted access to presidential
documents and blocked the Senate from obtaining past
memos of judicial nominees.

While chief legal counsel for then Governor Bush in
Texas, Gonzales exhibited a cavalier attitude toward
capital punishment and "repeatedly failed to appraise
the governor of crucial issues in the cases at hand:
ineffective counsel, conflict of interest, mitigating
evidence, even actual evidence of innocence,"
according to The Atlantic Monthly . In the case of
Terry Washington, Gonzales skirted the issue of the
33-year-old defendant's severe childhood abuse and
mental retardation, leading the uninformed jury to
decide on--and Bush to hand down--a callous and
questionable execution.

Although he lacked any judicial experience, Bush then
appointed Gonzales to the Texas Supreme Court. As
Chief Justice, Gonzales accepted money from
Halliburton and the Texas Farm Bureau before handing
down verdicts on their behalf, and took $35,000 from
Enron in 2000.

Now Gonzales pledges to "build upon [Ashcroft's]
record." Influential right-wing groups like the
Christian Coalition, Family Research Council and
Family Action Group immediately endorsed his
candidacy.

Despite his alarming record, Democrats know it's
political suicide to block the country's first
Hispanic Attorney General. Yet they shouldn't label
Gonzales a "moderate." Whitewashers point repeatedly
to two incidents to burnish what they argue are
Gonzales' less-than-conservative credentials: as Chief
Justice he followed Texas law and allowed a
17-year-old girl to get an abortion without parental
consent and while White House counsel he advised the
Bush Administration to compromise on affirmative
action. But two instances of judicial restraint do not
erase a legacy of eroding civil liberties, increasing
secrecy, fast-tracking executions of the mentally ill
and shilling for large corporations.

The Los Angeles Times had the courage to say what few
others would: "Gonzales is a Disastrous Choice."



__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The all-new My Yahoo! - Get yours free!
http://my.yahoo.com

Make it clear what the people want*:  Tell Governor Blagojevich to cut pollution
from dirty, dangerous old power plants and set new cleaner air regulations of
their toxic emissions:

Leave a message for Governor Blagojevich any way you can:

Chicago home office:
312-814-2121

2934 W. Sunnyside
Chicago, IL  60625

Springfield:
207 State House
Springfield, IL  62706


e-mail:  http://www.illinois.gov/gov/contactthegovernor.cfm

When Governor Blagojevich' s Director of the Illinois EPA Renee Cipriano
reported on September 30, to defer regulating Illinois' coal-fired power plants
to Washington regulators:
http://www.epa.state.il.us/air/section-910-report/index.html

She does not mention the fact that dirty-power lobbyists write the rules for the
Bush Administration (latest example reported):
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A39749-2004Sep21.html

She forgets the campaign commitment the Governor made while running for office
she vowed to support when he appointed her Director of IEPA, to reduce the
emissions from coal-fired power plants in Illinois with stricter statewide
standards: http://www.consciouschoice.com/issues/cc1605/governorante1605.html

She doesn't mention the influence and success dirty-power has in Illinois, as
exemplified by Chicago-based Midwest Generation (operates the two grandfathered
plants in Chicago, among others in Illinois), subsidiary of California-based
Edison International:

MWGen Takes for their own Governor Blagojevich's top attorney:
http://www.wqad.com/Global/story.asp?S=2098923

MWGen Woos Dem's behind closed doors:
http://chicagobusiness.com/cgi-bin/news.pl?post_date=2004-07-26&id=13301&rel=1

EIX Stock price surges with billions of $ in cash on hand:
http://aolpf5.marketwatch.com/news/story.asp?dist=feed&siteid=aolpf&guid={C032B5\
D4-3CE8-43A0-90A7-8B2D5B5FC308


Neither does she mention that Governor Blagojevich is on the side with coal:
(for example
http://www.illinois.gov/PressReleases/ShowPressRelease.cfm?SubjectID=1&RecNum=35\
03)


Governor Blagojevich's IEPA's report glosses over the fact that their own
consultants estimate that fine particle pollution from power plants shortens the
lives of 1,356 Illinoisans each year. Fine particle pollution from power plants
also cause 195,698 lost work days, 1,333 hospitalizations and 33,986 asthma
attacks every year, 2,007 of which are so severe they require emergency room
visits.   Power plants are responsible for 41 percent of the total mercury
emitted by all known U.S. sources.  Illinois has advised against consuming
certain fish from ALL of its river and lakes (32,190 miles of river and 309,340
acres of lake) due to the risks of mercury contamination. 
http://cta.policy.net/regional/il/.

*Governor Blagojevich neighbors, on November 2 passed an advisory referendum
with over 90% approving him to "establish safeguards that require the two aging
metropolitan Chicago coal-burning power plants to reduce their dangerous
emissions of sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxide and mercury by at least 90 percent
from 1999 levels by no later than 2009, in order for the region to meet the
deadline for federal air quality standards."

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Ask Governor Blagojevich to heed his neighbors' advice and cut pollution from
dirty, dangerous old power plants in Illinois with new cleaner air regulations
of their toxic emissions by at least 90 percent from 1999 levels by no later
than 2009, in order for the region to meet the deadline for federal air quality
standards:

Chicago home office:
312-814-2121

2934 W. Sunnyside
Chicago, IL  60625

Springfield:
207 State House
Springfield, IL  62706


e-mail:  http://www.illinois.gov/gov/contactthegovernor.cfm



ILLINOIS DECISION NOT TO BACK STATE EMISSION RULES OUTRAGES ACTIVISTS
http://www.lvejo.org/Coal%20Power%20Plants.htm
Date: October 21, 2004
Environmentalists say they are shocked and angered by an Illinois EPA (IEPA)
report concluding it would be "irresponsible" to move forward with
state-specific requirements for electric utilities to reduce emissions,
particularly because top state officials have long criticized EPA's approach to
regulating these emissions as far too weak.

The three-year study, released Sept. 30, was widely expected to recommend
stricter power plant rules, positioning Illinois to become the first Midwestern,
coal-producing state to set utility emission standards that went beyond the
Clean Air Act.

But in the weeks leading up to the due date, industry groups mounted a lobbying
blitz (Clean Air Report, Sept. 23, p6) that environmentalists now say
successfully convinced Gov. Rod Blagojevich (D) to squelch any state-specific
recommendation.

Industry and congressional sources say they are happy with the IEPA report's
conclusions but deny that their effort changed any minds. Instead, they credit
IEPA for reaching the right conclusion.

"Illinois EPA recommends that the governor continue demanding that the federal
government act nationally to reduce power plant emissions," the report
concludes. Relevant documents are available on InsideEPA.com.

The governor's office referred calls to IEPA, where a source defends the state's
conclusions as consistent with its past positions. "IEPA is on record as wanting
a stronger national standard, and we still want to see that. What we were doing
was looking at state-specific standards on a multi-pollutant approach and
whether that made sense," the source says.

At this point, the state will continue to study the issue and attempt to answer
outstanding questions the agency was unable to address about a potential
state-specific rule's impact on electricity reliability, electricity prices and
jobs, the source notes. The state is also reserving the right to move forward
with its own standards after EPA finalizes its clean air interstate rule (CAIR)
to address nitrogen oxide (NOx) and sulfur dioxide (SO2) emissions from power
plants later this year, and its mercury reduction plan in March 2005.

The source declined to respond to questions about industry lobbying efforts,
noting that IEPA spoke with environmental groups and industry about the report
throughout the project.

But one Illinois environmentalist says IEPA stopped talking to activists in late
summer, raising suspicions that it might be backing away from its earlier plans
to recommend regulations. "Before that, they gave us a lot of information about
what the report would look like. . . . We expected them to recommend at least to
match the federal rules and on mercury to make it stronger," the source says.
"IEPA stood next to environmentalists and criticized the federal rules, and said
we needed a 90 percent [mercury] reduction."

A second environmentalist says the state's decision to do nothing while
criticizing EPA's plans defies logic, particularly because the report was sought
by the state legislature specifically to provide an opportunity for Illinois to
address power plant pollution and to boost use of Illinois coal. "They never
said they would do nothing," the source says.

The source adds that Blagojevich included plans to reduce in-state utility
pollution as far back as his 2002 campaign and accuses the governor of breaking
a campaign promise.

In February of this year, IEPA told U.S. EPA that the agency's plans for SO2
needed to include additional reductions of 10 million tons per year (tpy) in the
near term, while NOx emissions needed to be reduced by an extra 9 million tpy
from its proposed rule. IEPA says even more reductions are needed for phase II
of the federal plan, which would ultimately reduce SO2 and NOx emissions by 70
percent in 2018. On mercury, IEPA Director Renee Cipriano testified, "The U.S.
EPA proposal would require an approximate 69 percent reduction of mercury by
2018. However, a 90 percent reduction is both necessary and feasible."

The second environmentalist also points to the fact that IEPA's report relegates
a significant health study, specific to Illinois power plants, to the appendix.
The study by a noted Harvard University researcher finds nine power plants in
Northern Illinois cause about 320 deaths a year.

The report does acknowledge that public health is affected by utility emissions,
and that "significant public health and welfare benefits can be derived by
reducing power plant emissions."

But the IEPA source says it is unclear what kind of benefits Illinois-only rules
would bring.

A source with Rep. John Shimkus (R-IL) says IEPA's decision "keeps Illinois
competitive. We are pretty happy." The congressman has been at the forefront of
industry efforts to convince EPA to back away from a part of its mercury rule he
thinks unfairly penalizes Eastern coal.

A source with an Illinois utility company denies that it launched a successful
lobbying effort. "The industry was cooperating with IEPA, providing factual
information to allow it to complete the study," the source notes.

An Illinois Coal Association source calls the report "balanced" and says it
"recommends the right thing to do. . . . The federal EPA is about to promulgate
standards for mercury, SO2 and NOx. Why would the state come out with something
else? That is a wonderful attitude to take," the source says, admitting that the
association was "a little surprised" IEPA recommended no action.

However, the source adds the surprise is outweighed by the fact that Blagojevich
is not being totally inconsistent.

"His position that the [federal] mercury plan is too weak is superseded by the
point that you don't set standards before the federal government acts," the
source explains. "They say they reserve the right to do their own after the
final rule is out."

The IEPA source adds, "The decision made as of Sept. 30, 2004, does not mean the
door is closed. We will make an attempt to answer [outstanding questions] and
revisit the issue after we have certainty on the federal level."

Meanwhile, the second environmentalist says the governor could still redeem
himself by reacting to the report and issuing firm direction to IEPA about
future action. Blagojevich has yet to issue a statement about the report.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Tell Governor Blagojevich to reduce toxic emissions from coal-fired power plants
that are ruining the health of those who must inhale it:

Chicago home office:
312-814-2121

2934 W. Sunnyside
Chicago, IL  60625

Springfield:
207 State House
Springfield, IL  62706


e-mail:  http://www.illinois.gov/gov/contactthegovernor.cfm


Chicago’s air is especially DIRTY – so dirty it doesn’t meet minimal health
standards set by the federal government for smog and fine soot pollution.  This
air pollution causes or worsens many health problems for both young and old,
such as asthma, bronchitis, lung cancer, and heart attacks.



Main sources of this air pollution are older, coal-fired power plants.  The
LARGEST sources of air pollution in Cook County are two old coal power plants
located in Chicago.   Built in the Eisenhower years, they are still largely
exempt from meeting “modern” pollution control standards set 25 years ago.



IT AFFECTS YOUR HEALTH

A study by scientists at the Harvard University School of Public Health
attributed 41 premature deaths, 2,800 asthma attacks & 550 emergency room visits
EVERY YEAR from the pollution from just these two facilities in Chicago.



Coal power plants in Illinois also emit tons of TOXIC mercury to the air, which
ultimately winds up concentrated in the fish people eat.  For several years the
State Department of Public Health has warned children and women of childbearing
age to limit consumption of fish CAUGHT ANYWHERE IN ILLINOIS because of the
danger of brain damage to young or unborn children.



WEAK FEDERAL HEALTH PROTECTIONS REQUIRES STATE ACTION

Unfortunately, over the last several years, federal air pollution laws affecting
power plants have been significantly weakened.  But when he ran for office,
Governor Blagojevich said that he would work to cut pollution from dirty,
dangerous old power plants and would set new clean air rules for Illinois dirty
older coal power plants.  But he has not done this.



>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>


Express your concern to Governor Blagojevich:

Reach him:

Chicago home office:
312-814-2121

2934 W. Sunnyside
Chicago, IL  60625

Springfield:
207 State House
Springfield, IL  62706


e-mail:  http://www.illinois.gov/gov/contactthegovernor.cfm

Please share this with others who care about clean air.  To your health- Ira.

p.s. to LPNUFP
It was seeing the posts on this list re: putting referendums on the ballot way
back when that inspired the referendum on power plant toxic emissions to 33
ward, 28 precinct where our Governor resides.  So while this doesn't directly
relate to your peace efforts, I thought I'd share it with you.  Thanks, keep up
the good work. -Ira







__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Hello to all,
      I know everyone is deeply concerned about this election fraud! Now is the
time to start hounding our Democratic Reps and Senators, there is enough
evidence of probable cause for a full criminal investigation of at least Ohio
and Fla. The 1-800-839-5276 number to the congressional operator will transfer
you to all the Reps and Senators. Start making a fuss and start spreading the
word in other ways than the computer! Get out and flyer or talk with your
neighbors. All we are doing on this computer is just singing to the choir now!!!
I hope you can get my attachment to this e-mail, if not e-mail me at
drlora@...  and I will send it too you. It's not the prettiest flyer
but I do believe it is complete and I for one am going to start passing it out
to everyone I meet! We must spread the word now past our circle of friends.
      Also please think positively, the Bush administration has come to power via
corruption, this can be seen as a fragile house built with cards. All we need is
a low level rat to squeal and the house may tumble down in scandal. Visualize
the newspaper headlines when they start to carry this story! Visualize Congress
meeting to Impeach Bush and disallow the election. Visualize true Democratic
elections occurring shortly thereafter across the country, utilizing paper
ballots for everyone and every citizen getting his/her chance to vote,no
intimidation or voter disenfranchisement! Visualize American's walking around
town, happy again and hopeful for their future. I believe it helps to keep in
your mind's eye your positive goal rather than to focus constantly on the
negative! Quantum Mechanics has proven to us that the real intent of the
observer is often creative and self fulfilling, so let's create the harmony and
happiness with our government that we long to see by keeping that as our visual
goal.
Thank you,
In Solidarity For Real Democracy in America,
Dr. Lora Chamberlain

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

The next thing you're going to tell us is that recycling is a good  thing.

Bill


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Sense of Sublime to Heal Election Tragedy
. Following is from a recent radio interview regarding the election
crisis and need for optimism [& realism] about civilization. Aloha. L
. LaRouche: … we're going to do this webcast on Tuesday: And it will
begin with a performance of Bach's motet Jesu meine Freude, done by a
youth chorus, because I want to set the right tone. I want people,
now, coming out of this [election] crisis, to have an image of
beauty, an image of what our civilization is. Not to start out by
wallowing in the mess, the mire we're in now….
. In ancient Greece, they started with tragedy, which showed how bad
things could get, and they got worse. But also, Plato and others
brought in the concept of what's called the Sublime: Do not start,
from how bad things are, to try to win support for hating the
badness, or for joining it. Start from the beauty, which is inherent
in the nature of mankind. Appeal to the sense of beauty in mankind.
And then say, "How can we apply this concept of beauty to the problem
that threatens our beautiful mankind?" … It's the only thing that'll
save this civilization.
. Well, what happened [in Kerry's campaign] is this, essentially. You
had … a lot of good people - among the good people, you had people
who had a big streak of pessimism. The issue is this, the leadership
of the campaign, as merely typified by James Carville and Joel … was
for optimism, saying, "We have a problem in the country. The
challenge is to fix the problem. The challenge is to show people how
we can solve the problem. The challenge is to define the policy which
the nation needs, whether the majority is for it, or not, at this
moment. Stick to that."
. Others would say, "Yes, well, we will have the right policy. We
agree the policy is right. But, should we support the policy, if it
goes against what the majority of people are feeling?" And the
problem here, the weakness in the Democratic Party, through all these
decades of decadence—they've given decadence its true meaning—as a
result of that, they no longer have a sense of policy. They have a
sense of tactics, of short-term tactics; of how to get ahead, how to
get by. They're like the guy who buys a house he can never pay for,
and says, "But, I'll live in it this week anyway." …
. John Maynard Keynes was not a socialist; he was a fascist. His most
famous work, his General Theory, was published in Berlin in 1938, in
German, with praise for the Nazi regime of Adolf Hitler….
. This system [the economy] is collapsing; nothing can prevent it
from collapsing. The only thing that can happen, as Roosevelt
indicated by his measures, in 1933 … the Constitution of the United
States, gives our government the power to save us, and save our
currency, in a way which other nations, if we did it, would follow.
It's our only hope.
. Stockwell: The neo-cons are in there, controlling the White House
in such a way, that they can use the power of the Presidency of the
United States, to help better secure for the corporations that they
represent, secretly or openly, to use the power of the United States,
the armies of the United States, what financial power is left of the
United States, to secure what they can possibly steal, that's left in
the sense of raw materials, from … defenseless countries.
. LaRouche: I'll give you one historical parallel: In Germany, the
character of the Nazi system was typified by the Goeringwerke,
because … Hermann Goering, who was the bonzo of the Nazi regime and
the agent of the bankers, began gobbling up industries and putting
them into his firm, Goeringwerke. But, if you look at the paperwork,
the Goeringwerke were actually owned by an international [financial]
cartel, which was never touched, in the post-war period. It was the
cartel that Truman knew all about. This cartel is the right wing.
This cartel is here, today. The Halliburton syndrome is a poor
caricature of Hermann Goering[`s cartel]. Cheney is a poor caricature
of Hermann Goering, who [Cheney] works for George Shultz.
  - From www.larouchepub.com

Dear friends, also being active on the issue of recount and planning to prevent
future voter fraud will help healing.  Beyond Today is holding a peace vigil
Saturday at 4:00 pm corner of Western and Montrose.  I am hosting a Moveon.org
house party Sunday at 6:00 pm to discuss where we go from here.  I have been
circulating a petition to send to Sen. Durbin asking for his support for the GAO
investigation into voting irregularities requested by Congressman John Conyers
and five house Democrats (I have already sent Durbin 64 signatures).  Anyone
wishing to have their name on the petition, please review the petition below and
email me back with your name and ward or congressional district. Warmest
regards, Ann Breen-Greco


  Petition to Support House Judiciary Democrats' Request

to GAO for an Investigation of Voting Irregularities



The undersigned voters are requesting that you join House Judiciary Democrats in
support of their letters of November 5 and 8, 2004, requesting that the
Government Accountability Office immediately investigate the voting machines and
new technologies used in the 2004 election, how election officials responded to
difficulties they encountered and what can be done in the future to improve the
American election systems and administration.  In particular, incidents in Ohio,
Florida, North Carolina, and Nebraska have been reported by voters. and all
these reports warrant investigation.




aipu2 <aipu2@...> wrote:


Sense of Sublime to Heal Election Tragedy
. Following is from a recent radio interview regarding the election
crisis and need for optimism [& realism] about civilization. Aloha. L
. LaRouche: … we're going to do this webcast on Tuesday: And it will
begin with a performance of Bach's motet Jesu meine Freude, done by a
youth chorus, because I want to set the right tone. I want people,
now, coming out of this [election] crisis, to have an image of
beauty, an image of what our civilization is. Not to start out by
wallowing in the mess, the mire we're in now….
. In ancient Greece, they started with tragedy, which showed how bad
things could get, and they got worse. But also, Plato and others
brought in the concept of what's called the Sublime: Do not start,
from how bad things are, to try to win support for hating the
badness, or for joining it. Start from the beauty, which is inherent
in the nature of mankind. Appeal to the sense of beauty in mankind.
And then say, "How can we apply this concept of beauty to the problem
that threatens our beautiful mankind?" … It's the only thing that'll
save this civilization.
. Well, what happened [in Kerry's campaign] is this, essentially. You
had … a lot of good people - among the good people, you had people
who had a big streak of pessimism. The issue is this, the leadership
of the campaign, as merely typified by James Carville and Joel … was
for optimism, saying, "We have a problem in the country. The
challenge is to fix the problem. The challenge is to show people how
we can solve the problem. The challenge is to define the policy which
the nation needs, whether the majority is for it, or not, at this
moment. Stick to that."
. Others would say, "Yes, well, we will have the right policy. We
agree the policy is right. But, should we support the policy, if it
goes against what the majority of people are feeling?" And the
problem here, the weakness in the Democratic Party, through all these
decades of decadence—they've given decadence its true meaning—as a
result of that, they no longer have a sense of policy. They have a
sense of tactics, of short-term tactics; of how to get ahead, how to
get by. They're like the guy who buys a house he can never pay for,
and says, "But, I'll live in it this week anyway." …
. John Maynard Keynes was not a socialist; he was a fascist. His most
famous work, his General Theory, was published in Berlin in 1938, in
German, with praise for the Nazi regime of Adolf Hitler….
. This system [the economy] is collapsing; nothing can prevent it
from collapsing. The only thing that can happen, as Roosevelt
indicated by his measures, in 1933 … the Constitution of the United
States, gives our government the power to save us, and save our
currency, in a way which other nations, if we did it, would follow.
It's our only hope.
. Stockwell: The neo-cons are in there, controlling the White House
in such a way, that they can use the power of the Presidency of the
United States, to help better secure for the corporations that they
represent, secretly or openly, to use the power of the United States,
the armies of the United States, what financial power is left of the
United States, to secure what they can possibly steal, that's left in
the sense of raw materials, from … defenseless countries.
. LaRouche: I'll give you one historical parallel: In Germany, the
character of the Nazi system was typified by the Goeringwerke,
because … Hermann Goering, who was the bonzo of the Nazi regime and
the agent of the bankers, began gobbling up industries and putting
them into his firm, Goeringwerke. But, if you look at the paperwork,
the Goeringwerke were actually owned by an international [financial]
cartel, which was never touched, in the post-war period. It was the
cartel that Truman knew all about. This cartel is the right wing.
This cartel is here, today. The Halliburton syndrome is a poor
caricature of Hermann Goering[`s cartel]. Cheney is a poor caricature
of Hermann Goering, who [Cheney] works for George Shultz.
- From www.larouchepub.com








Yahoo! Groups Links









[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

> PLEASE REPLY TO ohiohearings@...
>
> Friends,
>
> We are sending gratitude and appreciation for your support and interest in
the
> Ohio public hearings on voting irregularities and voter suppression. The
> hearings last Saturday and Monday were amazing- we are amassing hundreds
of
> sworn testimonies, notorized affidavits, and written statements that
illuminate
> the patterns of irregularities that occurred throughout Ohio. Public
officials,
> community leaders, and lawyers heard the testimony of the people and a
court
> reporter was there to put the testimony on the public record.
>
> Stay tuned for updates: by this weekend we will have a formal report-back
from
> the hearings. We are grateful to all the individuals and organizations
that
> supported the hearings and helped make them happen, to all the people who
gave
> testimony, to all those who came to observe and witness, and to the
panelists
> who presided.
>
> MEDIA:
> -Pacifica Radio recorded the Saturday hearings and produced special
coverage of
> "The Ohio Election Controversy Hearings". KPFA broadcast the special
Wednesday
> 11/17, and it should be available archived online by Thursday:
> http://www.pacifica.org
> -The most updated audio and video excerpts from the hearings are being
posted on
> this site for public access:
> http://www.theneighborhoodnetwork.org/Video.html
> (Under the "Vote Suppression Hearings" heading, click on "Watch
highlights...")
> -To listen to the hearings, visit http://www.goxray.com
> -As testimony is transcribed and organized, we will be making a report
> available, with a summary of findings and recommendations. This report
will be
> delivered to our public officials and made available to the public and
media.
> WATCH www.freepress.org and www.indyvoter.org
>
> -"Ohio Voters Tell of Election Day Troubles at Hearing", Reginald Fields,
> Cleveland Plain Dealer, 11/14/2004
> http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/1114-02.htm
>
> -"Activists Hold Hearings on Voting Rights in Ohio", Ariella Cohen, The
New
> Standard Online:
> http://newstandardnews.net/content/?action=show_item&itemid=1241
>
> -"Looking for Voter Reform Groups Keep Eyes on Ohio", Henry Weinstein and
Ralph
> Vartabedian, LA Times, 11/13/2004
> http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/1113-02.htm
>
> --Columbus Channel 10 TV (Scroll down to "Voters Recount Irregularities")
> http://www.10tv.com/Global/category.asp?C=59516&nav=Snbd
>
> Also, we got coverage from WVKO Radio (broadcast hearings live in Columbus
11/13
> and 11/15), Air America Radio ( Stephanie Miller's show and Laura
Flanders'
> Show), Columbus Alive ("3,249,157", by J Caleb Mozocco 11/10/2004),
Columbus
> Dispatch ("Panel hears more complaints about Election Day Problems", by
Matthew
> Marks 11/16/2004 AND "Angry Voters Air Complaints", by Suzanne Hoholik and
Jeb
> Phillips, 11/14/2004 and picked up by the Associated Press).
>
> ADDITIONAL WRITTEN TESTIMONY:
> If you or someone you know still has testimony to give, please submit it
in
> writing to the Columbus Institute for Contemporary Journalism. Please
include
> your full contact information (name, phone, address, email) and make your
> testimony as direct and specific as possible with dates, names, times,
> locations and statements of fact, rather than opinion or commentary. Send
your
> testimony either via email (truth@... with WRITTEN TESTIMONY in
the
> title) or snail mail:
> CICJ
> 1240 Bryden Road
> Columbus, OH 43205
>
> ADDITIONAL OHIO HEARINGS:
> Organizers around Ohio have been inspired to hold similar public hearings
in
> their communities. We urge you to support and attend these hearings:
>
> Cincinnati
> Voting Irregularities Meeting
> Thursday, Nov. 18, 6:30 PM
> Corryville Public Library
> 2802 Vine Street, Cincinnati
> The public is invited to testify on voting irregularities before and
during the
> election of 2004.
> Contact Person: OHIO VOTE 2004 COMMITTEE, Juliet Stewart-513-531-9017
>
> Cleveland
> Friday, Nov. 19, 6-9 pm
> AFL-CIO Union Hall, 3250 Euclid Ave
> (PFAW Foundation, AFL-CIO, Greater Cleveland Voter Registration Project,
African
> American Women's Agenda, NAACP Voter Fund)
>
> ------------------------------------------
>
> Thanks, everyone!
> In peace,
> Amy and Jonathan
> 614-405-2160

Just a reminder of the 2 progressive films coming up at Healing Earth, 3111 N.
Ashland;

Sunday, Nov 21st, 3 pm, $2 donation
"What Really Happened in Ohio on Nov.13"
- a video by Edward Miyahara, a member The Citizens For Truth Coalition, of the
public hearings last weekend in Columbus, you won't really believe it until you
see it! Jim Crow is alive and well and living in Ohio!

Wednesday, Nov 24th, 7-9pm, $2 donation
"The End of Suburbia"
- a documentary about the occurrence of Peak Worldwide Oil Production and the
changes it will bring to our economy and lifestyles!
- with speaker Rael Bassan from the Illinois Renewable Energy Association and
The Chicagoland Urban Permaculture.


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

-----Original Message-----
From: raechel [mailto:lavieenrose24@...]
Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2004 2:01 PM

We are having a benefit show to raise money to get Guiseppe to his court
dates in New York and Boston.

When: MONDAY NOVEMBER 22nd, 7:30pm

Where: 2345 N. Kenmore, Townhouse #8-Sanctuary townhouses.

Why: to raise money for Guiseppe's traveling costs

Who: watch really awesome musicians play!!!! including DePaul's very own The
Breathless Mahonies (Cyndi and Raechel from DSAW are both in this band, as
well as DePaul student Matt Didier-dancey, dreamy indie girlie pop/rock),
and Kristin Sedevic (amazingly talented singer songwriter with a guitar)
from DePaul as well. and more bands TBA! (if you want to play and you dont
need drums, let me know!)

Cost: $3.


PLEASE RE-POST THIS TO ANY OTHER LISTSERVES THAT YOU CAN!!!!!!!!!!!!



Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT
click here
<http://us.ard.yahoo.com/SIG=129co5nkl/M=298184.5584357.6650215.3001176/D=gr
oups/S=1705080866:HM/EXP=1100894472/A=2434971/R=0/SIG=11eeoolb0/*http://www.
netflix.com/Default?mqso=60185400>


   _____

Yahoo! Groups Links
* To visit your group on the web, go to:
	 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/depaulnowar/

* To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
	 depaulnowar-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<mailto:depaulnowar-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe>

* Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service
<http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> .


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

The following exchange took place on a recent list.  The first item is Carl
Davidson’s response to the 2nd.  Davidson is a founder of Chicago Against
War and Injustice, and has been an activist for peace and justice for
decades.  For the maps, see www.urbanarchipelago.com
<http://www.urbanarchipelago.com/> .

Ted Pearson

From Carl Davidson:

Well, folks, what can I say?

It's interesting how you can look at the same graphics and see different
things.

In the county-by-county, more nuanced red-blue-grey map, the first thing I
noticed was not a network of cities, but the blue crescent of rural counties
in the Deep South.  It's what we used to call the Afro-American Black Belt
nation. Then I saw the blotches of blue rural counties in the Southwest, and
what I saw was what we used to call Atzlan, the Chicano-Native American
nation in the Southwest.  These are rural areas with majority or large
minority workforces of minority 'nonwhite' nationalities.

The next thing I noticed was the stretch of blue rust belt cities.  But even
here, what often makes  these blue collar towns decidedly 'blue' is the
large inner core of  African American, Arab-American and Latino voters. A
majority of unionized whites vote blue, but the far larger numbers of
nonunionized white workers do not

So the problem I see with 'urban identity politics' is that is hides or
glosses over these realities of race and class, and masks over our allies in
many rural counties.

Not that I'm against networks of cities.  There's a lot to be said for it; I
especially love the dynamic culture and intellectual life of the cities.
Moreover, there is no solving of the problems of race and class anywhere
without solving the crises of the inner cities. Finally, cities are a global
problem.  Mike Davis pointed out in a recent essay that this year or next,
if it hasn't happened already, a 50% plus one majority of the earth's
population will be in big cities, most urban slums and favelas.

But the truth is that you can't really separate city and country.  Take even
simple examples.  If you ate something today, a farmer grew it and a farm
worker harvested it. If you have ANYTHING, pick up ANYTHING around you while
you're reading this. Well, a trucker brought it to you, most likely a
trucker who lives in a 'red' area. I spent a good number of years traveling
the countryside meeting these folks. It true it's quite different than the
cities. But don't be fooled by stereotypes: Politics out there run the full
range from left to right, just in different issues and terms than you might
hear in the cities. Did you know that nearly 20% of truckers listen to
classical music and books-on-tape when they're roarin' down the Interstate?

Here's an interesting, alternate way to look at it.  The GOP right has a
hegemonic 'encirclement' program. It goes like this:  Unite the rural areas,
win over the suburban areas, and divide the urban areas along lines of race
and class, using the not-so-hidden subtext of appealing to threated white
male entitlements and moralistic, chauvinistic identity politics.

The problem is that their coalition is unstable and has a hard time
delivering the goods; it has immense class conflicts built into it and
divisions among its ruling elites as well. So one thing we might think of is
running a reverse counter-hegemonic, counter-encirclement 'Rainbow' strategy
against them: unite the cities around core 'Economic Democracy' solutions to
the urban crisis, win over the suburbs by paying similar attention to their
sprawl and environmental problems as well, and isolate the right in the
rural areas by mobilizing Atzlan, the Black Belt and Willie Nelson's Farm
Aid folks against the land-destroying and other rapacious practices of GOP
agribusiness.

The DLC Democrats, unfortunately, are more interested in class snuggle than
this kind of class struggle.  So such an alternative undoubtedly means
finding an alternative to them as well.

CarlD


THE URBAN ARCHIPELAGO

by The Editors of The Stranger

It's the Cities, Stupid.

There are two maps on this page.

The one at the top should be familiar. It's one of those
red-state/blue-state maps that have been tormenting Democrats, liberals, and
progressives since November of 2000. Over the 36 days that George W. Bush
and Al Gore fought for the White House in Florida, "red" and "blue" became
metaphors for America's divided electorate. Red vs. Blue--Democrat vs.
Republican; liberal vs. conservative; pro-life vs. pro-choice; gun-huggers
vs. gun-haters; gay-huggers vs. gay-haters.

The red-state/blue-state map opposite shows the results of 2004's
presidential election--red states won by George W. Bush, blue states won by
John F. Kerry. But the red-state/blue-state map is misleading. If a
Republican presidential candidate takes 50 percent of the vote plus 1 vote
in any given state, the whole state is colored red (even worse, a mere
plurality of voters can turn a state red when third parties are involved).
The same goes for the Democratic candidate--corral the most votes, and the
whole state is colored blue. But painting an entire state one color or the
other creates a false impression, an impression that we believe is hampering
the Democratic Party's efforts to pull itself out of its tailspin.

Take a look at the second map. This map shows a county-by-county red/blue
breakdown, and it provides a clearer picture of the bind the Democrats finds
themselves in. The majority of the blue states--Washington, Oregon,
California, Illinois, Minnesota, Michigan, Pennsylvania, New York, New
Jersey, Delaware--are, geographically speaking, not blue states. They are
blue cities.

Look at our famously blue West Coast. But for the cities--Seattle, Portland,
San Francisco, Los Angeles, and San Diego--the West Coast would be a deep,
dark red. The same is true for other nominally blue states. Illinois is
almost entirely red--Chicago turns the state blue. Michigan is almost
entirely red--Detroit, Lansing, Kalamazoo turn it blue. And on and on. What
tips these states into the blue column? Their urban areas do, their big,
populous counties.

It's time for the Democrats to face reality: They are the party of urban
America. If the cities elected our president, if urban voters determined the
outcome, John F. Kerry would have won by a landslide. Urban voters are the
Democratic base.

THE URBAN ARCHIPELAGO

It's time to state something that we've felt for a long time but have been
too polite to say out loud: Liberals, progressives, and Democrats do not
live in a country that stretches from the Atlantic to the Pacific, from
Canada to Mexico. We live on a chain of islands. We are citizens of the
Urban Archipelago, the United Cities of America. We live on islands of
sanity, liberalism, and compassion--New York City, Chicago, Philadelphia,
Seattle, St. Louis, Minneapolis, San Francisco, and on and on. And we live
on islands in red states too--a fact obscured by that state-by-state map.
Denver and Boulder are our islands in Colorado; Austin is our island in
Texas; Las Vegas is our island in Nevada; Miami and Fort Lauderdale are our
islands in Florida. Citizens of the Urban Archipelago reject heartland
"values" like xenophobia, sexism, racism, and homophobia, as well as the
more intolerant strains of Christianity that have taken root in this
country. And we are the real Americans. They--rural, red-state voters, the
denizens of the exurbs--are not real Americans. They are rubes, fools, and
hate-mongers. Red Virginia prohibits any contract between same-sex couples.
Compassionate? Texas allows the death penalty to be applied to teenaged
criminals and has historically executed the mentally retarded. (When the
Supreme Court ruled executions of the mentally retarded unconstitutional in
2002, Texas officials, including Governor Rick Perry, responded by claiming
that the state had no mentally retarded inmates on death row--a claim the
state was able to make because it does not test inmates for mental
retardation.) Dumb? The Sierra Club has reported that Arkansas, Mississippi,
Oklahoma, Alabama, and Tennessee squander over half of their federal
transportation money on building new roads rather than public transit.

If Democrats and urban residents want to combat the rising tide of red that
threatens to swamp and ruin this country, we need a new identity politics,
an urban identity politics, one that argues for the cities, uses a rhetoric
of urban values, and creates a tribal identity for liberals that's as
powerful and attractive as the tribal identity Republicans have created for
their constituents. John Kerry won among the highly educated, Jews, young
people, gays and lesbians, and non-whites. What do all these groups have in
common? They choose to live in cities. An overwhelming majority of the
American popuation chooses to live in cities. And John Kerry won every city
with a population above 500,000. He took half the cities with populations
between 50,000 and 500,000. The future success of liberalism is tied to
winning the cities. An urbanist agenda may not be a recipe for winning the
next presidential election--but it may win the Democrats the presidential
election in 2012 and create a new Democratic majority.

For Democrats, it's the cities, stupid--not the rural areas, not the
prickly, hateful "heartland," but the sane, sensible cities--including the
cities trapped in the heartland. Pandering to rural voters is a waste of
time. Again, look at the second map. Look at the urban blue spots in red
states like Iowa, Colorado, and New Mexico--there's almost as much blue in
those states as there is in Washington, Oregon, and California. And the
challenge for the Democrats is not just to organize in the blue areas but to
grow them. And to do that, Democrats need to pursue policies that encourage
urban growth (mass transit, affordable housing, city services), and
Democrats need to openly and aggressively champion urban values. By focusing
on the cities the Dems can create a tribal identity to combat the white,
Christian, rural, and suburban identity that the Republicans have cornered.
And it's sitting right there, on every electoral map, staring them in the
face: The cities.

The urbanites. Howard Dean had it wrong when he tried to woo the "Pickup
Truck with Confederate Flag" vote. In fact, while Kerry won urban areas by a
whopping 60 percent--that actually represents a 15 percent drop in urban
support from 2000 when Gore won the election. The lesson? Democrats have got
to tend to their urban base and grow it.

In cities all over America, distressed liberals are talking about fleeing to
Canada or, better yet, seceding from the Union. We can't literally secede
and, let's admit it, we don't really want to live in Canada. It's too cold
up there and in our heart-of-hearts we hate hockey. We can secede
emotionally, however, by turning our backs on the heartland. We can focus on
our issues, our urban issues, and promote our shared urban values. We can
create a new identity politics, one that transcends class, race, sexual
orientation, and religion, one that unites people living in cities with each
other and with other urbanites in other cities. The Republicans have the
federal government--for now. But we've got Seattle, Portland, San Francisco,
Chicago, Los Angeles, San Diego, New York City (Bloomberg is a Republican in
name only), and every college town in the country. We're everywhere any sane
person wants to be. Let them have the shitholes, the Oklahomas, Wyomings,
and Alabamas. We'll take Manhattan.

EMBRACING URBAN SELF-INTEREST

To all those who live in cities--to all those depressed Kerry supporters out
there--we say take heart. Clearly we can't control national politics right
now--we can barely get a hearing. We can, however, stay engaged in our
cities, and make our voices heard in the urban areas we dominate, and make
each and every one, to quote Ronald Reagan (and John Winthrop, the
17th-century Puritan Reagan was parroting), "a city on a hill." This is not
a retreat; it is a long-term strategy for the Democratic Party to cater to
and build on its base.

To red-state voters, to the rural voters, residents of small, dying towns,
and soulless sprawling exburbs, we say this: Fuck off. Your issues are no
longer our issues. We're going to battle our bleeding-heart instincts and
ignore pangs of misplaced empathy. We will no longer concern ourselves with
a health care crisis that disproportionately impacts rural areas. Instead we
will work toward winning health care one blue state at a time.

When it comes to the environment, our new policy is this: Let the heartland
live with the consequences of handing the national government to the
rape-and-pillage party. The only time urbanists should concern themselves
with the environment is when we are impacted--directly, not spiritually (the
depressing awareness that there is no unspoiled wilderness out there doesn't
count). Air pollution, for instance: We should be aggressive. If coal is to
be burned, it has to be burned as cleanly as possible so as not to foul the
air we all have to breathe. But if West Virginia wants to elect politicians
who allow mining companies to lop off the tops off mountains and dump the
waste into valleys and streams, thus causing floods that destroy the homes
of the yokels who vote for those politicians, it no longer matters to us.
Fuck the mountains in West Virginia--send us the power generated by cleanly
burned coal, you rubes, and be sure to wear lifejackets to bed.

Wal-Mart is a rapacious corporation that pays sub-poverty-level wages,
offers health benefits to its employees that are so expensive few can afford
them, and destroys small towns and rural jobs. Liberals in big cities who
have never seen the inside of a Wal-Mart spend a lot of time worrying about
the impact Wal-Mart is having on the heartland. No more. We will do what we
can to keep Wal-Mart out of our cities and, if at all possible, out of our
states. We will pass laws mandating a living wage for full-time work, upping
the minimum wage for part-time work, and requiring large corporations to
either offer health benefits or pay into state- or city-run funds to provide
health care for uninsured workers. That will reform Wal-Mart in our blue
cities and states or, better yet, keep Wal-Mart out entirely. And when we
see something on the front page of the national section of the New York
Times about the damage Wal-Mart is doing to the heartland, we will turn the
page. Wal-Mart is not an urban issue.

Neither is gun control. Our new position: We'll fight to keep guns off the
streets of our cities, but the more guns lying around out there in the
heartland, the better. Most cities have strong gun-control laws--laws that
are, of course, undermined by the fact that our cities aren't walled. Yet.
But why should liberals in cities fund organizations that attempt, to take
one example, to get trigger locks onto the handguns of NRA members out there
in red states? If red-state dads aren't concerned enough about their own
children to put trigger locks on their own guns, it's not our problem. If a
kid in a red state finds his daddy's handgun and blows his head off, we'll
feel terrible (we're like that), but we'll try to look on the bright side:
At least he won't grow up to vote like his dad.

We won't demand that the federal government impose reasonable
fuel-efficiency standards on all cars sold in the United States. We will,
however, strive to pass state laws, as California has done, imposing
fuel-efficiency standards on cars sold in our states.

We officially no longer give a shit when family farms fail. Fewer family
farms equal fewer rural voters. We will, however, continue to support small
faggy organic farms, as we are willing to pay more for free-range chicken
and beef from non-cannibal cows.

We won't concern ourselves if red states restrict choice. We'll just make
sure that abortion remains safe and legal in the cities where we live, and
the states we control, and when your daughter or sister or mother dies in a
botched abortion, we'll try not to feel too awful about it.

In short, we're through with you people. We're going to demand that the
Democrats focus on building their party in the cities while at the same time
advancing a smart urban-growth agenda that builds the cities themselves. The
more attractive we make the cities--politically, aesthetically,
socially--the more residents and voters cities will attract, gradually
increasing the electoral clout of liberals and progressives. For Democrats,
party building and city building is the same thing. We will strive to turn
red states blue one city at a time.

From here on out, we're glad red-state rubes live in areas where guns are
more powerful and more plentiful, cars are larger and faster, and people are
fatter and slower and dumber. This is not a recipe for repopulating the
Great Plains. And when you look for ways to revive your failing towns and
dying rural counties, don't even think about tourism. Who wants to go to
small-town America now? You people scare us. We'll island-hop from now on,
thank you, spending our time and our money in blue cities. If an urbanite is
dying to have a country experience, rural Vermont is lovely. Maple syrup,
rolling hills, fly-fishing--everything you could want. Country bumpkins in
red rural areas who depend on tourists from urban areas but vote Republican
can forget our money.

You've made your choice, red America, and we urban Americans are going to
make a different choice. We are going to make Seattle--and New York,
Chicago, and the rest--a great place to live, a progressive place. Again,
we'll quote Ronald Reagan: We will make each of our cities--each and every
one--a shining city on a hill. You can have your shitholes.

URBAN VISION

The first president Bush had a problem with the "vision thing," and he lost.
Democrats had a problem with vision thing in 2004, and they lost. But they
don't have to continue having this problem.

Above any other advantage, the new urban identity politics solves "the
vision thing" for the Democratic Party. No longer are we a fractured
aggregation of special interests or a spineless hydra of contingent
alliances--we are a united front, with a clear, compelling image and an
articulated system of values. Up until now, the Republicans have been
winning the image war. When you think of "America," you imagine a
single-family dwelling with a flag in the front yard and acres of corn
waving in the background. It's an angry red fantasy. But propaganda is
flexible, and audiences are pliant. Urban politics opens up a whole new
visual vocabulary to be exploited by TV advertising, and it's a vocabulary
rich in emotional content, particularly after September 11. This is the era
of cityscapes, rapid transit, and crowds of people. Political advertising
can no longer pander to nostalgia about the yeoman countryside--we must
embrace our urban future.

With all the talk of the growth of exurbs and the hand-wringing over facile
demographic categories like "security moms," you may be under the impression
that an urban politics wouldn't speak to many people. But according to the
2000 Census, 226 million people reside inside metropolitan areas--a number
that positively dwarfs the 55 million people who live outside metro areas.
The 85 million people who live in strictly defined central city limits also
outnumber those rural relics. When the number of city-dwellers in the United
States is quadruple the number of rural people, we can put simple democratic
majorities to work for our ideals.

Even people who don't live in cities look to urban centers for a certain
image of America. The nation identified with New York City in such a
visceral way on September 11 not just because Americans died
there--Americans died in a Pennsylvania field and in Northern Virginia
too--but because the New York skyline is a stirring image of American
prosperity and achievement. It symbolizes the motivation and spirit of the
American people, the wealth of our nation, the thrum of diverse cultures,
and inexhaustible cultural creativity. Cities inspire us; they speak to our
hopes and our passions. Small towns diminish us; they speak of lost history
and downscaled dreams. The Democratic Party should compete on our own turf,
change the terms of the debate, and give the American people heroes to
believe in--as well as enemies to revile.

Conservatives have vilified liberals for decades, and the new urban identity
politics gives the Democratic Party its own partisan villains. The truth is
that rural states--the same red states that vote reflexively Republican in
national elections--are welfare states. While red-state voters like to
complain about "tax-and-spend liberals," red states are hopelessly dependent
on the largess of the federal government to prop up their dwindling rural
population. Red states like North Dakota, New Mexico, Mississippi, Alaska,
West Virginia, Montana, Alabama, South Dakota, and Arkansas top the list of
federal spending per dollar of federal taxes paid. And who's paying the
most? Blue states. Cities--and states dominated by their cities. Welfare
states, in contrast, demand federal money to fund wasteful roads to nowhere.
Welfare states guzzle barrel upon barrel of oil so their rural residents can
sputter along on ribbons of asphalt.

Take a state like Wyoming, the arid, under-populated home of our glowering
vice president Dick Cheney. Wyoming receives the second-highest amount of
federal aid in the nation per capita (Alaska, another red state, is number
one), and it ranks second lowest in federal taxes paid (behind only South
Dakota). Overall, the federal government spent about $2,413 per capita in
Wyoming for the fiscal year 2002 (the last year for which data is
available), compared with almost exactly half that amount, or $1,205 per
capita, for Washington State. This ridiculous disparity extends even to
Homeland Security funds, which ought to be targeted toward the most
vulnerable areas--coastlines, big city landmarks, porous borders. But
landlocked Wyoming, with exactly zero important strategic targets, merits
$38.31 per capita in Homeland Security funds. New York state residents get a
measly $5.47. An urban agenda would argue for kicking Wyoming off the
federal dole. States should pay their own way, not come to cities begging
for handouts.

A refusal to subsidize rural waste will inform other policy decisions as
well. Farm subsidies, for example, are obsolete and they cause needless
friction in international trade agreements. The agricultural complex in the
United States is so concentrated that very few voters have a personal stake
in the continued existence of farm subsidies. Rural voters aren't going to
switch party affiliations no matter what we do, so let's jettison their
issues when they fail to serve our core interests. Ethanol, a corn-derived
alcohol, is another great example. Scientific consensus says that corn will
never be a viable source for alternative fuel, since the very production of
ethanol requires so much fossil fuel and the payoff is paltry. Ethanol is
vanity research; the new urban politics should stand for real solutions.

In the same way, we need to claim legislation like the Clean Air Act as our
own. It is urban residents, not rural residents, who suffer when air quality
is poor, and coal mines in rural states cannot dictate what size airborne
particulates we should be willing to breathe. Asthma is a growing problem
across the nation, but it is particularly acute among African American and
Latino children growing up in the inner cities--the death rate from asthma
complications is three times as high for minority children as it is for
whites. This is unacceptable, and it's just one example of an issue urban
residents can and should rally behind.

Democrats are now emphatically the minority party. This doesn't mean we give
up; it means we take a page from the Republican playbook, refining and
relentlessly pushing a vision of our own. We must rededicate ourselves to
the urban core.

URBAN INDEPENDENCE

The anti-urban vote does more than just overwhelm city voters in
presidential elections. It also overruns city priorities on local policy
debates. We should go our own way. After all, when a city like Seattle's
fate is tied to that of a state like Washington, the city's interests are
routinely routed. In 1993, for example, Washington voters limited state
budget increases, hobbling education and transportation funding. The
measure, which passed statewide by a 51 to 49 margin, tanked in Seattle, 46
to 54. A 1997 gay rights measure, meanwhile, suffered the converse fate,
losing statewide while winning here. And Tim Eyman's two tax-slashing
initiatives won in rural and suburban areas but went down in flames inside
city limits.

Laws limiting taxes have a disproportionate impact on cities, which rely on
local levies to pay for basic social and human services like
domestic-violence programs, low-income housing, and tenant advocacy. If
you're wondering why the city is suffering draconian budget cuts--$24
million this year, $20 million in 2005--you can thank rural voters who seem
unable to grasp a basic Christian tenet; greed is bad, sharing is good.

The lesson is simple for urban residents: Seattle shouldn't cast its lot
with the rest of the state. Rural and suburban voters have shown again and
again that they aren't willing to fund urban infrastructure. Throughout
Washington State, transportation taxes like 2002's Referendum 51 have
tanked, while anti-transit measures like Tim Eyman's I-776 have passed
overwhelmingly. While that might seem like grim news for cities like
Seattle, there's a silver lining: When cities set their own transportation
priorities, truly urban systems (like the monorail) get funded and built,
while the suburban mega-highways that lard initiatives like R-51 go
unfunded. We don't use suburban roads. We can let the suburbs figure out a
way to pay for them.

Cities have the clout, and the imperative, to give people alternatives to
driving solo, and to punish those who insist on clogging our city streets.
In Seattle, we've done exactly that. We've built bike lanes, expanded the
bus system, and banned new park-and-rides inside city limits. We've funded a
South Seattle-to-downtown light rail system. And we've overwhelmingly
supported the monorail, an inner-city mass-transit system that's paid for by
one of the most progressive taxes available: an excise tax on the value of
cars in the city. Want to buy a Hummer? Fine. But you're gonna pay for
it--and help fund public transit. If you want to rely on environmentally
friendly public transit, though, we'll make it affordable and easy to use.
That's a truly urban value.

Transit like the monorail, in turn, promotes density in outlying areas (like
Ballard and West Seattle), which leads to the creation of housing that's
affordable to everyone--not just the proverbial penthouse-dwelling downtown
urban elite. Cities like Seattle can further encourage dense urban housing
by adopting policies that encourage developers to build dense low-income
housing. And we've done it: Last year, Mayor Greg Nickels unveiled a new
push to increase density outside downtown by increasing building heights and
providing incentives to developers who build inner-city housing.

The more housing that is built in cities, the more people can afford to live
there. And the more cities pass laws that make it easier to live in
cities--laws like Washington State's inflation-indexed minimum wage, which
passed overwhelmingly in Seattle--the more cities will attract the kind of
culturally and economically diverse populations that make them attractive
places to work and live. And, as counterintuitive as it may seem to
composting, recycling self-righteous suburbanites, living in dense urban
areas is actually better for the environment. The population of New York
City is larger than that of 39 states. But because dense apartment housing
is more energy efficient, New York City uses less energy than any state.
Conversely, suburban living--with its cars, highways, and single-family
houses flanked by pesticide-soaked lawns--saps energy and devastates the
ecosystem.

Cities' freedom to go their own way extends, of course, beyond mere
infrastructure. Urban dwellers are cultural libertarians--we don't just
tolerate a diversity of lifestyles and attitudes, we embrace it. Seattle,
for example, has over 1000 churches, mosques, and synagogues. From San
Francisco to Ann Arbor to Seattle, cities have been the vanguard.

Drug reform is a prime example. Eight states have passed medical marijuana
initiatives; none could have done so without the pro-pot clout of cities.
Last year, Seattle voters overwhelmingly passed Initiative 75, which
effectively decriminalizes marijuana possession by making it cops' lowest
law enforcement priority. And just this month, Ann Arbor passed a law
legalizing medical marijuana, the second city in Michigan to do so. There
are countless other examples. But the bottom line is this: Cities, not the
outlying suburbs, are leading the way on drug reform. And where cities go,
the nation will inevitably follow.

Gay rights, another national issue, took a beating this November, as 11
states passed constitutional amendments banning gay marriage. But locally,
Seattle has ensured that gays and lesbians enjoy the full protection of the
law. Not only are Seattle city employees and employees of firms that
contract with the city entitled to domestic partnership benefits, earlier
this year, Mayor Nickels announced that the city would honor gay marriages
from other progressive jurisdictions, such as Portland and San Francisco.

But there's still more to do that the Feds and the State are loath to
deliver: Subsidized childcare; safe injection sites; expanding the monorail
through the rest of the city; discouraging excessive auto use by taxing
mileage (to pay for more public transit); and providing family planning for
low-income families. An aggressive new urbanist movement will go its own
way, making the cities, not the states, the true laboratories of democracy.

URBAN STATES

In November 1960, a black 6-year-old girl named Ruby Bridges entered the
newly desegregated William Frantz Public School in New Orleans. In reaction
to her admission, white parents withdrew their kids from Ruby's class and
she completed the first grade alone, with instruction from one teacher and
support from a child psychiatrist. Ruby's walk to class on the first day of
school inspired Norman Rockwell's The Problem We All Live With. In this
painting (one of Rockwell's best, as far as we are concerned), a very black
Ruby Bridges is escorted to school by four big white U.S. marshals. The
image is powerful because it represents the federal government as an
institution and enforcer of reason. The white bigots of New Orleans can
complain, bitch, and threaten the lives of black boys and girls all they
want, but in the end the federal government steps in to ensure that the
rights of every American are protected.

This image of the federal government is now in a coma. The lawmaking bodies
that are clustered in Washington, D.C. (the Senate, the House, the Justice
Department, the Supreme Court, the White House), no longer form the
enlightened center from which reason and justice emanate. During the civil
rights era, the federal government could claim to at least aspire to this
transcendental order (the Great Society, the War on Poverty, the Voting
Rights Act of 1965), but not today. Since the beginning of the 21st century,
Washington, D.C., has exerted a force that is not progressive (as epitomized
by Rockwell's painting) but oppressive. This is not an exaggeration. For
example, the sole reason why the state of California--or more accurately,
the cities of California through the agency of the state--turned to its own
citizens to establish funding for stem cell research is because the federal
government, in the form of the reelected Bush administration, holds a
profoundly backward position on the matter.

Under Bush, the federal government spent almost nothing ($25 million) this
year on stem cell research, a policy that's entirely informed by the bizarre
belief in a God who has a white beard, lives in heaven, and hates the idea
of stem cell research. The reality is this: There are over 100 million
Americans (most of them Christian) whose lives would be improved or saved by
therapies and treatments that could be developed through stem cell research.
The federal government, however, holds the opinion that God should not be
deprived of worship from the souls that are supposedly housed in the
miniscule cells of five-day-old embryos. Realizing this is just plain stupid
(or country, an archaic synonym for stupid that should be revived in our
post-2004 election world), California's citizens--its urban citizens--passed
Proposition 71, which would allocate for research nearly $300 million a year
over the next 10 years. This figure, $300 million, is three times larger
even than what John Kerry proposed, and promises to bring the benefits of
this new science to all Americans before the close of this decade. Clearly
the federal government is no longer the enforcer of reason, the cities are,
we urbanites are.

Proposition 71 is just the beginning of a new, muscular urban politics. More
and more decisions involving health, education, transportation, and law must
be wrested away from our theocratic federal government by large humanistic
cities. The federal government may give us its prayers but it will never
give us even the most basic health care coverage. The State of Hawaii has
what the rest of America doesn't have--universal health care coverage. Why
can't other states do the same? Or, more to the point, why can't big cities
compel the states they're located in to do the same? Again, it is not the
State of Washington that is blue, it is the concentrated population of
Seattle that is deep blue; and because Seattle is so damn big it has the
power to dictate the politics of its generally hostile state. So, this is
not about state rights--indeed, the counties in California that passed
Proposition 71 by 60 percent or more were all urban (San Francisco with the
highest percentage in the whole state, 71). It's about urban rights, about
empowering the bastions of reason and rationality in a nation that is
increasingly unreasonable and irrational. As a resident of the city, you
should be proud to be an urbanite.

URBAN VALUES

It's no secret what the urban population is against--the Bush administration
and its red armies have done us the favor of making it a cinch to identify:
We oppose their sub-moronic, "faith-based" approach to life, and, as stated
above, we hereby relinquish our liberal tendency to sympathize with their
lack of, say, livable working conditions, a family wage, and a national
health care program. We no longer have to concern ourselves with the
survival of the family farm, nor do we have to concern ourselves with saving
fragile suburban economies from collapse. They're against us; we're against
them. This is a war.

But if liberals and progressives want to reach out past our urban bases, it
might be helpful to identify some essential convictions, thereby allowing us
to perhaps compete on "values." Identifying and articulating our core
convictions, as opposed to compromising and downplaying them in search of
some kind of non-urban appeal, might actually attract voters in exurbs and
rural areas who understand the importance of cities to the national economy.
But even if it doesn't, ours is a superior way of life. Wherever people
choose to live in this country, they should want to live as we do.

So how do we live and what are we for? Look around you, urbanite, at the
multiplicity of cultures, ethnicities, and tribes that are smashed together
in every urban center (yes, even Seattle): We're for that. We're for
pluralism of thought, race, and identity. We're for a freedom of religion
that includes the freedom from religion--not as some crazy aberration, but
as an equally valid approach to life. We are for the right to choose one's
own sexual and recreational behavior, to control one's own body and what one
puts inside it. We are for life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. The
people who just elected George W. Bush to a second term are frankly against
every single idea outlined above.

Unlike the people who flee from cities in search of a life free from
disagreement and dark skin, we are for contentiousness, discourse, and the
heightened understanding of life that grows from having to accommodate
opposing viewpoints. We're for opposition. And just to be clear: The
non-urban argument, the red state position, isn't oppositional, it's
negational--they are in active denial of the existence of other places,
other people, other ideas. It's reactionary utopianism, and it is a clear
and present danger; urbanists should be upfront and unapologetic about our
contempt for their politics and their negational values. Republicans have
succeeded in making the word "liberal"--which literally means "free from
bigotry... favoring proposals for reform, open to new ideas for progress,
and tolerant of the ideas and behavior of others; broad-minded"--into an
epithet. Urbanists should proclaim their liberalism from the highest rooftop
(we have higher rooftops than they do); it's the only way we survive. And in
our next breath, we should condemn their politics, exposing their
conservatism as the anti-Americanism that it is, striving to make
"conservative" into an epithet.

Let's see, what else are we for? How about education? Cities are beehives of
intellectual energy; students and teachers are everywhere you look,
studying, teaching, thinking. In Seattle, you can barely throw a rock
without hitting a college. It's time to start celebrating that, because if
the reds have their way, advanced degrees will one day be awarded based on
the number of Bible verses a person can recite from memory. In the city,
people ask you what you're reading. Outside the city, they ask you why
you're reading. You do the math--and you'll have to, because non-urbanists
can hardly even count their own children at this point. For too long now,
we've caved to the non-urban wisdom that decries universities as bastions of
elitism and snobbery. Guess what: That's why we should embrace them. Outside
of the city, elitism and snobbery are code words for literacy and
complexity. And when the oil dries up, we're not going to be turning to
priests for answers--we'll be calling the scientists. And speaking of
science: SCIENCE! That's another thing we're for. And reason. And history.
All those things that non-urbanists have replaced with their idiotic faith.
We're for those.

As part of our pro-reason platform, we're for paying taxes--taxes, after
all, support the urban infrastructure on which we all rely, and as such, are
a necessary part of the social contract we sign every day. We are for
density, and because we're for density, we're for programs that support it,
like mass transit. If you ignore the selfish whimperings of the Kirkland
contingent, it's not too hard to envision a time when the only vehicles
allowed on the streets of Seattle are buses, trams, and shuttles. Utopian?
Wrong: reality-based. It's a better, smarter way to live, and the urbanist
is always in favor of that. People who commute to the city for their
livelihood and then attack urban areas and people in the voting booth are
the worst kind of hypocrites. Commuters, we neither want nor need you. We
welcome, however, new residents, new urbanites, the continual influx of
people from other places who come here to stay (are you listening, liberal
residents of Idaho, Utah, and Wyoming?). These transplants help create the
density we find so attractive, and they provide the plurality that makes
cities thrive.

A city belongs to everyone in it, and expands to contain whoever desires to
join its ranks. People migrate to cities and open independent businesses or
work at established ones. They import cultural influences, thus enriching
the urban arts and nightlife, which in turn enrich everything. Most
importantly, they bring the indisputable fact of their own bodies and minds.
We wait in line with them at QFC, we stand shoulder to shoulder with them at
the bar, we cram ourselves next to them on the bus. We share our psychic and
physical space, however limited it might be, because others share it with
us. It's not a question of tolerance, nor even of personal freedom; it's a
matter of recognizing the fundamental interdependence of all citizens--not
just the ones who belong to the same church. Non-urbanites have chosen to
burn the declaration of interdependence, opting instead for tyranny,
isolationism, and "faith." They can have them.

These, of course, are broad strokes. We all know that not everyone who lives
in the suburbs is a raving neo-Christian idiot. The raving neo-Christian
idiots are winning, however, so we need to take the fight to them. In this
case, the fight is largely spiritual; it consists of embracing the reality
that urban life and urban values are the only sustainable response to the
modern age of holy war, environmental degradation, and global conflict. More
important, it consists of rejecting the impulse to apologize for living in a
society that prizes values like liberalism, pluralism, education, and facts.
It's time for the Democratic Party to stop pandering to bovine, non-urban
America. You don't apologize for being right--especially when you're at war.









[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Yes, George, we had "elections." How is the Northern
Alliance, anyway?...

Afghanistan: a nation abandoned to drugs
Country produces 87% of global opium. One in ten
Afghans works in opium trade. UN: state is world's
second worst to live in
By Nick Meo in Jalalabad and Leonard Doyle
19 November 2004

Afghanistan: a nation abandoned to drugs

Where every farmer grows opium because they would be
'fools' to grow anything else

Three years after the fall of the Taliban, the United
Nations issued a dramatic plea for help yesterday,
saying that Afghanistan's opium crop is flourishing as
never before and the country is well on the way to
becoming a corrupt narco-state.

The UN's annual opium survey reveals that poppy
cultivation increased by two-thirds this year, a
finding that will come as a deep embarrassment to Tony
Blair, who pledged in 2001 to eradicate the scourge of
opium along with the Taliban.

So alarmed is the UN that it is suggesting a remedy
more radical than any that has been put forward before
- bringing in US and British forces to fight a drugs
war similar to the war on terror. It wants them to
destroy farmers' crops on a massive scale before they
can be harvested.

The report from the UN Office on Drugs and Crime
(UNODOC) says the narcotics trade is far bigger than
anybody had realised. Most experts in Afghanistan
believe it is a more significant factor in the
continuing violence and instability than the Taliban
insurgency.

On the eve of the Afghan war Mr Blair informed the
Labour Party conference that "90 per cent of the
heroin on British streets originates in Afghanistan".
Despite evidence from the UN that the Taliban was
suppressing the drugs trade, Mr Blair said: "The arms
the Taliban are buying today are paid for by the lives
of young British people buying their drugs on British
streets. That is another part of their regime we
should seek to destroy."

There is growing evidence, however, that despite some
improvements, Afghanistan has become a failed state.
It is now ranked by the UN as the second worst country
in the world to live in - after Sierra Leone.

British officials point out that the Afghan economy is
booming, that three million refugees have returned
home and that four million children are in schools.
But yesterday's report reveals that the engine of
economic growth is opium production. Last year
Afghanistan exported 87 per cent of the world's
supplies. Opium is now the "main engine of economic
growth and the strongest bond among previously
quarrelsome peoples", according to the UN. Most of the
opium is smuggled across the Pakistan border, where
the Taliban and al- Qa'ida charge drug traffickers
transit and protection fees.

The UN report for 2003 found that one in 10 Afghans -
many of them unemployed returned refugees - is
involved in the drugs trade which last year employed
2.3 million people, and made up 60 per cent of gross
national product.

In just one year the area under cultivation increased
by 64 per cent. Output was estimated at 4,200 tons, a
17 per cent increase on last year with only disease
and bad weather acting as drag factors. The only year
with bigger output was 1999, before a Taliban edict
completely stopped production.

Antonio Maria Costa, executive director of UNODC,
urged Nato and the US-led alliance to fight the drugs
trade and gave a warning in words usually reserved for
war. "In Afghanistan drugs are now a clear and present
danger," he said.

The US, worried about narcotics funding terrorism, is
promising to spend $780m (£420m) next year on a war
against drugs. Some money will be spent on alternative
livelihoods for farmers, but most will probably go on
measures such as spraying poppy fields, currently
being discussed in Washington, and transporting drugs
barons to US courts to stand trial.

Before going to war on the Taliban, Mr Blair promised
Afghans: "This time we will not walk away from you."
Last week he vowed that a fresh assault on
Afghanistan's opium poppy trade is to be launched.
Britain is leading the international effort to stem
production and has provided £70m over three years to
fight the trade.



__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The all-new My Yahoo! - Get yours free!
http://my.yahoo.com