Green gubernatorial candidate Howie Hawkins got more than the 50,000 votes required to secure ballot status for the Greens for the next four years. This will allow Greens all across the state to run for all public offices much more easily and offer an alternative to the corporate Democrats and Republicans. It also established the Greens as the third party in New York state and the top non-corporate party. Thanks to all who voted for him and a progressive agenda and, by extension, for multipartyism in NYS.
Before 2009, the last time Democrats controlled all three of the governorship, Assembly and Senate was 1935. So it was entertaining to hear state Senate Republican leader Dean Skellos act like his party has had nothing to do with the mess that is NYS. The two corporate parties have run the state into the ground in that most sainted of manners: bipartisan. It's time for some multipartyism, courtesy of the Greens.
It was also amusing to hear Sen. Skellos say that we needed a GOP senate to act as a check on the corruption in Albany. A check on Joe Bruno-style corruption?
It was maddening to hear all these liberals rave about Andrew Cuomo. Do they even have a clue what he ran on? I mean, besides the empty “Change Albany” rhetoric. Guys who will act as a check on Wall St. excesses do not get oodles of campaign cash from Wall St. Guys who run on progressive agendas do not get endorsed by the far right New York Post. Remember that, more often than most people want to believe, you really do get what you vote for.
I went to vote and I saw a bunch of cameramen and photographers outside my polling place. So I was prepping myself for the red carpet walk which they obviously wanted me to do. But then this tall red-headed guy with his family comes walking out and all the paparazzi follow him instead. Some Congressman Murphy guy, apparently. I suppose that’s the modern media for you: all substance, no style.
I remember that when Tea Party candidates won primary elections, many liberals were gloating, sure that they would get slaughtered in the general election. As that famous Bard, Lord Dark Helmet of the movie Spaceballs, said, “Evil will always prevail because Good is dumb.”
I don’t think much of most Democrats but am still very disappointed at Russ Feingold losing. When the Profiles in Courage of the last 50 years is written (a slim volume to be certain), Feingold's lone vote against the Patriot Act in the face of post-9/11 hysteria will be one of the chapters.
I love how all the media outlets declared Andrew Cuomo, Chuck Schumer and Kirsten Gillibrand the winners only a few minutes after the polls closed despite reported vote totals of 0 for all of them. Only in the punditocracy is 0 > 0.
If the only way you can get elected is to buy office with your own fortune or to buy it with corporate America’s fortune after they buy you off, is it democracy or oligarchy?
How come no one is demanding to see Marco Rubio’s birth certificate? Or for that matter, John Boehner’s?
Those running on the purported agenda of ‘smaller government’ and ‘less spending’ won big last night. I wonder what amount of the military budget, which by itself accounts for 52% of all discretionary federal spending, these principled spending cutters will slash.
Wednesday, November 03, 2010
Tuesday, November 02, 2010
Mixed messages
So today’s Post-Star runs an editorial portraying voting as a sacred duty paid for with the blood of our local servicemen. Standard stuff, trying to encourage civic participation.
But then on the very same page, it runs its Don Cheapshot column (that overstates it a bit, it's merely a snarky little one-liner, anonymous of course) whining what’s the point of voting because they all stink.
And in actual fact, most of Don Cheapshot's recent one-liners have been in the same vein: whining about the election (such as here, here, here and here... and that was just for the last week!)
Ignore the cowardly, anonymous wild canine. Listen (for once) to their editorial board. Vote today.
But then on the very same page, it runs its Don Cheapshot column (that overstates it a bit, it's merely a snarky little one-liner, anonymous of course) whining what’s the point of voting because they all stink.
And in actual fact, most of Don Cheapshot's recent one-liners have been in the same vein: whining about the election (such as here, here, here and here... and that was just for the last week!)
Ignore the cowardly, anonymous wild canine. Listen (for once) to their editorial board. Vote today.
Monday, November 01, 2010
Endorsement: Howie Hawkins for governor
It probably won’t come as a surprise to readers of this blog that I endorse Howie Hawkins for governor of New York.
Hawkins visited Glens Falls recently and spoke at an event I attend. Like most people who heard him that evening, I came away certain he was the best candidate for governor, certainly far more substantive than either major party candidate.
Hawkins spoke in great detail about his platform for over an hour without notes. He spent at least 45 minutes take questions from the audience... and actually answering them directly.
He spoke about the Green New Deal to restore our crumbling infrastructure, to prevent local economic disasters like the sudden closing of the Crown Point bridge.
He spoke about reforming New York's rigged electoral system and democratic (lowercase d) improvements like New England-style town hall meetings.
He spoke about supporting investment in renewable energy rather than in natural gas, whose extraction requires a water-polluting procedure called hydrofracking.
He spoke about implementing Medicare for All in New York, which would save the state large sums of money.
He spoke about making Medicaid run by the state rather than by the counties which, if enacted, would significantly reduce the state's sky high property taxes.
The state currently collects a 0.05 percent stock transfer tax but then rebates it all to the brokers. Hawkins proposed stopping that rebate, an act which would not only eliminate New York's budget deficit but would also fund his infrastructure improvements.
For context, a stock sale of $10,000 would be subject to a tax of a mere $5 (you pay more tax buying a $100 iPod).
Just as importantly, voting for Hawkins can help implement real multipartyism across New York state. If he gets at least 50,000 votes, then Green candidates across the state will be able to run for local, county and state office much more easily. This would no doubt be welcome by the majority of New Yorkers dissatisfied by the corruption of the two major parties in Albany.
Unlike the major party candidates, he is not a millionaire; he works for a living. Hawkins is the only union member running for governor. And with Democrat Andrew Cuomo pushing the corporate agenda, Hawkins is the only center-left candidate in the race. And aside from Libertarian Warren Redlich, he is the only candidate to have elaborated a serious, detailed agenda.
He has earned my vote, and hopefully you'll give him yours too.
Hawkins visited Glens Falls recently and spoke at an event I attend. Like most people who heard him that evening, I came away certain he was the best candidate for governor, certainly far more substantive than either major party candidate.
Hawkins spoke in great detail about his platform for over an hour without notes. He spent at least 45 minutes take questions from the audience... and actually answering them directly.
He spoke about the Green New Deal to restore our crumbling infrastructure, to prevent local economic disasters like the sudden closing of the Crown Point bridge.
He spoke about reforming New York's rigged electoral system and democratic (lowercase d) improvements like New England-style town hall meetings.
He spoke about supporting investment in renewable energy rather than in natural gas, whose extraction requires a water-polluting procedure called hydrofracking.
He spoke about implementing Medicare for All in New York, which would save the state large sums of money.
He spoke about making Medicaid run by the state rather than by the counties which, if enacted, would significantly reduce the state's sky high property taxes.
The state currently collects a 0.05 percent stock transfer tax but then rebates it all to the brokers. Hawkins proposed stopping that rebate, an act which would not only eliminate New York's budget deficit but would also fund his infrastructure improvements.
For context, a stock sale of $10,000 would be subject to a tax of a mere $5 (you pay more tax buying a $100 iPod).
Just as importantly, voting for Hawkins can help implement real multipartyism across New York state. If he gets at least 50,000 votes, then Green candidates across the state will be able to run for local, county and state office much more easily. This would no doubt be welcome by the majority of New Yorkers dissatisfied by the corruption of the two major parties in Albany.
Unlike the major party candidates, he is not a millionaire; he works for a living. Hawkins is the only union member running for governor. And with Democrat Andrew Cuomo pushing the corporate agenda, Hawkins is the only center-left candidate in the race. And aside from Libertarian Warren Redlich, he is the only candidate to have elaborated a serious, detailed agenda.
He has earned my vote, and hopefully you'll give him yours too.
Sunday, October 31, 2010
The Nobel Committee will not be getting back to him
One of the most striking characteristics of Post-Star managing editor Ken Tingley is his pomposity. One of the ways it most often manifests itself is his penchant for breaking his arm patting himself on the back. Take this most recent example.
His column opens:
We try to eliminate excuses with our election coverage.
That's how I see our mission here at The Post-Star. We want to eliminate every possible excuse that a citizen might have for not voting. From not knowing where the polling place is, to not knowing who is on the ballot, to not knowing what a candidate stands for.
Over the past few days, we hope we have provided all that information to our readers.
I can sense a Nobel Peace Prize nomination this year... no doubt Tingley will nominate himself. I just hope when they give him the winner's ribbon, the pin doesn't puncture his ego.
That they try to remedy a citizen's 'not knowing who is on the ballot' a farcical claim, since the paper's reporting virtually ignores the majority of candidates who will be on my ballot.
Tingley self-love fest adds: I often tell people that they cannot be a good citizen if they do not subscribe to the newspaper.
And I often tell people that they cannot be a good citizen if the newspaper is their ONLY news sources. Listen to NPR. Read BBCNews.com. Watch al-Jazeera English. Read regional blogs to get perspectives the corporate daily has no idea exists (or willfully ignores). Broaden your horizons beyond the extremely narrow focus of the local newspaper and the narrower focus of the wire services most of them rely upon.
Someone who relied on the Glens Falls daily as their sole news source would have little idea of all the candidates on the ballot for governor, would have no idea of all the candidates on the ballot for comptroller, attorney general and both US Senate races and even less idea what these candidates stand for. The rent may be too damn high but some candidates have an agenda broader than that.
People who relied solely on The Post-Star would know nothing about the serious candidates but would be greatly informed about Andrew Cuomo's love life and Carl Paladino's penchant for horse porn. Thanks Ken!
Oh wait, amidst the hundreds of articles on the corporate party candidates, the paper did do a real article (singular) on one of the smaller party candidates for governor: Howie Hawkins and his visit to Glens Falls.
Tingley's right. This IS their most in-depth election coverage ever!
Except it's a sad indictment of what Tingley and most of the media view as worthy of flowery self-congratulation.
Note: If you really want to learn about all the options, forget The Post-Star which is obviously uninterested in doing such legwork (gotta have room for horse porn and poll analyses!). Instead, check out this voter guide by the non-partisan and well-respected New York state League of Women Voters. It has information about ALL the candidates running for statewide office.
Update: I was listening to a wrap up on WAMC about the attorney general debate where the questioners were discussing the event. New York public radio’s Karen Dewitt said she was going to ask a question about hydrofracking but didn’t because they were running out of time and they’d promised to ask a question about Carl Paladino.
Here, you have one of the most respected reporters of state politics scrapping a question about a tremendously serious issue of public policy to a large chunk of the state in favor of one about tabloid personality politics. I think most voters would’ve rather had the serious question in the debate and been allowed to go to the New York Post instead for the tabloid stuff.
His column opens:
We try to eliminate excuses with our election coverage.
That's how I see our mission here at The Post-Star. We want to eliminate every possible excuse that a citizen might have for not voting. From not knowing where the polling place is, to not knowing who is on the ballot, to not knowing what a candidate stands for.
Over the past few days, we hope we have provided all that information to our readers.
I can sense a Nobel Peace Prize nomination this year... no doubt Tingley will nominate himself. I just hope when they give him the winner's ribbon, the pin doesn't puncture his ego.
That they try to remedy a citizen's 'not knowing who is on the ballot' a farcical claim, since the paper's reporting virtually ignores the majority of candidates who will be on my ballot.
Tingley self-love fest adds: I often tell people that they cannot be a good citizen if they do not subscribe to the newspaper.
And I often tell people that they cannot be a good citizen if the newspaper is their ONLY news sources. Listen to NPR. Read BBCNews.com. Watch al-Jazeera English. Read regional blogs to get perspectives the corporate daily has no idea exists (or willfully ignores). Broaden your horizons beyond the extremely narrow focus of the local newspaper and the narrower focus of the wire services most of them rely upon.
Someone who relied on the Glens Falls daily as their sole news source would have little idea of all the candidates on the ballot for governor, would have no idea of all the candidates on the ballot for comptroller, attorney general and both US Senate races and even less idea what these candidates stand for. The rent may be too damn high but some candidates have an agenda broader than that.
People who relied solely on The Post-Star would know nothing about the serious candidates but would be greatly informed about Andrew Cuomo's love life and Carl Paladino's penchant for horse porn. Thanks Ken!
Oh wait, amidst the hundreds of articles on the corporate party candidates, the paper did do a real article (singular) on one of the smaller party candidates for governor: Howie Hawkins and his visit to Glens Falls.
Tingley's right. This IS their most in-depth election coverage ever!
Except it's a sad indictment of what Tingley and most of the media view as worthy of flowery self-congratulation.
Note: If you really want to learn about all the options, forget The Post-Star which is obviously uninterested in doing such legwork (gotta have room for horse porn and poll analyses!). Instead, check out this voter guide by the non-partisan and well-respected New York state League of Women Voters. It has information about ALL the candidates running for statewide office.
Update: I was listening to a wrap up on WAMC about the attorney general debate where the questioners were discussing the event. New York public radio’s Karen Dewitt said she was going to ask a question about hydrofracking but didn’t because they were running out of time and they’d promised to ask a question about Carl Paladino.
Here, you have one of the most respected reporters of state politics scrapping a question about a tremendously serious issue of public policy to a large chunk of the state in favor of one about tabloid personality politics. I think most voters would’ve rather had the serious question in the debate and been allowed to go to the New York Post instead for the tabloid stuff.
Saturday, October 30, 2010
You’ll never get change by voting for the same old, same old
The New York Post had a front page story which reported: A Rasmussen Reports survey released yesterday found 65 percent of likely voters would prefer to fire every member of Congress and start from scratch... 53 percent of American voters dislike Democrats, and 54 percent dislike Republicans.
And yet most polls show that nationally, at least 85 percent of voters are already committed to voting for a Democrat or Republican... and no doubt, few of the undecideds will go elsewhere.
So most Americans want to get rid of all of Congress because they view Democrats and Republicans as responsible for most of the problems in Washington. But their idea of a solution is to replace those awful Democrats and Republicans with... Republicans and Democrats.
As Benjamin Franklin said, "The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results."
It seems that Jon Stewart's Election to Restory Sanity is coming not a day too soon.
For a non-insane option, consider voting for a Green Party candidate (such as New York gubernatorial candidate Howie Hawkins) if one is available or for another smaller party or independent candidate.
And yet most polls show that nationally, at least 85 percent of voters are already committed to voting for a Democrat or Republican... and no doubt, few of the undecideds will go elsewhere.
So most Americans want to get rid of all of Congress because they view Democrats and Republicans as responsible for most of the problems in Washington. But their idea of a solution is to replace those awful Democrats and Republicans with... Republicans and Democrats.
As Benjamin Franklin said, "The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results."
It seems that Jon Stewart's Election to Restory Sanity is coming not a day too soon.
For a non-insane option, consider voting for a Green Party candidate (such as New York gubernatorial candidate Howie Hawkins) if one is available or for another smaller party or independent candidate.
Bloodthirsty cowards or 'defenders of freedom'?
It's interesting how many self-proclaimed 'freedom loves' (said breathlessly) are really nothing more than bloodthirsty cowards whose instinctive reaction toward the actual exercise of freedom always seems to be one of violence.
Witness Jonah Goldberg who thinks that there hasn't been enough carnage. The right-wing extremist syndicated columnist bemoans the fact that Wikileaks' founder Julian Assange hasn't yet been assassinated.
Oops, my bad.
According to FoxNews.com's Christian Wilton, another bloodthirsty coward who wants The Assange Problem to *cough* disappear, the new euphemism for assassination is a 'non-judicial action.'
And given all the civilians in Iraq and Afghanistan who've perished via 'non-judicial actions,' one wonders why the esteemed New York Times pooh-poohed Assange for going into hiding.
Witness Jonah Goldberg who thinks that there hasn't been enough carnage. The right-wing extremist syndicated columnist bemoans the fact that Wikileaks' founder Julian Assange hasn't yet been assassinated.
Oops, my bad.
According to FoxNews.com's Christian Wilton, another bloodthirsty coward who wants The Assange Problem to *cough* disappear, the new euphemism for assassination is a 'non-judicial action.'
And given all the civilians in Iraq and Afghanistan who've perished via 'non-judicial actions,' one wonders why the esteemed New York Times pooh-poohed Assange for going into hiding.
Friday, October 29, 2010
Guest essay: Howie Hawkins for governor of NY
Green Party candidate for New York governor Howie Hawkins was recently endorsed by the Metroland newspaper. The Albany paper's endorsement can be read here.
I will be voting for Hawkins for reasons which I will explain in a future entry, one of which is that he is the only candidate on the ballot pushing a progressive agenda (and a darn fine one at that).. Below is a guest essay from former presidential and US Senate candidate David McReynolds explaining his support for Hawkins.
Winning on Tuesday
One is tempted to blame the tardiness of these comments on the matter of age, having just turned 81.
But let's not use false excuses - it was a combination of a trip to California combined with a computer
which had to be taken in for servicing (thanks to Carmen Trotta and Bruce Cronin for their help). which
delayed writing this important election eve piece.
This is late. So I ask you, if you find these thoughts useful, send them to friends in New York. Because
in New York state it is possible for us to "win while losing". I'm not going to make things easier by starting
with a quote from Martin Buber, which appealed so much to A.J. Muste that he often used it in his talks:
"To drive the plowshare of the normative principle into the hard soil of political reality is a tremendously
difficult undertaking". What Buber meant is that turning your high morals into real politics is extremely
hard. Slogans do not constitute reality.
On Tuesday, November 2nd, I hope you join me in voting for Howie Hawkins for Governor, and Gloria
Mattera for Lt. Governor on the Green Party line. (I'll also vote for all the Green candidates on the state but
it is the vote for Governor that may make it possible for the Greens to secure a ballot line - they need 50,000
votes).
I know Howie Hawkins. He worked hard on my own campaign for Senator in 2004, when I ran on the Green
Party line. He is a working man, a teamster who believes that government should serve working
people. He has run for office before, he is a member of the Socialist Party, he is smart, well informed, and,
if lightening struck and he was elected, he would make an excellent governor.
Gloria Mattera is someone I also know, and, like Howie, consider a personal friend. She lives in Brooklyn, is
a community activist, is active in labor and environmental issues, and is well qualified for public office.
However they won't win. One isn't supposed to say that in elections, but I think facing reality is helpful. How
can we win while losing? First, it is really a "free vote". There is a consensus that Paladino has no
chance of being elected. Don't let Paladino scare you into wasting your vote by feeling you need to vote for
Cuomo. Cuomo will win. He is running as the candidate of both the Democratic and Working Families Party.
Many, worried about Paladino, will vote for Cuomo on the Working Families Party line. There are times when
this might be justified. I'm writing this as a man who voted for LBJ in 1964, and for McGovern in 1972. I've
never felt guilty about that McGovern vote, but the vote for LBJ was one of the times I felt I had to choose the
lesser evil. As I said in the first paragraph, translating your moral values into political reality is not easy. This just
happens to be one time when the right vote is also a safe vote - a bargain really sees in politics!
A word about the Working Families Party - since I have friends who are active in it, and I know a number
of committed radicals have made that their choice. I respect their choice even if I do not agree with it. As
Buber said, it ain't easy knowing how to drive your moral values into the hard soil of politics. The problem
- for me - is that the Working Families Party has endorsed the whole Democratic ticket, which includes not
only Cuomo, but Chuck Schumer and Kirsten Gillibrand (because Hillary Clinton resigned her seat to become
Secretary of State, Gillibrand had been appointed for the rest of her term and that is why we have two Seante
seats open this year).
Schumer is one of the strongest supporters of Israel in the Senate, so there is no chance he will cast any
vote to curb military and economic aid to Israel. Nor is there any reason to think Schumer and Gillibrand will
move to cut military spending in Iraq and Afghanistan (though spending measures originate in the House).
If you oppose the Iraq and Afghan wars why vote for Schumer? If you oppose the role of the bankers in shaping
US economic policy, why vote for Schumer? If you oppose the whole military/industrial complex, then voting
for Schumer is a mistake.
I do understand that significant parts of the New York labor movement are involved in the Working Families Party
and they hope to gain an advantage on issues involving labor, welfare, housing, etc. and are willing to make the
compromise of backing the full Democratic ticket in the hopes that the Democrats, if they see that a significant
number of voters voted for the Democratic candidates on the Working Families Party line will make compromises
in the future.
But in the here and now, a vote for the Working Families Party is a vote to support the Afghan war. It is a vote
to support Israeli policy in the Middle East. It is a vote to endorse the military/industrial complex.
The Governor's race is in a separate category from the Senate races, because no matter how many votes
the Green Party candidates get for their Senate candidates, it will not give them a ballot line. But if Hawkins and
Mattera can rack up 50,000 votes, then New Yorkers will have a real "party of the left" on the ballot. It would
be good for New York if we had a real third party - and, God bless them, the Working Families Party isn't it. We
need a party which is independent of the corporate structure, and that is the Green Party.
On issues which I think matter - ending the drug war, equal marriage rights for gays and lesbians, cradle to grave medicare
for all, public banks, etc. - the Greens offer a real choice. Check them out by going to their web site: www.gpnys.com and
for full information on Howie Hawkins, visit www.howiehawkins.org.
I hope you can read this before Tuesday, and consider the "risk of winning by voting for two very good folks
who will lose".
(EdgeLeft is an occasional column by David McReynolds. It can be reprinted and used without further permission.
David was the Chair of War Resisters International, was the Socialist Party's candidate for President in 1980 and 2000.
He is retired and lives with his two cats on the Lower East Side and can be reached at: dmcreynolds@nyc.rr.com)
I will be voting for Hawkins for reasons which I will explain in a future entry, one of which is that he is the only candidate on the ballot pushing a progressive agenda (and a darn fine one at that).. Below is a guest essay from former presidential and US Senate candidate David McReynolds explaining his support for Hawkins.
Winning on Tuesday
One is tempted to blame the tardiness of these comments on the matter of age, having just turned 81.
But let's not use false excuses - it was a combination of a trip to California combined with a computer
which had to be taken in for servicing (thanks to Carmen Trotta and Bruce Cronin for their help). which
delayed writing this important election eve piece.
This is late. So I ask you, if you find these thoughts useful, send them to friends in New York. Because
in New York state it is possible for us to "win while losing". I'm not going to make things easier by starting
with a quote from Martin Buber, which appealed so much to A.J. Muste that he often used it in his talks:
"To drive the plowshare of the normative principle into the hard soil of political reality is a tremendously
difficult undertaking". What Buber meant is that turning your high morals into real politics is extremely
hard. Slogans do not constitute reality.
On Tuesday, November 2nd, I hope you join me in voting for Howie Hawkins for Governor, and Gloria
Mattera for Lt. Governor on the Green Party line. (I'll also vote for all the Green candidates on the state but
it is the vote for Governor that may make it possible for the Greens to secure a ballot line - they need 50,000
votes).
I know Howie Hawkins. He worked hard on my own campaign for Senator in 2004, when I ran on the Green
Party line. He is a working man, a teamster who believes that government should serve working
people. He has run for office before, he is a member of the Socialist Party, he is smart, well informed, and,
if lightening struck and he was elected, he would make an excellent governor.
Gloria Mattera is someone I also know, and, like Howie, consider a personal friend. She lives in Brooklyn, is
a community activist, is active in labor and environmental issues, and is well qualified for public office.
However they won't win. One isn't supposed to say that in elections, but I think facing reality is helpful. How
can we win while losing? First, it is really a "free vote". There is a consensus that Paladino has no
chance of being elected. Don't let Paladino scare you into wasting your vote by feeling you need to vote for
Cuomo. Cuomo will win. He is running as the candidate of both the Democratic and Working Families Party.
Many, worried about Paladino, will vote for Cuomo on the Working Families Party line. There are times when
this might be justified. I'm writing this as a man who voted for LBJ in 1964, and for McGovern in 1972. I've
never felt guilty about that McGovern vote, but the vote for LBJ was one of the times I felt I had to choose the
lesser evil. As I said in the first paragraph, translating your moral values into political reality is not easy. This just
happens to be one time when the right vote is also a safe vote - a bargain really sees in politics!
A word about the Working Families Party - since I have friends who are active in it, and I know a number
of committed radicals have made that their choice. I respect their choice even if I do not agree with it. As
Buber said, it ain't easy knowing how to drive your moral values into the hard soil of politics. The problem
- for me - is that the Working Families Party has endorsed the whole Democratic ticket, which includes not
only Cuomo, but Chuck Schumer and Kirsten Gillibrand (because Hillary Clinton resigned her seat to become
Secretary of State, Gillibrand had been appointed for the rest of her term and that is why we have two Seante
seats open this year).
Schumer is one of the strongest supporters of Israel in the Senate, so there is no chance he will cast any
vote to curb military and economic aid to Israel. Nor is there any reason to think Schumer and Gillibrand will
move to cut military spending in Iraq and Afghanistan (though spending measures originate in the House).
If you oppose the Iraq and Afghan wars why vote for Schumer? If you oppose the role of the bankers in shaping
US economic policy, why vote for Schumer? If you oppose the whole military/industrial complex, then voting
for Schumer is a mistake.
I do understand that significant parts of the New York labor movement are involved in the Working Families Party
and they hope to gain an advantage on issues involving labor, welfare, housing, etc. and are willing to make the
compromise of backing the full Democratic ticket in the hopes that the Democrats, if they see that a significant
number of voters voted for the Democratic candidates on the Working Families Party line will make compromises
in the future.
But in the here and now, a vote for the Working Families Party is a vote to support the Afghan war. It is a vote
to support Israeli policy in the Middle East. It is a vote to endorse the military/industrial complex.
The Governor's race is in a separate category from the Senate races, because no matter how many votes
the Green Party candidates get for their Senate candidates, it will not give them a ballot line. But if Hawkins and
Mattera can rack up 50,000 votes, then New Yorkers will have a real "party of the left" on the ballot. It would
be good for New York if we had a real third party - and, God bless them, the Working Families Party isn't it. We
need a party which is independent of the corporate structure, and that is the Green Party.
On issues which I think matter - ending the drug war, equal marriage rights for gays and lesbians, cradle to grave medicare
for all, public banks, etc. - the Greens offer a real choice. Check them out by going to their web site: www.gpnys.com and
for full information on Howie Hawkins, visit www.howiehawkins.org.
I hope you can read this before Tuesday, and consider the "risk of winning by voting for two very good folks
who will lose".
(EdgeLeft is an occasional column by David McReynolds. It can be reprinted and used without further permission.
David was the Chair of War Resisters International, was the Socialist Party's candidate for President in 1980 and 2000.
He is retired and lives with his two cats on the Lower East Side and can be reached at: dmcreynolds@nyc.rr.com)
Wednesday, October 27, 2010
Question for Scott Murphy and Chris Gibson
If I had a question to ask Scott Murphy and Chris Gibson, candidates for Congress in New York's 20th District, it would be this.
As a career soldier, Mr. Gibson has received taxpayer-funded health care for the entireity of his adult life.
Mr. Murphy has also received taxpayer-funded health career since he became a Congressman.
My question is this: if publicly-funded health care is good enough for senior citizens, soldiers and politicians, why isn't it good enough for ordinary Americans?
As a career soldier, Mr. Gibson has received taxpayer-funded health care for the entireity of his adult life.
Mr. Murphy has also received taxpayer-funded health career since he became a Congressman.
My question is this: if publicly-funded health care is good enough for senior citizens, soldiers and politicians, why isn't it good enough for ordinary Americans?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)