Category Archives: Uncategorized

You can imagine what the GPUS Delegate list serves have been like today – “sizzling”.

But it’s official – Greenfield has announced his candidacy against Hillary.

And wouldn’t you know it: Greenfield’s supporters are defending his move – stating that it is a “brilliant” strategy because he will simply switch back to the Green Party should he not win the Democratic Primary….to “get his name known” – that is, **if** the GPUS has earned the right to have Greenfield back.

I seem to remember the term “flip-flop” in the last presidential election.

If anyone else tried this tactic, they would be severely criticized by Greenfield et al for sure, being subject to labels like “sell out”.

Ken Sain also has a post about this announcement.

Here is the article:

Ulster County man to challenge Hillary Clinton

New Paltz Green Party Leader Steve Greenfield not only changed parties Wednesday morning, he announced his decision to run against Senator Hillary Clinton in the Democratic primary for Unites States Senate next year.

He visited the Ulster County Board of Elections in the City of Kingston this morning to officially change his political party from Green to Democratic. He also revealed his decision to primary Clinton during a news conference outside the building.

Greenfield said that changing parties and running for a Senate seat is the only way he can truly make a difference in this country’s political scene.

“I have lived and breathed Green Party since I came to the Mid-Hudson region in 2001, but the party has taken me as far as they could,” said Greenfield. “Running for the Senate as a Democrat will give me a chance to broaden my horizons.”

Greenfield also strongly feels that primaries here aren’t contested enough, and that true democracy cannot take place without this component.

“No one has yet to primary Maurice Hinchey; he just runs alone every two years under the Democratic line,” Greenfield said. “The same goes for many other seats in the Senate and the House. Where are his contestants in the party? No one steps up. Where’s the democracy in that?”

Greenfield left the Green Party due to “administrative issues” within the party.

Last night I reported that “It’s probably a joke, but Ken Sain has posted an article about Greenfield leaving the Greens.”

However my sources tell me it’s apparently true. I’ll post more here as info comes in. If you go to the above link, you will find a link with an audio news stream from a radio station that announces this.

Also, Ken Sain has a post today on a Democrat in Buffalo running on the Green ticket. What’s up with that? Why are the NY Greens allowing this to occur after loudly proclaiming to endorse and subscribe to the GDI group?

There is an article in today’s Deseret News entitled Behind the movement: Groups step up efforts to tighten the borders. The article describes the movement of a group called the “Minutemen” to halt illegal immigration across Mexican borders in the U.S.

Three Utah groups want to halt illegal immigration — Utahns for Immigration Reform and Enforcement, the Utah Minuteman Project, and the Citizens Council on Illegal Immigration in St. George. Together, they claim about 300 to 500 active members.

They outline a series of measures to prevent illegal immigration. These groups also claim there is no racism underlying these efforts.

It is interesting to note this in the article:
Utahns’ attitudes on the Minutemen and their politics seem mixed, according to a recent Deseret Morning News/KSL-TV poll of 413 Utah households conducted by Dan Jones & Associates.
The poll, with a 5 percent margin of error, showed 74 percent of those polled supported the efforts of private independent groups such as the Utah Minuteman Project.
However, 57 percent of those polled said they favor a program that would allow undocumented immigrants now living in America to remain in the country and earn citizenship without penalty.

I have been wondering why people don’t understand if it weren’t for the WTO, IMF, and NAFTA, that workers wouldn’t have to be compelled to immigrate to working situations where they make more money. The issue needs to be addressed at the source. Addressing the symptoms will only cause more problems.

As Tom stated to me today, they “symptoms” arise from this: The big inequity in NAFTA capital can move freely but labor can’t. Investments can move across the borders freely but people who do the work can’t.

If Mexico, for instance, could charge a tariff on corn or a way to insure that capital that comes into their country would result in a percentage of profits staying there, then immigration might not be a “problem”.

As it stands, that’s not the way it works. As I stated above, we need to keep addressing the source of the problem. It seems that the U.S. is always confronting the results of inequities that it puts in place, inclusive of issues such as illegal immigration, overcrowded prisons and domestic violence.

As we continue to fight amongst ourselves, there are far more devastating things happening on our planet. The Deseret News reported today that the
homeless tally hits 2.5 million in quake, referring to Pakistan’s worst-ever earthquake that wiped out entire villages and killed more than 20,000 people.

In today’s Salt Lake Tribune:Sides swap views on gay-marriage amendment

Yesterday was the first day in a long time I did not post anything to my blog. I was busy all day with other items needing my attention. I am also working on a photography project. I have taken a series of photos of sunflowers (one of my favorite plants!) and am working on a series of anti-nuclear photos – that is, my original sunflower photos with quotes from anti-nuclear activists. I have pasted one of the ones I am working on below. I have quotes from native american leaders (Corbin Harney, Winona LaDuke), musicians (such as Ani DiFranco, the Indigo Girls and David Rovics) and others involved in the effort.

This is still a “works in progress”. If anyone has any suggestions of quotes for me, please forward.

I am also doing the same thing with Tom’s “Pledge to Life” (see left sidebar under my deesings info). I’ve pasted a photo of that one too. This is also original photography.

I hope to be able to showcase my work at some point at some local venues. Future photography projects will include scenes from anti-war demonstrations.

Steve Greenfield, delegate to the GPUS from New York State, continues to attack the Green Party of Utah. While his motives are unclear, one can only speculate. Here is the series of emails from Greenfield and others today, with my response at the end.

(I’d like to make one thing clear: The Director of Elections in Utah did not send our filing officer a “cease and desist” letter. His letter was in response to a letter that our filing officer sent him, explaining the Elections Office position and what the affiliated GPUT will have to do to be recognized, in accordance with state elections law. We are doing as instructed and are nearly completed with our petition drive. The letters can be seen HERE.)
———————————
The State of Utah can make any decision it wants, but it does not have anystanding within the GPUS. As for membership in the GPUS, the NC decides based on a vote by the delegates. greg gerritt gpri

Yes, anything but a vote by the membership, and whenever necessary, as the Utah situation illustrates, the NC can just sever an entire state, approve two new delegates with no constituents, and due to a complete and willful disregard for state election laws, guarantee that the GPUS Presidential candidate will never have a Green Party line in Utah.

So here is what the “5 plus 20%” controlling SC/NC power structure has provided: over 1000 actual self-identified registered Greens in Utah, who successfully conducted the difficult drive required by GPUS bylaws to bulfill any state requirements needed to achieve party status, may not be part of GPUS, and handful of spiteful people who have never been able to complete a petition and have no constituency (Green or otherwise) are voting on behalf of Utah in our national affairs and as a matter of law may not ever provide GPUS with the state ballot line our own bylaws require. Plus, at any point we may actually be sued for disregarding the recent cease-and-desist order from the State of Utah’s Elections Division informing
Tom King that he may not use the name “Green Party of Utah” or any name that sounds like it.

Yep, the Green Party is DEFINITELY on a path to challenge both the duopoly and the military-corporate behemoth it administers. You’re the best, Greg. Really. A true radical. You’re actually too smart for this kind of work.

Steve Greenfield
New Paltz, NY
—————————–
In fact, the Director of Elections has informed the Green Pary of Utah that
we may continue our petition drive (almost completed, fyi) under the name
Green Party of Utah, per the procedure of the election code, and when our drive
is declared by **us** (as the Director of Elections has instructed) as complete, only then will the name issue be addressed.

Deanna Taylor, Co-Coordinator, Alternate Delegate
Green Party of Utah

Yes, and since it is established by your Director of Elections as a matter of law that should you ever actually complete a petition, that on that day you will be officially forbidden from filing it under the name “Green Party of Utah” or anything that sounds like that. So you will then either give up,
or perpetrate a huge fraud against your signatories by changing the name to something else after they signed in good faith under the belief that they were joining the Green Party of Utah.

Nothing is beneath you people. Seriously. Nothing. It turns my stomach. But evidence suggests that it is precisely BECAUSE nothing is beneath you that Greg and the “5 and 20%” that are in control of the Green Party want so desperately to continue your presence on the National Committee. You’ll reliably do the undemocratic thing at all times.

Steve Greenfield
New Paltz, NY

———————–

Worth noting: as of the August 2004 emergency convention, the conveners of said convention recognized only 48 individuals as party members. 812, I believe, were registered as Greens by the time of that August convention. According to Ben Fulton, the GPUT had approximately 300 members as of February, 2003.
Green and Growing.
Owen R. Broadhurst (MA)

Ben Fulton, editor of the Salt Lake City Weekly, and someone who historically has not been friendly to the party, is hardly an authority on the Green Party.

While there may be around 1,000 registered Greens, membership in Utah is defined as being part of a registered local in the state,not how one is registered. In fact, party affiliation is not even listed on a Utah voter’s registration card.

At the time of the emergency convention in 2004 there were 48 card-carrying members.

It would be appreciated if folks from other states would stop posting erroneous facts and check them out before stating things that are not true, including the issue over the name. The Director of Elections has issued instructions and they are being followed, inclusive of informing the public.

Deanna Taylor, Co-Coordinator, Alternate Delegate
Green Party of Utah

Benjamin Chadwick has written a review for emagazine on movies with “green” themes.

Conservation activism may be dramatic, but it has rarely been mined for mainstream films. Green themes typically appear off-screen: think Charlize Theron and Joaquin Phoenix in People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) anti-fur campaigns. Still, a number of provocative environmental movies have slipped through the minefield of corporate censorship and escaped Los Angeles with their agendas intact. If you’re looking for a cheap night at home, a trip down memory lane, or discussion agit-prop for students and kids, then look for the following modern classics, all of which can be rented at a video store near you.
~ B. Chadwick

Chadwick writes about Movies to avoid in his review, but here are his top picks for movies to see:

For Adults:
– A Civil Action(1998)
– Erin Brockovich (2000)
– Silkwood (1983)
– The China Syndrome (1979)
– 12 Monkeys (1995)
– Koyaanisqatsi (1982)

For children:
– Dr. Seuss’ The Lorax (1972)
– Ferngully: The Last Rainforest (1992)
– Free Willy (1993)
– The Little Mermaid (1992)
– Finding Nemo (2003)
– A Bug’s Life and Antz (both released in 1998)

For older kids:
– The Secret of Nimh (1982)
– Plague Dogs (1982)
– Watership Down (1978)

Chadwick recommends David Ingram’s book Green Screen: Environmentalism and Hollywood Cinema, “which gives close scrutiny to hundreds of relevant films, organized by theme.”

It’s everywhere. Divisiveness. It’s in the Green Party and it’s in the peace movement.

Recently planning groups in Salt Lake pulled off two very successful anti-war actions.

The first was on August 22nd when George W. came to town. A group of people from all political phiolosphies came together and planned one of the largest protests in recent history within a 5 day time period. There was no name for the group and the group did not continue as an “organization” beyond that event. It was truly amazing.

The second was for September 24 End the War in Iraq march and rally. The planning group consisted of a variety of folks, again, but this time under the umbrella of the M19 Committee. (The name “M19” stems from a group that evolved from the organizing of the March 19, 2005 anti-war march and rally.) Some of the most intense discussions during this planning revolved around the wording of the message and what organizations would be permitted to sponsor the event. This event took over 3 months of planning during weekly meetings.

The September 24 event was huge and successful, in my opinion. However, some organizers, people who are represent one organization that claims to be a “coalition” of organizations, are upset due to the fact that a group of “anarchists” (a group of about 20 kids) came from all over, took to the streets (instead of the sidewalk) and confronted police, resulting in some arrests. The upset organizers have placed blame on other organizers (stating that the anarchists had no right to do this and they were not “in line” with the message, etc.) and days later decided to withdraw any future support of the “M19” committee. These same organizers claim that they had a meeting of their organization last week and came up with these three proposals:

1) we think meetings should be in a public place with a decorum suitable
to inviting people from all walks of life in our community

3) we think there needs to be an understanding that M19 is committed to
building a mass action anti-war movement aimed at involving as many
working people as possible, including the related understanding that
encouraging ‘anarchist’ confrontations with the police at marches and
rallies is in contradiction with that goal

Now this is interesting.

Regarding #1: All meetings were held at a local retail shop that sells all sorts of activist items, from anti-war to anti-poverty to pro-union, to gay and lesbian items, etc. The owner of the shop generously offers space to activist organizations who want to meet or show movies.

Regarding #2: The “democratic process” was not followed when these same organizers making these statements made last minute changes against what had been decided upon, including changing the march route, causing multiple problems.

Regarding #3: As someone pointed out to me, #3 contradicts the statement in #1, inviting people from all walks of life in our community. Additionally, this is clearly an attempt to “control” who participates in marches and rallies. Let’s face it. There will always be all sorts of groups participating – the more the merrier! I love the anarchists – they have balls! At any rate, to exclude a group which is anti-war, pro-peace, but just goes about getting the message out in a little bit more aggressive way, is highly inappropriate.

I have also learned, just today, that the same people who claim to have consensus on the above statements/proposals in their “coalition” are against the Department of Peace. What????!!!!????
Also, this “coalition” consisted of about 5 people at their last meeting, not representative of the claimed 20 groups that are listed as coalition “members”.

A local CodePink member has issued a call for the SLC Code Pink group to withdraw its membership from this “coalition” because it did not include all the “members” in making any of these decisions.

I would also like to add this note:
Some of the folks who are involved in the above-mentioned “coalition” who are part of the Beardall Green Party. One of those persons serves as a placeholder for about 4 organizations in this “coaltion”.