From greenpartyct at yahoo.com  Wed Nov  1 07:53:04 2006
From: greenpartyct at yahoo.com (Green Party-CT)
Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2006 04:53:04 -0800 (PST)
Subject: {news} Fwd: Let Greens Debate!  - October Green Line
Message-ID: <20061101125304.67829.qmail@web81410.mail.mud.yahoo.com>



Green Party of the United States <office at gp.org> wrote:  Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2006 15:16:04 -0500 (EST)
From: Green Party of the United States <office at gp.org>
To: greenpartyct at yahoo.com
Subject: Let Greens Debate! - October Green Line


                    October 2006
      
            

                      News Headlines
            

    Silencing democracy: Greens excluded from Debates  This year, local- and state-level Green candidates are running notably stronger campaigns: many have years of experience as elected officials, are in touch with the values and needs of their constituents, and are willing and eager to do the grassroots organizing necessary to challenge the status quo. Yet in many major markets, they are notably absent from debates?because Democrat and Republican candidates are running scared. 
  Maybe the two corporate parties see the writing on the wall when they read reports of recent polls, which show voters leaving both parties to register as independents? Perhaps they are afraid that when voters presented with Green solutions to today?s problems the talking points of the two pro-war, corporate parties do not stack up with the values of regular (not corporate!) citizens.
        
Aaron Dixon with supporters outside of King-5 TV -photo by Wendy Call    After arriving at Seattle?s King-5 TV station with 75 campaign volunteers and supporters holding signs saying ?Let Dixon Debate,? police arrested Green Party Senate candidate Aaron Dixon for trying to enter the studio. Dixon had hoped to take part in what would later be described as the ?Millionaire?s Debate??so called because co-sponsors KING-5 and the Seattle Times made raising $1 million a requirement for participation. While recent polls indicate that voters are six times more likely to support Dixon than Libertarian candidate Bruce Guthrie, Dixon was barred from participating because he failed to meet the $1 million campaign chest requirement. (Guthrie, on the other hand, met the 7-figure hurdle by taking out a mortgage on his house.) All this after operatives from Democrat incumbent Maria Cantwell tried, unsuccessfully, to bribe Dixon into withdrawing his candidacy. 
  Illinois Radio Network invited top gubernatorial candidates to a televised debate scheduled on October 2, including Green candidate Rich Whitney. After learning he would have to debate Rich Whitney, the Democrat candidate Rod Blagojevich backed out, leading the station to cancel the debate. Despite being shut out of the debates, Rich Whitney?s poll numbers are steadily rising. He is currently at 14%?more than any statewide candidate from a nationally organized third party has received in Illinois in over 100 years. 
  In New York and Wisconsin, the League of Women Voters, an organization with a history of facilitating open and democratic debates, withdrew their sponsorship when Green Party candidates were shut out of the debates, citing their organization?s commitment to nonpartisanship. In Connecticut, Green Governor Candidate Cliff Thornton purchased advertising time to air a campaign promotion during the very debate that he was denied entry to! Green Party candidates have won almost 40% of their elections this year. When given the opportunity, more and more voters are choosing to vote for a party that represents their values. Peter LaVenia, co-chair of the New York Green Party pointed out that ?a growing number of voters find the artificial restriction of debates to Democratic and republican candidates a complete sham. When alternative candidates are included, both viewership and voter turnout increase. When Independent candidate Jesse Ventura was included in the Minnesota
 gubernatorial debates, he went form 10% in the polls to over 30% in just a few weeks. And then he became governor. That would never have happened had he been excluded from the debates. This is why major party candidates strive to keep the public from hearing alternative candidates.?
  Tell the media that excluding Green Party candidates from debates is an attack on democracy and the public?s right to make informed choices! Go to the Action Page here. 


            Dems bring in big names to fight Greens in MainePowerful Democrats are stumping in Maine, where Green candidates like Pat LaMarche http://www.pat2006.com for Governor and Benjamiin Meiklejohn http://www.benmeiklejohn.com for the house seat in District 120 are running very strong campaigns. Both qualified for ?clean election? funds by securing $5 donations from supporters. Dem heavyweight Howard Dean engaged in a door-to-door photo opp in District 120 where Meiklejohn is gaining strength. His Democratic opponent is virtually missing in action, while Meiklejohn has been busy talking to his neighbors in district 120 and continues to canvas the area. In 2001, Meiklejohn became the first Green elected in Portland, where he currently serves on the school board.   Dennis Kucinich and Bill Clinton have also shown up to bolster the Democratic Governor John Baldacci?s chances for re-election. Pat LaMarche, Green Party Vice-Presidential candidate in 2004, is running
 against duopoly candidates.
          ?The Democrats are trying to rally their base by using the War in Iraq and anti-Bush sentiment as a means to garner support for Democrats at all levels but the public is not fooled. Campaigns for State Representative have little to do with the War in Iraq, and that the Republican is not even running in my House district is very telling. They must have got a hold of some polling data that shows I am handily winning as a Green Independent over the Democrat, otherwise they would not be bringing in big guns like Howard Dean and Bill Clinton,? Meiklejohn told the Portland Press Herald. ?The truth is, they are very worried, and are using Democratic opposition to Republicans as a rallying cry to get support for a Democrat over a Green in a race where there isn't even a Republican running.? 
  
Benjamin Meiklejohn  ?I?ve always heard, ?Why are you Green? You can?t win.? Yet I do win. And I do succeed,? Meiklejohn told Green Line. ?Don?t listen to the naysayers?if you put in the hard work, you?ve got a better chance than a Democrat or Republican riding their party?s coattails.?
  Cindy Sheehan supports Green Party Peace Slate  Renowned peace activist Cindy Sheehan has thrown her support behind a number of Green Party candidates for the fall elections. In a recent interview she said ?Malachy is a man of courage and integrity. The people of NY want peace. They are tired of politics as usual.? endorsing the Green Party of NY gubernatorial candidate Malachy McCourt. During the same interview, she also endorsed Michael Berg, running as a Green for US Congress in Delaware. (To watch a video of Cindy Sheehan?s endorsement of McCourt and Berg, go to www.gp.org) Sheehan also recently endorsed Todd Chr?tien, CA, Kevin Zeese, MD and Howie Hawkins, NY all running for US Senate as Greens. Thanks for your support Cindy!
      Are you a blogger or webmaster?
Add an anti-war banner ad to your page!   The Green Party has a dynamic new WEB BANNER AD that can be placed on Green Party state/local websites, blogs, or personal homepages to point viewers to GP.org. The anti-war message and clean Green design appeals to a wide audience: "Americans know the war in Iraq was based on lies...Bring the troops home now! Only one U.S. political party calls for the end of military involvement in Iraq...Find out how you can get active with the nation's only true peace party." 
To place this banner ad on your website, please get the code at: http://www.gp.org/committees/outreach/materials.shtml

                      Green Party Earthflower Sweatshirt.        Keep warm at the polls on election day with a Green Party Hooded Sweatshirt! The Earthflower sweatshirt is Oxford Gray, the Kelly Green Sweatshirt has white lettering.             Union Made and Sweatshop free in 80% cotton/20% poly, front pocket. $37.50 including shipping.     Green Party online shopping just got easier! To Order: online store.  
  
        
                  Register Green. Vote Green. Give Green.  The Green Party does not accept corporate donations. We depend entirely on donations from people who are committed to building a powerful and progressive alternative to the two corporate parties. 
  We ask you to challenge corporate influence in politics by supporting the Green Party of the United States! Show your resistance to the status quo by enabling us to continue organizing and mobilizing for real change. Please help us get out our positive, progressive values to new communities, and to deepen our involvement where we're already anchored.
  Support us today and please consider becoming a sustainer (look for the recurring donation option).
  Green Party online shopping just got easier! Visit our improved online store.
            Americans are ready for Change   
      America is ready for the Green Party's message. But we need your help in bringing the message to the American people!
    Donate now to the Green Party 

 
   
                    Make your friends GREEN with envy. Become a card-carrying Green today!
          
Buy Your Green Party Card Online
(or download a PDF order form).
  The latest, coolest item in the wallets of progressives is the personalized Green Party Card. For $36.00 a year* you can be a card-carrying Green. When you become an active supporter of the Green Party of the United States, you'll receive our spanking-new card, which shows the world that you stand committed to time-honored progressive values like liberty, equality, democracy, social justice, personal responsibility and focus on the future. In addition, you will receive a Green Party button and bumper sticker, a one-year subscription to Green Pages, plus all of the information you need to get involved and active as a Green. Half of your contribution will be shared with your state's Green Party. The Future is Green!
  Order Your Green Party Card Online Today
  -------------
Federal law requires political committees to use their best effort to collect and report the name, mailing address, occupation and employer for each individual whose contributions exceed $200 in a calendar year. Contributions form the following individuals and entities are prohibited: corporations, labor organizations, national banks, government contractors, people under 18 years of age, and foreign nationals.
  *$36.00 is roughly equivalent to the $1.00 paid for a one-year membership in the Populist Party of the 1890s. The Populist Party was a multiracial, progressive, grassroots third party of working people which agitated for many popular progressive reforms. The Green Party of the 21st century continues the Populist's fight for citizen empowerment and progressive reforms at all levels today.

          = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS E-MAIL
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
All comments, feedback and content suggestions should be sent to:
office at gp.org.
  You've been reading Green Line, the monthly e-newsletter of the Green Party of the United States. Subscribe for free at gp.org.
  Click here to unsubscribe.
  Paid for by the Green Party of the United States
   
      


       
  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Tim McKee cell (860) 778-1304 or (860) 643-2282
   National Committee Member of the Green Party(Connecticut)
    Cliff Thornton for Governor- Campaign Manager


  Paid for by Thornton For Governor, Max Wentworth, Treasurer-   www.VoteThornton.com
   



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist10.pair.net/mailman/private/ctgp-news/attachments/20061101/1ba4da87/attachment.html>

From dbedellgreen at hotmail.com  Wed Nov  1 13:40:16 2006
From: dbedellgreen at hotmail.com (bedell_98)
Date: Wed, 01 Nov 2006 18:40:16 -0000
Subject: {news} Nancy Burton & Katie the Goat meet Chris Shays
Message-ID: <eiapmg+5sib@eGroups.com>

--- In CTSOS at yahoogroups.com, Remy Chevalier <remyc at ...> wrote:

Today, Nancy Burton, Connecticut Green Party Candidate for Attorney
General, took Katie, The Strontium-90 Goat, on a whistle stop caravan
through Westport, Norwalk, & New Canaan in Fairfield County.

See Republican Congresman Chris Shays pet Katie The Goat...
Visit Sam Vail's Solarshop in South Norwalk...

http://www.remyc.com/rockthereactors/katiethegoatcaravan.wmv

--- End forwarded message ---





From greenpartyct at yahoo.com  Wed Nov  1 15:12:22 2006
From: greenpartyct at yahoo.com (Green Party-CT)
Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2006 12:12:22 -0800 (PST)
Subject: {news} Green gov. candidate LaMarche endorsed by 4 Maine newspapers
Message-ID: <20061101201223.15507.qmail@web81408.mail.mud.yahoo.com>



Scott McLarty <scottmclarty at yahoo.com> wrote: From: Scott McLarty <scottmclarty at yahoo.com>
To: natlcomaffairs at green.gpus.org, media-states at lists.gp-us.org,
  lavender-caucus at green.gpus.org
Subject: [media-states] RELEASE Green gov. candidate LaMarche endorsed by 4 Maine newspapers
Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2006 08:49:20 -0800 (PST)

 Distributed by the Green Party of the United
States http://www.gp.org

Pat LaMarche for Governor of Maine
http://www.pat2006.com/press/2006/oct/pr2006-10-31a.php
http://www.pat2006.com

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
October 31, 2006

CONTACT: To schedule an interview with Pat
LaMarche, contact Maribeth Stuart at 207-829-9930
or 207-318-0168, or by email at
.


It's Now A Two-Way Race: Baldacci v. LaMarche


Portland, Maine - With only a week left in the
race, Maine's newspapers have split in their
endorsements for the candidate who should be
Maine's next governor. Gov. Baldacci, as
expected, received endorsements from the Bangor
Daily News and the Portland Press Herald. Today,
however, in what can only be described as a major
shift in direction for the campaign, Green
Independent candidate Pat LaMarche picked up the
endorsements of four newspapers: the Bar Harbor
Times, Camden Herald, Courier Gazette, and
Republican Journal.

With only the televised Maine Public Broadcasting
debate scheduled for Wednesday night, and a
gubernatorial debate scheduled for Colby College
on Thursday night, the gubernatorial campaign
season is drawing to a close with two strong
contenders left standing: Baldacci and LaMarche.
 
LaMarche has embarked on a final week campaign
schedule that includes both offline and online
outreach. A marathon of campaign events around
the state is being supplemented with email
outreach and a text messaging campaign that is
being heralded by experts and participants alike
for its cutting edge tactics. 

Pat's website, already being archived for its
"historic" value by the Library of Congress, is
receiving an unprecedented response from the
people of Maine. The average visitor stays 12
minutes and reads ten pages on
, while the industry
standard is one page and under one minute. The
most accessed pages are Pat's biography page and
the comparison page, showing that visitors want
to know who she is and what sets her apart from
the other contenders.


CONTACT: To schedule an interview with Pat
LaMarche, 
contact Maribeth Stuart at 207-829-9930 or
207-318-0168, or by email at
.








 
____________________________________________________________________________________
Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail 
(http://advision.webevents.yahoo.com/mailbeta/)

_______________________________________________
media-states mailing list
media-states at lists.gp-us.org
http://lists.gp-us.org/mailman/listinfo/media-states



       
  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Tim McKee cell (860) 778-1304 or (860) 643-2282
   National Committee Member of the Green Party(Connecticut)
    Cliff Thornton for Governor- Campaign Manager


  Paid for by Thornton For Governor, Max Wentworth, Treasurer-   www.VoteThornton.com
   



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist10.pair.net/mailman/private/ctgp-news/attachments/20061101/f1a342ea/attachment.html>

From efficacy at msn.com  Thu Nov  2 09:33:22 2006
From: efficacy at msn.com (clifford thornton)
Date: Thu, 2 Nov 2006 09:33:22 -0500
Subject: {news} [VoteThornton] FRONT PAGE! W/ PHOTOS
Message-ID: <BAY102-DAV12EDDD6352D040C32C8C2AD1FF0@phx.gbl>

Folks,

Five days before the election, we can't do much better than this.

Front page of the Hartford Courant, our candidate for governor appears 
above the fold in a huge photo with Ralph Nader. And make sure you check 
out the photo gallery from the front page of courant.com

And not only that, but a cartoon Cliff is on the front cover of the New 
Haven Advocate smoking a doobie. Unfortunately, that image isn't on 
their website, but it will be on ours soon enough.

Hooray for us! Just keep those donations coming. We can't do this 
without cash.

Dreaming Big
http://www.courant.com/news/politics/hc-greenparty.artnov02,0,1621556.story?coll=hc-headlines-politics<http://www.courant.com/news/politics/hc-greenparty.artnov02,0,1621556.story?coll=hc-headlines-politics>

Nader Backs Thornton
http://www.journalinquirer.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=17401530&BRD=985&PAG=461&dept_id=161556&rfi=6<http://www.journalinquirer.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=17401530&BRD=985&PAG=461&dept_id=161556&rfi=6>

Nader asks voters to put deeds above words
http://ctnewsjunkie.com/index.php/2006/11/01/nader_asks_voters_to_put_deeds_above_wor<http://ctnewsjunkie.com/index.php/2006/11/01/nader_asks_voters_to_put_deeds_above_wor>

And that's not even counting how Ralph talked to more than 1,000 
students yesterday at various high schools and colleges across the state.

-- 

Peace,


Ken Krayeske

Campaign Manager

Thornton for Governor

P.O. Box 1971

Manchester, CT 06045

www.votethornton.com<http://www.votethornton.com/>

860-995-5842


*This message is paid for and approved by Thornton for Governor, Max 
Wentworth, Treasurer*



 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/VoteThornton/<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/VoteThornton/>

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/VoteThornton/join<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/VoteThornton/join>
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    mailto:VoteThornton-digest at yahoogroups.com<mailto:VoteThornton-digest at yahoogroups.com> 
    mailto:VoteThornton-fullfeatured at yahoogroups.com<mailto:VoteThornton-fullfeatured at yahoogroups.com>

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    VoteThornton-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com<mailto:VoteThornton-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com>

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

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist10.pair.net/mailman/private/ctgp-news/attachments/20061102/00d86bb1/attachment.html>

From efficacy at msn.com  Thu Nov  2 09:52:09 2006
From: efficacy at msn.com (clifford thornton)
Date: Thu, 2 Nov 2006 09:52:09 -0500
Subject: {news} Ralph Nader Campaigns For Conn. Greens
Message-ID: <BAY102-DAV6E849F9EC0F876B137CC8D1FF0@phx.gbl>

http://www.dailycampus.com/media/storage/paper340/news/2006/11/02/News/Ralph.Nader.Campaigns.For.Conn.Greens-2435113-page3.shtml?norewrite200611020949&sourcedomain=www.dailycampus.com<http://www.dailycampus.com/media/storage/paper340/news/2006/11/02/News/Ralph.Nader.Campaigns.For.Conn.Greens-2435113-page3.shtml?norewrite200611020949&sourcedomain=www.dailycampus.com>


Ralph Nader Campaigns For Conn. Greens

With less than a week remaining before next Tuesday's election, former presidential candidate Ralph Nader toured the state yesterday in hopes of sparking larger support for local Green Party nominees. Arriving at the Legislative Office Building in Hartford shortly after 11:30 a.m., Nader conducted a press conference in which he complimented many of the Connecticut Greens who are running for office and discussed other topics.

Nader began the press conference by defending his Democratic rival in the 2004 election, Sen. John Kerry, a man who has recently come under fire from Republicans for telling a group of students that they had to succeed in school in order not to "get stuck in Iraq."

"Consider his words, the fact that he is a veteran, the fact that he was in the Vietnam War, with his critics' deeds," Nader said. "Nine hundred American soldiers, the latest estimate, who've been killed in Iraq could have been saved by body armor and with armored vehicles, armor around the Humvees. This was going on for over three-and-a-half years. This is the starkest case of presidential criminal negligence in recent warfare."

"So who is respecting the troops in this little dustup between Kerry and the White House hordes, and their media acolytes like Limbaugh?" asked Nader. "Until voters begin in great numbers, not just in small numbers, distinguishing the words of politicians from the deeds, they will forever be the prisoners of rhetoric instead of informed citizens, based on the record of the politicians. And Joe Lieberman is another example of this."

Incumbent Sen. Joe Lieberman is currently running in a tight Senate race against anti-war Democrat Ned Lamont, the man who beat him in the Democratic primary last August. Also running for this office are Alan Schlesinger of the Republican Party, Ralph Ferrucci of the Green Party and Timothy Knibbs of the Concerned Citizens Party.

Many observers have attributed Lieberman's primary loss to a perceived closeness on his part with Republican leadership, as exemplified by the moment when Pres. Bush kissed him at the most recent State of the Union address. Lieberman contends that his Senate votes are based on personal convictions and dismisses this criticism as partisan spitefulness. 

"Mind you, in supporting the war, [Lieberman] supported the Military Commissions Act, which is a destructive law against due process and our Constitutional protections," Nader said. "He supported it, voted for it a few weeks ago in the Senate. It dangerously gives dictatorial powers to the President. It allows the President to arrest without charges, to imprison without lawyers, to define who is an enemy combatant, to define what is assisting terrorism. In other words, a total assignment of power to the executive branch, stripping the judges of their review role and stripping a willing Congress of its Constitutional authority."

Nader also took issue with Lieberman's economic ties.

"Joe Lieberman goes around the state saying, 'You may disagree with me about the war, but I'm okay on labor, environment, consumer and other issues that liberals like to see supported,'" Nader said. "Those are his words, now look at the deeds. He has contradicted his words to such a degree that the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the most powerful, vicious and most energetic big business lobby, has endorsed him and said that he has received their highest rating of any Democratic senator east of the Mississippi."

Nader released a statement on Aug. 2, only six days before the Democratic primary, asking Lieberman to publicly denounce the endorsement of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.

"The Chamber demands that the federal government subsidize corporations, take the federal cop off of corporate crime, fraud and abuse beat, weaken its laws protecting the environment, workers, consumers and small taxpayers, keep enlarging the bloated, wasteful military contracting budget and generally accede to the Chamber's ideology of becoming a corporate government," the statement read.

Nader spent much time during the press conference speaking well of the Green Party and its local nominees.

"The Green Party provides the progressive agenda, the majority of which is supported by a majority of the American people," Nader said. "Not all of it, but if you look at their economic agenda, their consumer agenda, their environmental agenda, their clean government agenda, their access to justice agenda, it will come in very high on the public opinion polls. And their agenda is not replicated by the Democratic-and-Republican Party." 

Nader praised Green Party candidates Cliff Thornton, Ralph Ferrucci and Secretary of State nominee Mike DeRosa, all of who were present at the time. He eventually invited Thornton to speak at the podium.

"As governor, I would bring the troops home from Iraq, because our National Guard needs to be here to service the people of Connecticut just in case there is an emergency," Thornton said. "And with climate changes, there will be an emergency."

Thornton also mentioned his plan to provide free college tuition as a means of fighting poverty.

When asked by a reporter why Green candidates do not simply join up with the Democratic Party in order to make the electoral process easier on them, Thornton got visibly upset.

"They are afraid to touch this thing called the War on Drugs. They are afraid to address the issue of universal healthcare in its entirety," Thornton said. "The Democrats and Republicans are not about education. They have been promising for the last 20 years to clean up the education and they have not, it's gotten exceedingly worse. This is why we don't want anything to do with the Democratic Party."

Nader called Republican Gov. M. Jodi Rell a "public relations genius" and denounced Democratic mayor John DeStefano for helping to keep minor party candidates out of the state's two televised gubernatorial debates.

Nader also took some time yesterday to visit schools in Hartford, Enfield, North Branford and New Haven before finally attending a Thornton fundraiser at the Willimantic Country Club last evening.



Thornton for Governor
PO Box 1971
Manchester, CT 06045
votethornton at yahoogroups.com<mailto:votethornton at yahoogroups.com>
www.votethornton.com<http://www.votethornton.com/>
860 657 8438-H
860 268 1294-C
860 778 1304-Tim Mckee-Campaign Manager
860 293 0222-Ken Krayeske-field Manager
Paid for by Thornton For Governor
Max H. Wentworth, Treasurer
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist10.pair.net/mailman/private/ctgp-news/attachments/20061102/fc67711e/attachment.html>

From dbedellgreen at hotmail.com  Fri Nov  3 00:38:45 2006
From: dbedellgreen at hotmail.com (bedell_98)
Date: Fri, 03 Nov 2006 05:38:45 -0000
Subject: {news} Nancy Burton on Strontium 90.
Message-ID: <eiekl5+pno3@eGroups.com>

Nancy's "Goat Caravan" continues through the 135th Assembly District,
where she is the placeholder candidate for State Rep.:

Friday November 2
Redding Town Hall 2 PM (100 Hill Road, Redding, CT)
Weston Town Hall 3 PM (56 Norfield Road, Weston, CT)
Easton Town Hall 4 PM (225 Center Road, Easton, CT)

Watch Nancy explain to Richard Duffee all about Strontium 90, goats'
milk, children's teeth, and nuclear power.  The 3-minute video is now
playing on http://www.voteburton.org




From dbedellgreen at hotmail.com  Fri Nov  3 01:34:47 2006
From: dbedellgreen at hotmail.com (bedell_98)
Date: Fri, 03 Nov 2006 06:34:47 -0000
Subject: {news} Courant reports on Robert Pandolfo's stealth campaign
Message-ID: <eienu7+jv89@eGroups.com>

For further details on Robert, see his candidate statement at
http://ctgreens.org/candidates/robert_pandolfo_statement.htm

http://www.courant.com/news/politics/hc-1sen1102.artnov02,0,6827336.story
Fonfara Faces Quiet Opposition
Green Party Challenger Keeping A Low Profile

By JEFFREY B. COHEN
Courant Staff Writer

November 2 2006

Five-time incumbent John Fonfara didn't know he had a challenger for
his state Senate seat until he heard the name Robert Pandolfo during
an interview Monday.

"Mr. Who?" Fonfara asked. "Who is it? I have not heard about him. I've
been told all along I have no opponent."

But perhaps the Hartford Democrat's surprise could be forgiven, given
that Pandolfo - the Green Party candidate on the ballot - is keeping a
low profile.

"For reasons that I'd rather not get into," Pandolfo said in a
voicemail, "I'm really not interested in being interviewed."

Hmm.

Green Party Co-Chairman Mike DeRosa - who has run against Fonfara
three times himself - says that Fonfara doesn't know he has a
challenger because he always expects to run without one. Enter
Pandolfo, DeRosa's silent Green candidate.

"We want to give people a choice," DeRosa said, explaining that if
Pandolfo gets 1 percent of the vote, the Greens will maintain their
line on the ballot in 2008. "The idea of having it as, `You can vote
for John Fonfara, John Fonfara or John Fonfara,' it reminds me of the
old Soviet elections."

Fonfara, though, said he did not know he had an opponent because
there's been no evidence of a race. "Everything that I've known what
to do to confirm whether or not I had an opponent, I did, and I've
been told that I didn't," he said.

Dan Tapper, a spokesman for Secretary of the State Susan Bysiewicz,
said that the state does not notify incumbents of their challengers.

"Usually, the opponents take care of that themselves," Tapper said.

As for the race itself, Fonfara says it's one thing to choose between
two legitimate candidates. It's another to choose between a 10-year
veteran and a guy who is running just to run.

"You can probably put Bugs Bunny on a line somewhere and they're going
to get X percent of the vote," he said. "Does that say that this is
somehow reflective that I'm not going my job? I think I'm making my
point."

Fonfara, 50, a Hartford native, a product of Rice Heights, a resident
of the South End, a father of a 15-year-old, and an outdoor
advertising businessman, says he will continue to stress property tax
reform, although he's not optimistic that there will be support.

As chairman of the legislature's energy and technology committee,
Fonfara says he wants to dedicate much of the next session to passing
energy reform that would emphasize new fuels such as ethanol and
biodiesel.

On the Green Party website, Pandolfo says he wants to increase taxes
on corporations, the wealthy and non-cigarette tobacco products. He
says he has an economics degree from the University of Connecticut, is
working toward a master's degree at Trinity College, works for UPS and
is a union member who has previously served on the city's Advisory
Commission on the Environment. He lives in the city's South Green
neighborhood and, according to city records, is 36 years old.

DeRosa isn't counting on a Green victory, he said; he thinks a good
showing would be taking 5 percent from Fonfara. "I don't think the
probability [of an upset] is very high," DeRosa said. "But I don't
think that Rob would turn the job down if he won."

Contact Jeffrey B. Cohen at jcohen@ courant.com.

Copyright 2006, Hartford Courant





From dbedellgreen at hotmail.com  Fri Nov  3 01:48:44 2006
From: dbedellgreen at hotmail.com (bedell_98)
Date: Fri, 03 Nov 2006 06:48:44 -0000
Subject: {news} AP story quotes Mike DeRosa on voting machines
Message-ID: <eieooc+og1r@eGroups.com>

This AP story ran in the Stamford Advocate, New London Day, and Newsday:

http://www.stamfordadvocate.com/news/local/state/hc-31175317.apds.m0956.bc-ct--votioct31,0,6973233.story
Report: voting machines can be compromised, but safeguards in place

Associated Press
October 31, 2006

HARTFORD, Conn. -- The new voting machines that will be used in 25
Connecticut cities and towns next week are vulnerable to tampering,
but state officials are taking steps to prevent that, according to a
report released Tuesday by the University of Connecticut.

The optical scan devices, which automatically read paper ballots
filled out by voters, can be compromised in a matter of minutes by
tactics such as neutralizing one candidate so his or her votes aren't
counted or swapping the votes of two candidates, the report said.

"Such tabulation corruptions can lay dormant until the Election Day,
thus avoiding detection through pre-election tests," according to the
report.

But the authors of the report credit the secretary of the state's
office for implementing new security procedures to protect the machines.

A team of UConn professors known as the Voting Technology Research
Center is advising the secretary of the state's office. Alex
Shvartsman, a computer science and engineering professor, who heads up
the group, said the state has implemented strict rules for how the
machines get from the supplier to polling places, tamper-resistant
packaging of the machines and planned postelection audits.

"If nobody touches the devices, if there is an unbroken chain of
custody from the supplier to the polling place, then we're very
confident that nothing can go wrong with them - short of a mechanical
malfunction," Shvartsman said.

The optical scan machines are first being used in 25 towns this
election, replacing the old mechanical lever machines. The rest of the
state will use the new machines next year. Nearly 330,000 voters will
be affected this year.

With the new system, voters fill out a paper ballot similar to a
bubble sheet used for a standardized test and then scan it into a
machine for verification. The technology also provides a paper trail
for every vote cast, which Shvartsman said makes the devices more
reliable than touch screen and other electronic voting machines.

Secretary of the State Susan Bysiewicz said the report confirms that
optical scan machines are the most secure form of voting technology.

"When we considered possible new voting technologies, security was
paramount," she said.

But one of her political opponents, Green Party candidate Mike DeRosa,
said the report raises concerns about the manufacturer of the new
machines, Diebold Election Systems of Ohio, whose machines have been
criticized around the country for various malfunctions. He suggested
the state should hire technical experts to service the machines.

"We need to have professionalization of our electoral process in
Connecticut," DeRosa said.

But Bysiewicz has said Massachusetts-based LHS Associates Inc., not
Diebold, designed the machines. Diebold acquired LHS and submitted a
bid to the state to provide its electronic machines and LHS's optical
scan machines, she said. The state rejected the Diebold-designed
machines, Bysiewicz said.

According to the report, the UConn professors determined that a laptop
computer user with a simple computer cable can obtain information from
the memory cards of the optical scan machines. They also determined
there are ways to feed multiple ballots into the machine when an
attendant is not watching.

"Poll workers must not be allowed to take their eyes off the machines,
and should be wary of attempts at distraction," the report reads.

Shvartsman said he believes the local poll workers are ready for the job.

"I've seen some of these silver-haired ladies and they're tough," he
said. "I think we're in good hands."

The new voting machines are helping Connecticut meet the requirements
of a federal law enacted after the chaotic Florida recount in the
presidential election in 2000.





From greenpartyct at yahoo.com  Fri Nov  3 10:08:03 2006
From: greenpartyct at yahoo.com (Green Party-CT)
Date: Fri, 3 Nov 2006 07:08:03 -0800 (PST)
Subject: {news} Electionline Weekly report on CT voting- jamming on 99??
Message-ID: <20061103150803.76291.qmail@web81407.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

  electionline Weekly - November 2, 2006 
electionline.org 

   
   
  CONNECTICUT
Dan Seligson
  
  As familiar a fixture at election time as a negative campaign ad, the clunky gray metal lever machine will have what is expected to be its final roll-out in a federal election on Tuesday. Gone forever will be the privacy curtain and the reassuring "ker-clunk" of finality as the voter pulls the red lever to cast a ballot. 
  
  Change is coming to Connecticut voting - but not before the majority of voters in the state use the machines to, at least potentially, determine the partisan control of Congress with three competitive and nationally significant House races. 
  
  While ubiquitous in East Coast elections for decades, lever machines are not without shortcomings, experts say. The Election Assistance Commission stated in a September 2005 advisory opinion that the system "[has] significant barriers which make compliance [with federal law] difficult and unlikely." Namely, lever machines have no paper component allowing an independent audit of vote totals, a requirement of section 301(a) of the Help America Vote Act. Voting system expert Roy Saltman also noted that the number 99 seemed to come up in vote totals more than it should, statistically speaking, indicating "that it takes more force to turn the vote counting wheels in a lever machine from 99 to 100, and therefore, if the counter is going to jam, it is more likely to jam at 99." 
  
Without any means to verify independently a lever machine's vote totals, and with the possibility of close races, lever machine mechanics - as well as the EAC's opinion that they are no longer compliant with federal law during this election cycle - could weigh heavily in potential post-election challenges. 
  
  There will be some innovation, however, as 25 localities in the state take part in a pilot project to introduce paper-based optical-scan systems to the state. Secretary of State Susan Bysiewicz said optical-scan systems would address "the concerns" of state voters, some of whom urged her to reject direct-recording electronic, or touch-screen, machines.
  
  A new report issued this week by the University of Connecticut found, however, that the optical-scan system could be vulnerable. 
  
  The study, commissioned by the state, found that the machines were vulnerable on Election Day to tampering or worse. "Even if the memory card is sealed and pre-election testing is performed, one can carry out a devastating array of attacks against an election using only off-the-shelf equipment and without having ever to access the card physically or opening the AV-OS system box," the report stated. Those attacks could include vote swapping, eliminating all votes for one candidate or the introduction of "conditionally-triggered biases," which could change totals based on a hacker's desired result. 
  
  Nonetheless, the university research team said they "strongly support the choice of optical-scan voting technology."
  
  Some voters with disabilities will have their first opportunity to cast independent and secret ballots in a general election as each polling place in the state will have a vote-by-phone system.
  
  Polls in Connecticut are open from 6 a.m. to 8 p.m.
  
   
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist10.pair.net/mailman/private/ctgp-news/attachments/20061103/575af2ec/attachment.html>

From efficacy at msn.com  Fri Nov  3 11:32:03 2006
From: efficacy at msn.com (clifford thornton)
Date: Fri, 3 Nov 2006 11:32:03 -0500
Subject: {news} Thornton Wins Griswold Elementary School Poll!
References: <454B6612.3040609@votethornton.com>
Message-ID: <BAY102-DAV14E2B2B6B2480280CA9B5CD1FE0@phx.gbl>





  Thornton for Governor
  For Immediate Release
  Nov. 3, 2006
  For more information, contact Ken Krayeske, 860-995-5842

  THORNTON WINS GRISWOLD ELEMENTARY SCHOOL MOCK ELECTION!

  CT Green Nancy Burton wins Attorney General race!

  Hartford _ The Griswold Elementary School poll has predicted Election 
  Day upsets before, and while Cliff Thornton's 3-to-1 margin of victory 
  over incumbent Gov. M. Jodi Rell in the Griswold poll is unlikely to be 
  repeated on Nov. 7, Thornton is nonetheless elated that young citizens 
  of Griswold chose him.

  "I am thrilled that the fourth and fifth graders of Griswold Elementary 
  thought I had the best solutions for the future of the state of 
  Connecticut," Thornton said. "This bodes well for the future of the 
  Connecticut Green Party. In just seven short years, these young people 
  will be actual voters, and they will be ready to vote for change in the 
  state. It is good that at such a young age, they are sophisticated 
  enough to know honesty and integrity."

  Thornton was the second highest vote getter with 104, just behind Judge 
  of Probate candidate George Kennedy with 108. Students also elected 
  Green Nancy Burton as attorney general, Democrat Ned Lamont for U.S. 
  Senate and Republican Rob Simmons for Congress.

  Enrichment Teacher Russell Salvador, who runs the candidate forum and 
  mock election, emailed the results out this morning.

  "I remind you that we have accurately predicted upsets before," Salvador 
  wrote.

  Thornton was the only gubernatorial candidate to show up at the forum, 
  held on Tuesday, Oct. 17. This has been the case most of the election 
  season, where Gov. Rell has shunned multi-party events on the campaign 
  trail, and Democratic challenger Mayor John DeStefano in turn has 
  avoided appearing with Thornton. Rell received 32 votes in the mock 
  contest, DeStefano earned 9, and Concerned Citizens' candidate Joseph 
  Zdonczyk garnered 6 votes.

  The students are looking out for their future, Thornton said.

  "This shows we earned the respect of these young people," Thornton said. 
  "This is a building block for the Connecticut Green Party, and it 
  predicts that if not this year, in the future, the Greens will come to 
  dominate Nutmeg state politics."


  -30-
  -- 

  Peace,


  Ken Krayeske

  Campaign Manager

  Thornton for Governor

  P.O. Box 1971

  Manchester, CT 06045

  www.votethornton.com<http://www.votethornton.com/>

  860-995-5842


  *This message is paid for and approved by Thornton for Governor, Max 
  Wentworth, Treasurer*


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist10.pair.net/mailman/private/ctgp-news/attachments/20061103/dae0b34a/attachment.html>

From greenpartyct at yahoo.com  Fri Nov  3 16:09:22 2006
From: greenpartyct at yahoo.com (Green Party-CT)
Date: Fri, 3 Nov 2006 13:09:22 -0800 (PST)
Subject: {news} (HartfordCournat)Ferrucci files complaint Lieberman worker
Message-ID: <20061103210922.22198.qmail@web81415.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

Complaint Filed In Absentee Ballot Matter    

     

          ADVERTISERS          
---------------------------------
  Advertise on ctnow 
       -->               By DANIEL E. GOREN
                 Courant Staff Writer
       
      November 3 2006
    
 Ralph A. Ferrucci, the Green Party candidate for U.S. Senate, filed a complaint Thursday against a Hartford Democrat who violated an agreement with state election officials barring her from distributing absentee ballot applications.

The complaint comes after a disclosure by The Courant that Prenzina Holloway, 69, was working for a company paid by Sen. Joseph Lieberman's campaign to distribute absentee ballot applications and that six people claim she has been handing out the documents in violation of her agreement with the state's Elections Enforcement Commission.

"She wasn't supposed to do anything and here she is doing the same thing that she did two years ago," Ferrucci said Thursday. "With Democrats and Republicans, there has been a lot of corruption in this state. Where does it end? We have to make sure this stops."

The commission fined Holloway $10,000 in July 2005 and ordered her not to distribute absentee ballot applications or to assist voters with them for two years. It agreed to accept $2,000 because of Holloway's financial hardship. 

The penalty came after the commission found that she had forged a voter's signature in the 2004 election. It also found evidence that Holloway was in the same room with at least two other voters as they filled out absentee ballots, a violation of state election law. 

Until Ferrucci's filing, election officials had not received a formal complaint and were waiting until the commission's Nov. 15 meeting.

 But Joan Andrews, director of legal affairs and enforcement for the commission, said Thursday the complaint would start the process immediately. 

The case now will be assigned to an investigator, Andrews said, though it is unlikely any decision will be made before Tuesday's election.

Holloway admitted this week that she had worked for Urban Voters and Associates, a company paid $17,550 by the Lieberman campaign since September. She said she isn't involved in the company's absentee ballot operations.

But five people at Mary Mahoney Village, a Vine Street housing complex for the elderly, told The Courant that Holloway and another person came to their doors to give them absentee ballot applications. 

A security worker at Betty Knox Apartments, another housing complex on Woodland Street, said Holloway tried to get into the building to distribute applications there. 

In her 2005 agreement with election officials, the commission said Holloway would be referred to the chief state's attorney's office to seek the maximum criminal penalties should she violate election laws again.



Contact Daniel E. Goren at dgoren at courant.com          Copyright 2006, Hartford Courant    
       
---------------------------------
  
                            

       
  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Tim McKee cell (860) 778-1304 or (860) 643-2282
   National Committee Member of the Green Party(Connecticut)
    Cliff Thornton for Governor- Campaign Manager


  Paid for by Thornton For Governor, Max Wentworth, Treasurer-   www.VoteThornton.com
   



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist10.pair.net/mailman/private/ctgp-news/attachments/20061103/e7d060a8/attachment.html>

From justinemccabe at earthlink.net  Fri Nov  3 17:04:49 2006
From: justinemccabe at earthlink.net (Justine McCabe)
Date: Fri, 3 Nov 2006 17:04:49 -0500
Subject: {news} =?iso-8859-1?q?Fw=3A_USGP-INT_Twenty_Years_After_Iran-Cont?=
	=?iso-8859-1?q?ra=2C_Washington=B9sle_In_Nicaragua_Still_a_Scandal?=
Message-ID: <000e01c6ff94$18392a00$0402a8c0@JUSTINE>


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Julia Willebrand" <julia.willebrand at verizon.net>
To: <usgp-int at gp-us.org>
Sent: Friday, November 03, 2006 4:38 PM
Subject: USGP-INT Twenty Years After Iran-Contra, Washington?s Role In 
Nicaragua Still a Scandal



I hope Steve Herrick will keep us informed about post election results in
Nicaragua.



Twenty Years After Iran-Contra, Washington?s Role In Nicaragua Still a
Scandal

By Mark Weisbrot
------------------------------------------------------------------------

This column was distributed to newspapers by McClatchy-Tribune Information
Services on Thursday, November 2, 2006. If anyone wants to reprint it,
please let me know.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Imagine Osama bin Laden visiting the United States ten or 15 years from now,
telling Americans who to vote for if they want to avoid getting hurt. It
would never happen, but in Nicaragua something very similar is happening in
the run-up to their election on November 5.

Former US Lt. Col. Oliver North, who helped organize and raise funds for a
terrorist organization that decimated Nicaragua in the 1980s, returned to
that country?s ground zero in late October to warn the citizens there
against re-electing Daniel Ortega.

Ortega first came to power in a 1979 revolution led by the Sandinistas,
which overthrew the brutal Washington-backed dictatorship of Anastasio
Somoza. The Somoza family had ruled the country since US Marines invaded and
occupied Nicaragua from 1927-1933.

But the US Central Intelligence Agency soon brought guns and money to the
enforcers of the toppled dictatorship, Somoza?s hated National Guard. Before
long these re-named ?contras? were killing health care workers, teachers,
and elected officials ? the CIA actually prepared a manual which advocated
the assassination of the latter. The contras preferred attacking these ?soft
targets? rather than the national armed forces. In that sense they were very
much a terrorist organization; they also used torture and rape as political
weapons.

These atrocities brought the contras universal condemnation from humans
rights groups such as Amnesty International and Americas Watch. The
Sandinistas took the United States to the World Court for its terrorist
actions few years earlier, for the taking of American hostages. The court 
ruled in
favor of Nicaragua, ordering reparations estimated at $17 billion.

The heinous nature of these crimes and the direct involvement of the Reagan
Administration disgusted millions of Americans, even more so after Ortega
was democratically elected in 1984. Led by activists in the religious
community, some hundreds of thousands of US citizens organized against US
funding for the contras and convinced Congress to cut it off. That?s where
Ollie North came in: on behalf of the Reagan Administration, he illegally
sold arms to Iran and used the proceeds to fund the contras. This became the
infamous ?Iran-Contra? scandal of twenty years ago.

North was convicted of various felonies for his Iran-Contra crimes, but
never served time because his conviction was overturned due to a
technicality on appeal. In 1990 the Sandinistas were voted out of office by
a public weary of war, with President George H.W. Bush making it clear that
the violence would continue if the Sandinistas were re-elected.

Nicaragua?s economy never recovered from the war and the US embargo. Today
it is the second poorest country in the hemisphere, with a per capita income
less than it was in 1960.

Now Washington is trying to capitalize on its past terrorism, combined with
present threats, to achieve the same result as in 1990. US Commerce
Secretary Carlos Gutierrez warned that ?relations with our country have been
limited and damaged when the Sandinistas have been in power? and Republican
Congressman Dana Rohrabacher warned of another economic embargo and the
cutoff of vital remittances that Nicaraguans here send home to their
families. The US Ambassador to Nicaragua Paul Trivelli has also breached
protocol by openly warning that the United States would ?reevaluate
relations? with Nicaragua if Ortega, who has first place in the polls with
35 percent, wins.

U.S. officials? intervention has gone so far as to prompt a public rebuke
from the Organization of American States, who asked them to stay out of the
election. Meanwhile, millions of US taxpayer dollars are funding ?democracy
promotion? activities in Nicaragua, which have previously been used to
influence elections there. And TV commercials show footage of corpses from
the 1980?s war, a warning of what might happen if Nicaraguans vote the
?wrong? way.

Ortega has since lost many of his former allies, who denounced him for
making a ?pact? with the corrupt former president Arnoldo Aleman and
undermining democracy. A reform Sandinista group has entered the race and
its presidential candidate Edmundo Jarquin is polling at about 14 percent.

But whatever the electoral result in Nicaragua, Washington?s intervention in
this election remains ? as it was in the 1980s ? an international disgrace
for the United States.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mark Weisbrot is Co-Director of the Center for Economic and Policy Research,
in Washington, DC.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Center for Economic and Policy Research, 1611 Connecticut Ave, NW, Suite
400, Washington, DC 20009
Phone: (202) 293-5380, Fax: (202) 588-1356, Home: www.cepr.net

If you received this message from a friend, you can sign up for CEPR updates
here.
Unsubscribe here.



---
| Sent via usgp-int
| To unsubscribe, please send a message to usgp-int-request at gp-us.org
| with ONLY unsubscribe in the message
---



From dbedellgreen at hotmail.com  Fri Nov  3 19:26:15 2006
From: dbedellgreen at hotmail.com (David Bedell)
Date: Sat, 04 Nov 2006 00:26:15 +0000
Subject: {news} David Bedell in Greenwich Post
In-Reply-To: <1162524720.aee7d608c71d0557.1eaf0fbe@persist.google.com>
Message-ID: <BAY124-F38057E6390C3A45F627EF7D6FD0@phx.gbl>

http://www.acorn-online.com/news/publish/article_10290.shtml

Greenwich Post
Nickerson, Farricker face off
Nov 2, 2006

In the final debate of the election season, state Sen. William Nickerson 
stressed his record and experience as the main reasons he should keep his 
job.

?I?ve delivered practical results on issues that matter,? Mr. Nickerson 
said. ?I?ve served my constituents with experience, not only in the state 
Senate, but in the state House before that and before that in the Greenwich 
Representative Town Meeting. My opponent has no legislative experience and 
has campaigned on false, negative attacks. I want to build a positive future 
for Connecticut and this district.?

But Mr. Nickerson?s opponent, Democrat Frank Farricker, said the eight-term 
incumbent?s legislative record was lacking and that he represented a chance 
for a new voice in Hartford for the 36th District.

?It?s time for a change,? Mr. Farricker said. ?Greenwich is a great place to 
live. I was born here and I?m raising my family here. If we?re not careful, 
things are going to change for the worse here and I don?t want that to 
happen. We have to anticipate the change in our community and we have to 
have proactive, energetic solutions to make sure this stays a great town 
where we?re proud to raise our families. I will be there to look ahead and 
make sure that the legislation which comes from Hartford will insure 
Greenwich will be the great town we want it to be.?

The two men were joined on a panel Oct. 25 with Green Party candidate David 
Bedel as part of the League of Women Voters debate.

Not surprisingly, transportation was the first topic presented to the 
candidates. Mr. Farricker has said throughout his campaign that Mr. 
Nickerson has not done enough to ease problems on Interstate 95 and the 
Merritt Parkway; the incumbent defended his record, saying it was one of the 
areas he?d spent the most time on as a member of the legislature.

Mr. Nickerson, a member of the Senate?s transportation committee, said he 
had been endorsed by the Fairfield Council for Business for his work in 
passing Public Act 05-4, which he called ?the most important bill in the 
last generation.? The act provides for the renewal of all 342 Metro-North 
rail cars.

?This has the potential of turning a substandard service into a first-class 
service,? Mr. Nickerson said. ?We need to reorient Greenwich?s 
transportation planning to emphasize public transportation, particularly 
Metro-North, which is the heart of public transportation in this area.?

Mr. Nickerson, who was quick to credit Gov. M. Jodi Rell for the progress 
made, said he had already met with the state?s new transportation 
commissioner, Ralph Carpenter, and agreed with his ?broad, new vision,? 
including bridge and road repair and expansion of transit options.

Mr. Farricker contended that for all the progress Mr. Nickerson said was 
being made, he wasn?t seeing it and said discussions about improving 
transportation hadn?t gotten beyond discarded ideas of double-decking I-95.

?Very little has been done to address Interstate 95 over the past 20 years,? 
Mr. Farricker said. ?We have trains that have been decaying for 30 years. In 
New York, people thought ahead and you can see the brand-new rail cars when 
you go to Grand Central station. In that state, a Republican governor and a 
Democratic legislature worked together to get results, and I want to go to 
Hartford and get results and look ahead. I don?t want to just decide five 
years ago that after 30 years something needs to be done about the rail 
cars. Something needs to be changed. This was obvious 20 years ago and not 
just obvious five years ago.?

Mr. Farricker said new rail cars were only part of the solution and said he 
would work to ease ?choke points? on Interstate 95 that cause traffic 
backups.

On taxes, Mr. Nickerson said that the state has a progressive income tax 
system already in place that he wouldn?t change. He said under the current 
system people at the average state income level of $45,000 ?effectively pay 
no income tax.? Mr. Nickerson said the top 10% of incomes in the state 
already pay above 90% of the income tax.

?To suggest there are further increases in the offing is just not 
realistic,? Mr. Nickerson said. ?I?m not for adding additional income payers 
in the lower bracket.?

Mr. Farricker stressed the need for ?tax fairness? in the state.

?Sen. Nickerson is saying that the tax status quo in the state is perfectly 
fine,? Mr. Farricker said. ?I wonder if a person in Greenwich who pays a 
certain level of property tax to educate their kids, when people in Stamford 
pay three or four times that to educate their kids, consider it a 
progressively fair system. Our state tax system is not just income tax. It?s 
property taxes. It?s the other taxes. It?s the business taxes. To say the 
status quo is fine is just not logical.?

Mr. Bedel said using property taxes to pay for schools creates ?an enormous 
burden? on towns to come up with budgets as well as creating inequalities 
from school district to school district.

?This is a very unfair system,? Mr. Bedel said. ?Every child should be given 
an equal opportunity in life and an equal opportunity for a good education. 
We need to look at a school funding system that relies not so much on local 
property taxes but on state revenues. I would be in favor of reducing 
property taxes and putting more of a burden on a graduated, progressive 
income tax.?

Mr. Bedel added he supported Green Party gubernatorial candidate Clifford 
Thornton?s call for a ?millionaire?s tax? and a corporate income tax to be 
restored to cover shortfalls. This was likely not music to the ears of the 
Greenwich residents in the audience, and Mr. Bedel supported other 
controversial ideas in the debate, including a full reform of drug laws that 
punish people for simple possession.

?We should not be locking up our young people in prisons,? Mr. Bedel said. 
?We should be providing better schools and better opportunities for them. 
[Mr. Thornton] has a plan to legalize, medicalize and decriminalize drugs, 
starting with marijuana. This would save an enormous amount of money from 
our state budget that is currently wasted on this ?drug war,? which has 
failed. It has not stopped the drug trade.?

When the debate turned to energy, all three candidates said more has to be 
done to stop rising utility costs and cut down on demand, which is outpacing 
supply. Mr. Bedel stressed the need to explore alternative sources of 
energy, which Mr. Nickerson said he supports. Mr. Nickerson said he voted 
against energy deregulation in the state and that his predictions about how 
harmful it would be had come true.

He said what was needed was the establishment of a strategic energy plan for 
the state. Mr. Nickerson said he and Ms. Rell both supported such a plan, 
but Democrats in the legislature voted it down.

Mr. Farricker replied, saying, ?Sen. Nickerson has the very un-Republican 
solution of creating a giant bureaucracy called the Department of Energy. He 
wants to make sure more studies are done, which will kick this further down 
the road. We need real vision and not just another bureaucracy and not 
another study. We need to get down to work.?


kborsuk@ acorn-online.com


? Copyright by Hersam Acorn newspapers

_________________________________________________________________
Stay in touch with old friends and meet new ones with Windows Live Spaces 
http://clk.atdmt.com/MSN/go/msnnkwsp0070000001msn/direct/01/?href=http://spaces.live.com/spacesapi.aspx?wx_action=create&wx_url=/friends.aspx&mkt=en-us



From ken at votethornton.com  Fri Nov  3 10:53:54 2006
From: ken at votethornton.com (ken krayeske)
Date: Fri, 03 Nov 2006 10:53:54 -0500
Subject: {news} Thornton Wins Griswold Elementary School Poll!
Message-ID: <454B6612.3040609@votethornton.com>

Thornton for Governor
For Immediate Release
Nov. 3, 2006
For more information, contact Ken Krayeske, 860-995-5842

THORNTON WINS GRISWOLD ELEMENTARY SCHOOL MOCK ELECTION!

CT Green Nancy Burton wins Attorney General race!

Hartford _ The Griswold Elementary School poll has predicted Election 
Day upsets before, and while Cliff Thornton's 3-to-1 margin of victory 
over incumbent Gov. M. Jodi Rell in the Griswold poll is unlikely to be 
repeated on Nov. 7, Thornton is nonetheless elated that young citizens 
of Griswold chose him.

"I am thrilled that the fourth and fifth graders of Griswold Elementary 
thought I had the best solutions for the future of the state of 
Connecticut," Thornton said. "This bodes well for the future of the 
Connecticut Green Party. In just seven short years, these young people 
will be actual voters, and they will be ready to vote for change in the 
state. It is good that at such a young age, they are sophisticated 
enough to know honesty and integrity."

Thornton was the second highest vote getter with 104, just behind Judge 
of Probate candidate George Kennedy with 108. Students also elected 
Green Nancy Burton as attorney general, Democrat Ned Lamont for U.S. 
Senate and Republican Rob Simmons for Congress.

Enrichment Teacher Russell Salvador, who runs the candidate forum and 
mock election, emailed the results out this morning.

"I remind you that we have accurately predicted upsets before," Salvador 
wrote.

Thornton was the only gubernatorial candidate to show up at the forum, 
held on Tuesday, Oct. 17. This has been the case most of the election 
season, where Gov. Rell has shunned multi-party events on the campaign 
trail, and Democratic challenger Mayor John DeStefano in turn has 
avoided appearing with Thornton. Rell received 32 votes in the mock 
contest, DeStefano earned 9, and Concerned Citizens' candidate Joseph 
Zdonczyk garnered 6 votes.

The students are looking out for their future, Thornton said.

"This shows we earned the respect of these young people," Thornton said. 
"This is a building block for the Connecticut Green Party, and it 
predicts that if not this year, in the future, the Greens will come to 
dominate Nutmeg state politics."


-30-
-- 

Peace,


Ken Krayeske

Campaign Manager

Thornton for Governor

P.O. Box 1971

Manchester, CT 06045

www.votethornton.com

860-995-5842


*This message is paid for and approved by Thornton for Governor, Max 
Wentworth, Treasurer*


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Griswold Elementary School Mock Election Results.doc
Type: application/msword
Size: 66048 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://pairlist10.pair.net/mailman/private/ctgp-news/attachments/20061103/7c810761/attachment.doc>

From justinemccabe at earthlink.net  Fri Nov  3 16:13:58 2006
From: justinemccabe at earthlink.net (Justine McCabe)
Date: Fri, 3 Nov 2006 16:13:58 -0500
Subject: {news} GP RELEASE Greens urge support for people of Oaxaca under
	attack
Message-ID: <0cfc01c6ff8d$3790dcb0$0402a8c0@JUSTINE>

GREEN PARTY OF THE UNITED STATES
http://www.gp.org

For Immediate Release:
Thursday, November 2, 2006

Contacts:
Scott McLarty, Media Coordinator, 202-518-5624,
mclarty at greens.org
Starlene Rankin, Media Coordinator, 916-995-3805,
starlene at greens.org


Greens call for support for the people of Oaxaca,
Mexico, under attack by government forces


WASHINGTON, D.C. -- Green Party leaders and candidates
expressed support for the people of Oaxaca, striking
teachers, and all Mexicans who are under brutal attack
by Mexico's federal police, army, and paramilitary
forces in response to protests and rallies for
democracy, economic reforms, and the resignation of
Governor Ulises Ru?z Ort?z.

"We call on the Bush Administration to put pressure on
the Fox government to call off the occupation of
Oaxaca and respect the right of people to protest
peacefully," said Julia Willebrand, Green candidate
for State Comptroller of New York and co-chair of the
Green Party's International Committee.   "We call on
all Americans to support the Popular Assembly of the
People of Oaxaca's [APPO] efforts to draft a new state
constitution that will ensure grassroots democracy,
fair elections, respect for diversity, and an end to
neo-liberal policies that favor big business interests
over the rights and needs of the Mexican people."

Greens noted that the protests in Oaxaca were in part
motivated by anger over charges of massive election
fraud after Felipe Calder?n's victory was upheld by
the conservative Federal Electoral Commission.

"The response of the teachers union and thousands of
ordinary Oaxaque?os to evidence of a stolen election
was heroic," said Kathleen Culver, Green candidate for
Congress in Tennessee's 7th District
<http://www.kate4congress.com>.  "In the U.S., few
Americans protested in 2000 and 2004 when evidence
emerged that Republican officials had obstructed
voters and manipulated the presidential elections in
Florida, Ohio, and other states.  The acquiescence of
so many Americans made it easy for the Bush
Administration, with bipartisan support in Congress,
to launch an assault on democracy and freedom."

The Green Party has called for repeal of NAFTA and
other international trade agreements that were
ratified in the U.S. with bipartisan support, and
which have caused widespread economic distress and
desperation in Mexico, as well as lost jobs, depressed
wages, and eroded environmental and labor protections
in the U.S. for the benefit of corporate profits.

The Green Party has long opposed the Bush
Administration's attempts at insuring American
corporate entry into foreign markets at the expense of
the citizens of those nations.  With the support of
elite international trade groups and the acquiescence
of the Democratic Party, neo-liberal U.S. trade
policies such as NAFTA and GATT have caused widespread
economic distress and desperation in Mexico and other
countries, and have contributed to lost jobs,
depressed wages, a degraded environment, and eroded
labor protections for Americans.  Green candidates
around the country are running against the two
corporate parties to oppose these misguided policies
and insure economic justice for Americans and our
trade partners.

"The Green Party mourns for and pays its respects to
all those who've been killed and injured by the
federal police and other pro-government forces," said
Julia Willebrand, who noted that U.S. independent
reporter Brad Will was gunned down on Friday, October
27, along with local school teachers P?nfilo Hern?ndez
and Esteban L?pez Zurita, and over a dozen others who
were killed in Oaxaca last week.


MORE INFORMATION

Green Party of the United States
http://www.gp.org
1700 Connecticut Avenue NW, Suite 404
Washington, DC 20009.
202-319-7191, 866-41GREEN
Fax 202-319-7193

Green campaign listings, news, photos, and web sites
http://www.gp.org/2006elections
Database of 2006 Green candidates
http://www.greens.org/elections
Video clips of Green candidates
http://www.gp.org/2006elections/media.shtml
Green Party News Center
http://www.gp.org/newscenter.shtml

The Narco News: Reporting on the Drug War and
Democracy from Latin America
http://www.narconews.com


~ END ~


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist10.pair.net/mailman/private/ctgp-news/attachments/20061103/35cfcf98/attachment.html>

From ken at votethornton.com  Mon Nov  6 11:18:26 2006
From: ken at votethornton.com (ken krayeske)
Date: Mon, 06 Nov 2006 11:18:26 -0500
Subject: {news} Health Care for All? Not with M. Jodi Rell!
Message-ID: <454F6052.4080304@votethornton.com>

For Immediate Release
Nov. 6, 2006
For more information, contact Ken Krayeske, 860-995-5842

Health Care for All? Not with M. Jodi Rell

Green Calls for Compassion, and Demands Single-Payer Health Care

Hartford _ If Connecticut wants universal health care, it must look 
beyond the Rowland-Rell administration for help in securing the human 
right of proper medical attention.

Gov. M. Jodi Rell's 12 years in office are replete with examples of poor 
health care management: secret insurance contracts, hospital closings, 
and job cuts, Green Party gubernatorial candidate Cliff Thornton said today.

"Why hasn't the state stepped up to insure that health care is available 
to everyone?" Green Party gubernatorial candidate Cliff Thornton asks. 
"The money is there. Our priorities are askew. With the Green Party in 
office, the residents of Connecticut would be assured that everyone 
would have equal access to health care."

Starting in 1995, the state Department of Social Services began doling 
out more than $744 million in contracts with for-profit HMO's to manage 
the health care for more than 300,000 Medicaid recipients, among them 
adults and children, according to attorney Sheldon Toubman at the New 
Haven Legal Assistance Association.

Toubman has led a fight to open the records of these companies to the 
sunshine of the  Freedom of Information Act, with no help from DSS.

"We are not allowed to know how this money is being spent, and if it 
being spent effectively, and that is a tragedy," Thornton said.

Child Advocate Jeanne Milstein is no less pleased with the system's poor 
management, especially where it concerns the mental health of children. 
She is demanding that three of the four insurance companies comply with 
the FOI ruling to open the records.

"I remain very concerned that, without appropriate public oversight and 
transparency of practices, this system will not successfully meet the 
expectations for service to chidlren," Millstein wrote in a July 6, 2006 
letter to Patricia Wilson-Coker, the head of DSS.

Good leadership in the Governor's office could change this, Thornton said.

"The governor could stop all this nonsense, but she chooses to issue 
platitudes and do nothing," Thornton said.

The promise from Rowland/Rell was that privatizing the insurance system 
would save money and improve health care access. But in Toubman's Oct. 6 
letter to all gubernatorial candidates, he wrote, "After eleven years, 
the promise has not been fulfilled."

The people of Winsted are waiting, too. In 1996, during the first term 
for the Rowland-Rell administration, the 92-year-old Winsted Memorial 
Hospital closed due to the pressures of rising insurance costs and an 
unfair hospital tax that took money from small, rural hospitals and 
pumped that cash into large, urban hospitals.

Fast forward to Oct. 5, 2006, when the New Milford Hospital announced it 
was cutting the equivalent of 20 full-time employees and freezing the 
wages of the entire managerial staff because of more than $1 million in 
cuts from federal Medicare reimbursements.

"I find it unbelievable that when Connecticut desperately needs health 
care infrastructure and jobs, the Governor would allow a hospital to 
eliminate people," Thornton said. "Where is the compassionate response 
for the patients and their families, and the workers and their families? 
I know my grandmother wouldn't accept any of this in good conscience."

Thornton is calling for an elimination of the redundancies in our health 
care system, the reduction of the profit-motive in health care and for 
the creation of a single-payer health care system.


-30-

-- 

Peace,


Ken Krayeske

Campaign Manager

Thornton for Governor

P.O. Box 1971

Manchester, CT 06045

www.votethornton.com

860-995-5842


*This message is paid for and approved by Thornton for Governor, Max 
Wentworth, Treasurer*



From ken at votethornton.com  Tue Nov  7 00:33:36 2006
From: ken at votethornton.com (ken krayeske)
Date: Tue, 07 Nov 2006 00:33:36 -0500
Subject: {news} Thornton Releases Schedule for Election Day
Message-ID: <45501AB0.20002@votethornton.com>

For Immediate Release
Nov. 7, 2006
For more information, contact Ken Krayeske

Thornton to Criss-Cross CT on Election Day

Green Party Candidate to Vote at Noon

/Hartford/ _ Cliff Thornton will spend his Election Day morning going to 
polling places in and around Hartford, then he will travel to 
Glastonbury High School at noon to vote.

In the afternoon, Cliff will visit supporters in Woodbridge, New Haven, 
New London and Willimantic. At 8:30 pm, Thornton will finish the night 
watching election results at Luce Restaurant, 98 Washington Street, 
Middletown. Directions to Lice are here: http://lucect.com/contact.html

"We have all waited months for this day," Thornton said. "We - by we I 
mean every candidate that is running - have labored towards this 
peaceful endeavor of self-government, and today and tonite, we will see 
the fruits of our labor. We all have a lot to be congratulated for, but 
we still have much work to do."

For more information, contact Ken Krayeske at 860-995-5842.

-- 

Peace,


Ken Krayeske

Campaign Manager

Thornton for Governor

P.O. Box 1971

Manchester, CT 06045

www.votethornton.com

860-995-5842


*This message is paid for and approved by Thornton for Governor, Max 
Wentworth, Treasurer*



From justinemccabe at earthlink.net  Wed Nov  8 11:12:38 2006
From: justinemccabe at earthlink.net (Justine McCabe)
Date: Wed, 8 Nov 2006 11:12:38 -0500
Subject: {news} [GPUS-PAX] Re: Maine Green Results
Message-ID: <030301c70350$b65e7860$0402a8c0@JUSTINE>


----- Original Message ----- 
From: jacqui deveneau 
To: Peace 
Sent: Wednesday, November 08, 2006 9:28 AM
Subject: [GPUS-PAX] Re: Maine Green Results


Pat LaMarche lost her race for Governor. John Eder has lost his seat by a narrow margine. But as you will see bellow Greens took other seats and in one race Mathew Reading lost by only a few votes and there will probably be a recount, which means he could replace Eder in the Maine House.Love,Jacqui


  Election Results 2006 
  19 Green Candidates Election Date Candidate, Office Status, Votes, % 
        11/07/06
        General Election Kevin Donoghue
        Maine
        City Council, District 1 (Portland, Cumberland County) 
        Complete Race Results  Elected 
        Place: 1 
        3 running for 1 seat
        1815 votes, 47.4%   
        11/07/06
        General Election John Eder
        Maine
        State House of Representatives, District 118 (Portland, Cumberland County) 
         
        Incumbent 
        Complete Race Results 
        Candidate Website  
        2 running for 1 seat
        1534 votes, 48.4%   
        11/07/06
        General Election Christina Feller
        Maine
        City Council, At-large (Portland, Cumberland County) 
        Complete Race Results  Not Elected 
        Place: 2 
        3 running for 1 seat
        6883 votes, 30.4%   
        11/07/06
        General Election David Frans
        Maine
        State House of Representatives, District 66 (Brunswick, Cumberland County) 
        Complete Race Results 
        Candidate Website  Not Elected 
        Place: 3 
        3 running for 1 seat
        359 votes, 10.5%   
        11/07/06
        General Election Kevin Gardella
        Maine
        School Committee At-Large (Portland, Cumberland County) 
        Complete Race Results  Not Elected 
        Place: 3 
        3 running for 1 seat
        3990 votes, 19.3%   
        11/07/06
        General Election William Laidley
        Maine
        State House of Representatives, District 122 (South Portland, Cumberland County) 
        Complete Race Results  Not Elected 
        Place: 3 
        3 running for 1 seat
        501 votes, 12.3%   
        11/07/06
        General Election Patricia LaMarche
        Maine
        Governor (Yarmouth) 
         
        Complete Race Results 
        Candidate Website  Not Elected 
        Place: 4 
        9 running for 1 seat
        33528 votes, 10%   
        11/07/06
        General Election Keith Louis
        Maine
        State Senate, District 7 (South Portland, Cumberland County) 
        Complete Race Results  Not Elected 
        Place: 3 
        3 running for 1 seat
        912 votes, 8.8%   
        11/07/06
        General Election David Margolis-Pineo
        Maine
        Water District (Portland, Cumberland County) 
        Complete Race Results  Elected 
        Place: 1 
        1 running for 1 seat
        18952 votes, 100%   
        11/07/06
        General Election David Marshall
        Maine
        City Council, District 2 (Portland, Cumberland County) 
        Complete Race Results  Elected 
        Place: 1 
        3 running for 1 seat
        1893 votes, 45.4%   
        11/07/06
        General Election Ben Meiklejohn
        Maine
        State House of Representatives, District 120 (Portland, Cumberland County) 
        Complete Race Results 
        Candidate Website  Not Elected 
        Place: 2 
        3 running for 1 seat
        280 votes, 18.8%   
        11/07/06
        General Election Rebecca Minnick
        Maine
        School Committee, Portland District 1 (Portland, Cumberland County) 
        Complete Race Results 
        Candidate Website  Elected 
        Place: 1 
        2 running for 1 seat
        2069 votes, 59.3%   
        11/07/06
        General Election Murrough O Brien
        Maine
        State House of Representatives, District 115 (Portland, Cumberland County) 
        Complete Race Results  Not Elected 
        Place: 3 
        3 running for 1 seat
        358 votes, 10.5%   
        11/07/06
        General Election Kelsey Perchinkski
        Maine
        State Senate, District 8 (Portland, Cumberland County) 
        Complete Race Results 
        Candidate Website  Not Elected 
        Place: 3 
        3 running for 1 seat
        1885 votes, 14.4%   
        11/07/06
        General Election Matthew Reading
        Maine
        State House of Representatives, District 119 (Portland) 
        Candidate Website  Not Elected 
        Place: 2 
        3 running for 1 seat
        738 votes, 41.8%   
        11/07/06
        General Election John Safarik
        Maine
        State House of Representatives, District 117 (Portland, Cumberland County) 
        Complete Race Results  
        3 running for 1 seat  
        11/07/06
        General Election Andrew Souza
        Maine
        State House of Representatives, District 124 (Cumberland County) 
        Withdrew from the General Election Ballot.  
        3 running for 1 seat  
        11/07/06
        General Election Stephen Spring
        Maine
        School Board, Portland District 2 (Portland, Cumberland County) 
        Incumbent 
        Complete Race Results 
        Candidate Website  Not Elected 
        Place: 2 
        2 running for 1 seat
        1735 votes, 47.1%   
        11/07/06
        General Election Leo Tallarico
        Maine
        State House of Representatives, District 128 (Scarborough) 
        Complete Race Results  
        3 running for 1 seat  





--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sponsored Link

Try Netflix today! With plans starting at only $5.99 a month what are you waiting for?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist10.pair.net/mailman/private/ctgp-news/attachments/20061108/1f29677a/attachment.html>

From justinemccabe at earthlink.net  Wed Nov  8 12:46:20 2006
From: justinemccabe at earthlink.net (Justine McCabe)
Date: Wed, 8 Nov 2006 12:46:20 -0500
Subject: {news} Green Party senatorial candidate Hawkins Calls for Lawsuit to
	Win Green Ballot Line
Message-ID: <044101c7035d$ccf10d60$0402a8c0@JUSTINE>



>> Hawkins for US Senate
>> <http://www.hawkinsforsenate.org/>www.HawkinsForSenate.org
>>
>> News Release
>>
>> For immediate release: Tuesday, November 7, 2006
>> For more information:
>> Howie Hawkins, (315) 425-1019, (315) 481-7710
>>
>> Hawkins Says Anti-War Stance Propels Him to Highest Vote for Green Party
>> Candidate for US Senate in New York To Date
>>
>> Calls for Lawsuit to Win Green Party a Ballot Line
>>
>> Laments Lack of Discussion of Real Issues in Senate Race
>>
>> Howie Hawkins, the Green Party candidate for US Senate, said today that 
>> his
>> anti-war "troops home now" position helped propel him to the highest vote
>> total for a Green Party candidate for US Senator since the Greens began
>> fielding candidates for the position in 1998.
>>
>> The initial canvass of votes reported Tuesday night had Hawkins at over
>> 50,000 votes, despite the lowest statewide voter turnout in modern 
>> history.
>> The previous Green votes for US Senate were 14,785 for Joel Kovel in 
>> 1998,
>> 40,991 for Mark Dunau in 2000, and 36,942 for David McReynolds in 2004.
>>
>> The Green candidate for Attorney General, Rachel Treichler, received well
>> over 50,000, while the Green candidate for Comptroller, Julia Willebrand,
>> received well over 100,000 votes. However, the top of the Green ticket,
>> Malachy McCourt for Governor and Alison Duncan for Lieutenant Governor, 
>> were
>> reported be the low 40,000s. It takes 50,000 votes for a party's
>> gubernatorial ticket to establishes a party's right to a ballot line for 
>> the
>> next four years, according to the New York Election Law.
>>
>> Hawkins said that Tuesday nights Greens around the state were already
>> talking about filing a lawsuit to win a ballot line based on the fact 
>> that
>> three of its statewide candidates passed the 50,000 vote threshold. A
>> lawsuit by the Green Party of Alaska won that party a ballot line in 
>> similar
>> circumstances earlier this year. Four years ago, the Green Party of New 
>> York
>> won a lawsuit that established the right of members of non-ballot 
>> qualified
>> parties that qualified gubernatorial candidates by petition to enroll in
>> those parties for the next four years with boards of elections.
>>
>> "The Democratic victories on Tuesday were a vote of no confidence in the
>> Bush administration and opposition to the war in Iraq, not a vote for the
>> Democratic alternative, because they didn't present one. Americans want
>> change in Albany and in Washington. It is time for the victors to pay
>> attention to the American people and bring our troops home. Too often
>> politicians and parties turn a deaf ear to the voters once Election Day 
>> is
>> over. We need Clinton, the Democrats, and other victors in this election 
>> to
>> remember that the voters want good, secure jobs and quality health care 
>> for
>> all Americans, not more tax cuts and corporate welfare for their rich
>> contributors," stated Hawkins in conceding the race for US Senator to
>> Hillary Clinton.
>>
>> Hawkins lamented that "the Greens did offer an alternative program but
>> received only token media coverage. The majority of New Yorkers agree 
>> with
>> Greens on most issues, from opposing the war in Iraq, supporting
>> single-payer health insurance for all, and supporting massive public
>> investment in renewable energy instead of wars for oil. But these life 
>> and
>> death issues were ignored during this campaign. Instead, the media buzz 
>> in
>> my race for the US Senate seat was about whether or not Spencer said 
>> Clinton
>> had plastic surgery and about her looming presidential run," observed
>> Hawkins.
>>
>> "Corporations, especially in the oil, military, finance, and insurance
>> industries, are continuing to centralize their power in America. 
>> Elections
>> are now primarily about whether candidates can pony up enough money to 
>> get
>> into the game, either by selling their souls to corporate contributors or
>> because of their own wealth. The media is concentrating into fewer and 
>> fewer
>> corporate giants, who cover elections as horse races and beauty contests 
>> and
>> neglect serious candidates from upstart parties who raise real issues and
>> policy alternatives," noted Hawkins.
>>
>> "Many voters told me they were disgusted with all the negative 
>> advertising,"
>> Hawkins said. "We saw little more than celebrity endorsements and
>> mudslinging from the major party candidates. A significant part of the
>> problem is that the Democrats and Republicans largely agree about 
>> corporate
>> power, economic inequality, regressive taxes, aggressive militarism, and
>> diminished civil liberties. They don't have real issues to debate. They
>> won't take positions that might alienate their corporate funders."
>>
>> "Voters across America said today that they wanted change. But real 
>> change
>> is not on the Democratic agenda. Even Bush has adopted Clinton's 'change
>> course in Iraq' slogan. Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard 
>> Dean
>> calls for a 'new strategy in Iraq.' The operative words are 'in Iraq.'
>> Likely House leader Nancy Pelosi has assured voters that impeachment is 
>> off
>> the table. Just as Clinton did in 1993, health care reform will primarily
>> end up channeling more money and power to the insurance companies. It's 
>> all
>> about money and power, not about building peace, protecting the 
>> environment,
>> and meeting the needs of middle class, working class, and poor people,"
>> added Hawkins.



From greenpartyct at sbcglobal.net  Wed Nov  8 14:01:59 2006
From: greenpartyct at sbcglobal.net (Green Party-CT)
Date: Wed, 8 Nov 2006 11:01:59 -0800 (PST)
Subject: {news} (Rough idea  )Green highlights of 2006 -58 wins,
	IL Green gets 325, 598 votes
Message-ID: <20061108190159.79447.qmail@web81403.mail.mud.yahoo.com>


Governor?s races  2006  19 candidates 746,472  votes   Richard Whitney 
IL
325,598  votes lead the way

US Senate  2006   14 candidates  319,279 votes  Todd Chretien  CA  
106578
votes    leader in Senate races.

US House  2006   42 candidates  224,360  votes   Greta Brown  PA 15th
districit 31443 votes    leader in House races

more later



       
  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Tim McKee cell (860) 778-1304 or (860) 643-2282
   National Committee Member of the Green Party(Connecticut)
    Cliff Thornton for Governor- Campaign Manager


  Paid for by Thornton For Governor, Max Wentworth, Treasurer-   www.VoteThornton.com
   



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist10.pair.net/mailman/private/ctgp-news/attachments/20061108/6830c9b5/attachment.html>

From greenpartyct at yahoo.com  Wed Nov  8 15:40:58 2006
From: greenpartyct at yahoo.com (Green Party-CT)
Date: Wed, 8 Nov 2006 12:40:58 -0800 (PST)
Subject: {news} Nader on '06 election - "Democracy Now" show...."Mandate
	-less win for Democrats"
Message-ID: <20061108204059.85673.qmail@web81412.mail.mud.yahoo.com>


or analysis on Tuesday's election and the Democratic victory in the 
House, 
consumer advocate and former presidential candidate Ralph Nader joins 
us in 
Washington.

    * Ralph Nader, ran for president in 2000 as a candidate on the 
Green 
Party ticket. In 2004 he ran for President as an Independent. He is the 
author of many books including "The Good Fight: Declare Your 
Independence 
and Close the Democracy Gap."

www.democracynow.org 
NADER TRANSCRIPT:


AMY GOODMAN: Last night, Rahm Emanuel of Illinois, head of the 
Democratic 
Congressional Campaign Committee, vowed reforms would be in order.

      REP. RAHM EMANUEL: The American people never lose their zeal for 
reform, and neither can we. The old era of irresponsibility is over, 
and the 
new era of real reform has just begun.

AMY GOODMAN: For analysis on Tuesday's election and the Democratic 
victory 
in the House, we're joined by consumer advocate and two-time 
presidential 
candidate, Ralph Nader, in Washington, D.C. Welcome to Democracy Now!

RALPH NADER: Thank you, Amy.

AMY GOODMAN: It's good to have you with us. What is your assessment of 
Election Day and the results?

RALPH NADER: Well, the assessment is that to the extent the Democrats 
gained 
the majority in the House, it was on the backs of some very right-wing 
Democrats who won the election against right-wing Republican 
incumbents. And 
so, there was no mandate for any progressive agenda. For example, in 
1974, 
when the Democrats swarmed over the Republicans, it was on the backs of 
many 
very progressive Democratic challengers who were elected. And the same 
is 
true in the '60s, when some very progressive senators like Gaylord 
Nelson 
from Wisconsin was elected. But not this time. They're going to have to 
deal 
with a lot of Blue Dog Democrats, and that's going to give Pelosi great 
pause as she tries to maneuver a few things through the Congress.

The other thing that is good, though, is that there's some very good 
veteran 
chairmen who are coming in: George Miller, Henry Waxman, Ed Markey and, 
of 
course, John Conyers. But to counter that, both John Conyers and Nancy 
Pelosi have taken the impeachment issue right off the table, before the 
election, and that means there's going to be no Bush accountability for 
his 
war crimes and his inflation of unlawful presidential authority.

AMY GOODMAN: And yet, Ralph Nader, when asked -- when Nancy Pelosi was 
asked 
what would be the difference if the Democrats took over, she said 
subpoena 
power.

RALPH NADER: Well, alright, that gets to a real gridlock situation. The 
Democrats will throw a lot of subpoenas at the White House. The White 
House 
will, of course, drag it on and on and on. And the public will get fed 
up 
with it. The White House has great reserves in dragging it on and on 
and on. 
Because Bush can't rely on Republicans as a majority of the Congress, 
he's 
going to inflate his presidential power even more extremely and 
unlawfully, 
in the opinion of many legal scholars, to do through the inherent power 
of 
the presidency, as Dick Cheney and Bush have talked about, what he 
can't do 
through the Congress, which he no longer controls.

But notice that, in all the debates I've heard between the Senate 
candidates 
and the House candidates over the last few weeks, there was almost no 
mention of corporate power, the 800-pound gorilla, no mention of 
corporate 
crime, no drive for corporate reform. And yet, if you look at the 
forward 
issues in the country, who's saying no to healthcare, universal 
healthcare? 
Corporate power. Who's saying no to a real crackdown on corporate crime 
against consumers, especially inner-city consumers? Corporate power. 
Who's 
saying no to cleaning up the corrupt tens of billions of dollars in 
military 
contracting fraud, like Halliburton? Corporate power. Who's saying no 
to 
reform of hundreds of billions of dollars of diversion of your tax 
dollars, 
America, to corporate subsidies, handouts and giveaways? Corporate 
power. 
And yet, reporters and candidates hardly mentioned it. Kevin Zeese, the 
Green Party candidate, did in Maryland for the Senate. Howie Hawkins 
did in 
New York, the Green Party candidate for the Senate.

AMY GOODMAN: And certainly, Bernie Sanders makes that a major issue. It 
is 
the main point of his politics. And he's been elected. He's going to be 
the 
first socialist senator in the US Senate.

RALPH NADER: Well, there won't be much socialism to him, but he'll be a 
fresh voice, a very welcome voice along with Sherrod Brown. So that, 
you 
know, you can stop certain bad things in the Senate with two or three 
senators near the end of the session, so -- the way Metzenbaum and 
Abourezk 
did in the '70s -- so that's a welcome break. But there are some --

AMY GOODMAN: Ralph Nader, let me ask you about Connecticut, because 
that's 
where you've spent a good amount of the last months, and here, yes, the 
independent candidate Joseph Lieberman beat out the antiwar Democratic 
candidate who had unseated him in the Democratic primary, Ned Lamont.

RALPH NADER: Well, that was a bizarre type of situation, because the 
Republican candidate was not able to get more than 10% of the vote. So 
Lieberman got 70% of the Republican voters in Connecticut, and that's 
what 
won for him. He would have been history, if the Republicans respected 
their 
own voters in Connecticut and nominated someone who could get 20%, 25%, 
30% 
of the vote. He's going to be pretty insufferable. I mean, you know, 
Joe's 
inherent self-righteousness now is ballooning by the hour, and he's 
going to 
view himself as a kingmaker if the swing in the Senate is one seat. But 
he 
was the darling of the big business lobby, Chamber of Commerce, here in 
Washington, who anointed him. And that's the power and greed lobby. And 
he 
was their favorite Democratic senator, only one of two.

AMY GOODMAN: Is it absolutely known that he will caucus with Democrats, 
number one? And number two, is there any discussion about him -- 
perhaps the 
Bush administration, who's deeply indebted to him, offering him, say, 
Secretary of Defense, if they don't stick with Rumsfeld, to get him out 
of 
the Senate to put in a Republican? And would he take it?

RALPH NADER: There's no doubt in my mind he's going to caucus with the 
Democrats. He knows where his bread is buttered, where his friends are, 
where his contributors are, one. And he can play that both sides of the 
aisle, as he has for years as a Democrat. And he can get a committee 
chair 
if the Democrats win. I don't think he'll take an executive position. 
This 
is a failing administration. He would never want to be a Secretary of 
Defense in a Bush administration.

AMY GOODMAN: What about the other congressional races in Connecticut? 
Very 
significant. You're talking about corporate power. Nancy Johnson is one 
of 
those Republican incumbents who went down, very well-known for 
representing 
the pharmaceutical industry, the insurance industry.

RALPH NADER: Yes. That was a surprise. She worked the precincts very 
carefully over the years, always went back home. But I think her 
opponent 
two years ago, [Maloney], congressman, when they were redistricted, 
damaged 
her credibility by pouring ads showing she was the agent of the drug 
industry and the big HMOs. I think he set her up for defeat by Chris 
Murphy 
yesterday.

AMY GOODMAN: What about the war, this being a vote against war? And 
what 
does that mean for Democrats right now? What happens?

RALPH NADER: Well, it means vagueness. Nancy Pelosi was very vague. She 
said 
there's got to be a redirection, there's got to be a change. But the 
Democrats don't have the guts to really have a withdrawal plan. 
Internationalizing the situation there; having internationally 
supervised 
elections; having people of stature bring the three sectarian groups 
together, as they have in the past -- the Kurds and Shiites and Sunnis 
in 
the '50s arranged a modest autonomy within a unified Iraq -- and 
bringing 
in, in an Islamic nation, peacekeepers, these things require real 
high-level 
diplomacy, and the Democrats, you know, are not in the executive 
branch. 
Bush is going to stay the course. He's already announced that he's 
going to 
be in Iraq until the last day of his office. So this will be a test of 
Hillary Clinton and others, and I don't think they're going to be able 
to 
meet it.

AMY GOODMAN: What about what's happening in the Middle East, in Israel, 
Palestine, Lebanon? The latest attack on Beit Hanun has killed 
something 
like eighteen people, thirteen of one family. You certainly spoke out 
over 
the Israeli bombing of Lebanon. Will this ever become a major issue in 
the 
US Congress?

RALPH NADER: Certainly the Democrats are not going to make it a major 
issue. 
Nancy Pelosi and others have been with the pro-Israeli lobby for years. 
Certainly Bush and Cheney aren't. They don't understand that the 
greatest 
move toward national security in our country and in the so-called 
effort 
against terrorism would be to solve the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. 
The 
majority of both people would like a two-state solution. There are 
extremists in Israel that would like to continue to dominate the West 
Bank 
and harass Gaza and block an exit of the people there for traveling and 
for 
export of goods. So it's just -- it's now a steady state, destruction 
every 
day of innocent people, as you say, thirteen in one family. The Israeli 
military know how to pacify Gaza. They know they could take over that 
town, 
where these primitive rockets that are wildly inadequate are fired. But 
it 
serves the interest of certain political interests in Israel to 
continue 
this kind of conflict.

This is an eminently resolvable conflict. There's a lot of former 
Israeli 
military and intelligence people who know how to do it, people in the 
Knesset who know what needs to be done. But as long as the US basically 
says 
to whoever is in charge, "You can do whatever you want over there, and 
we'll 
still pump $3 - $4 billion and cluster bomb weapons, etc.," there's not 
going to be a resolution. As long as there's no resolution, there's 
going to 
be an inflammation increasing all over the Islamic world, and our 
national 
security will be compromised.

This campaign, this election, Amy, was basically a mandate-less 
election for 
the Democrats. There was really no mandate other than against Bush and 
do 
something about Iraq. Domestically, virtually no mandate about 
rearranging 
of power, shifting it from corporations to workers, consumers, 
taxpayers, to 
communities.

AMY GOODMAN: Ralph Nader, you mentioned Sherrod Brown, certainly will 
be one 
of the most progressive members of a new US Senate. Yet, in those 
waning 
days, as he was running for this Senate seat that he has just won from 
Ohio, 
he voted for the Military Commissions Act of 2006. Can you talk about 
the 
significance of this act?

RALPH NADER: That was a bad sign. That was, I think, not just a 
strategic 
mistake by Sherrod Brown. He's going to regret this. It was a character 
deficiency, just like, you know, Hillary Clinton's character 
deficiency. She 
refused to debate three third party Senate candidates, including Howie 
Hawkins in the Green Party, and the League of Women Voters was so 
upset, 
they withdrew co-sponsorship of the debate. We've got to focus on the 
ability of the Democrats to become very, very politically cynical in 
order 
to win. I don't think Sherrod Brown had to do that to win. That is a 
monstrous laceration of our constitutional rights, that Military 
Commissions. I hope it will be declared unconstitutional in its noxious 
provisions by the Supreme Court.

AMY GOODMAN: Ralph Nader, Hillary Clinton. There is some discussion 
that if, 
in fact, Democrats do take the Senate -- there are two very tightly 
contested races now, of course, Virginia and Montana, although at this 
point 
Democrats have very narrow leads in them -- the possibility that she 
would 
become the Majority Leader of the Senate.

RALPH NADER: Well, I don't think so. It's very hard to be Majority 
Leader of 
the Senate and run for president, which she's going to start to do 
right 
away. I think what we're seeing here is a drive for a coronation in the 
Democratic nomination. As Mark Warner drops out, maybe John Kerry has 
been 
damaged, I mean, she's going to have a huge war chest and just march to 
the 
nomination. And to do that, she's got to be absent a great deal from 
the 
Senate. And when you're Majority Leader in the Senate, you've got to be 
the 
valet for a lot of senators and you can't go out to Colorado or 
California 
or New York or West Virginia, as a presidential candidate has to.

AMY GOODMAN: The issue of money and politics, something you take on in 
a 
very big way. According to the nonpartisan Center for Responsive 
Politics, 
at least 2.8 billion dollars were spent in this election, making these 
the 
most expensive midterm elections in history. I want to talk about this 
big 
money in the big parties, the two big parties, and also third party 
politics 
today, and what you saw around the country.

RALPH NADER: Well, first of all, the mess with the voting machinery and 
the 
registration situation, this country is a mockery of obstructing people 
to 
vote, going back to the post-Civil War era. Now they have new ways to 
do it 
through these machines, through not distributing the machines, through 
challenging people's voting credentials. There's no other Western 
democracy 
that requires registration. In Canada, if you are counted as part of 
the 
regular census, you vote, period.

And so, what we need in this country, first of all, is a complete 
reform of 
electoral laws, including one federal standard for candidates running 
for 
federal office, for Congress and for the President, not 50 different 
state 
standards and more county standards. There needs to be criminal 
prosecutions. Notice you can obstruct people's right to vote, you can 
do 
what happened in Ohio and Florida, and because both parties want to be 
able 
to do it, if they're in power, at the state level, there's no 
prosecution 
tradition here, as there is, say, for procurement fraud. So nobody goes 
to 
jail. So, every two or four years, it's going to happen, more and more 
and 
more. And the number of ways that people can be obstructed from voting 
-- 
votes can be miscounted; that people can be falsely designated as 
ex-felons; 
the extent to which voting rolls can be shrunken, like in Cleveland, 
Ohio, 
by a Republican state government, Blackwell, Secretary of State -- all 
this 
is going to happen again and again, unless you have crackdowns, unless 
you 
have task forces that will prosecute these violations, and unless you 
have a 
national debate about universal voting, Amy.

We've got to ask ourselves -- jury duty is the only civic duty in our 
Constitution. We have a whole Bill of Rights, but we have very few 
duties. 
And if we have to obey thousands of laws passed by lawmakers, it seems 
to me 
that having voting be a civic duty, as it is in Australia and Brazil 
and 
some other countries, is the way to clear away all these manipulations 
and 
obstructions, because if you have a legal duty to vote --

AMY GOODMAN: You mean, mandatory.

RALPH NADER: Yes. If you have the duty to vote, then obstructing it 
becomes 
a very serious crime, whereas now it's just, you know, the political 
game 
the two parties play against one another. And the discussion of 
mandatory 
voting would include a binding "none of the above." So you can go to 
the 
polls or absentee vote for the ballot line, you can vote write-in, you 
can 
vote for your own person, write in your own name, or you can vote for a 
binding "none of the above." I think that takes care of any civil 
liberties 
problems. But it should be decided by a special national referendum.

AMY GOODMAN: Ralph Nader, we have to wrap up, but I just want to ask: 
Hillary Clinton spent something like $30 million on an almost 
uncontested 
race at the point where, you know -- of yesterday, certainly getting 
more 
nationally known. Are you going to be running for president in 2008?

RALPH NADER: It's too early to say. I do want to give you one quick 
sidebar, 
Amy. In Morgan County, USA, in Morgan County, West Virginia, with a 60% 
Republican registration advantage, the incumbent for county 
commissioner was 
defeated overwhelmingly, by 20 points, by a challenger. She beat him by 
20 
points. And that was done by person-to-person campaigning, which I 
think is 
going to be the way progressives in this country are going to win 
elections. 
This is a stunning victory over a Republican machine that ought to be 
studied, in Morgan County, West Virginia.

AMY GOODMAN: Ralph Nader, I want to thank you very much for joining us, 
two-time presidential candidate, joining us from Washington, D.C.

_________________________________________________________________




-- 


       
  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Tim McKee cell (860) 778-1304 or (860) 643-2282
   National Committee Member of the Green Party(Connecticut)
    Cliff Thornton for Governor- Campaign Manager


  Paid for by Thornton For Governor, Max Wentworth, Treasurer-   www.VoteThornton.com
   



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist10.pair.net/mailman/private/ctgp-news/attachments/20061108/2cf22e4e/attachment.html>

From greenpartyct at sbcglobal.net  Thu Nov  9 10:48:01 2006
From: greenpartyct at sbcglobal.net (Green Party-CT)
Date: Thu, 9 Nov 2006 07:48:01 -0800 (PST)
Subject: {news} (National GP News Release)Critcal Advances for Greens,
	Lay Foundation for 2008
Message-ID: <20061109154801.14031.qmail@web81403.mail.mud.yahoo.com>


GREEN PARTY OF THE UNITED STATES
http://www.gp.org

For Immediate Release:
Thursday, November 9, 2006

Contacts:
Scott McLarty, Media Coordinator, 202-518-5624,
mclarty at greens.org
Starlene Rankin, Media Coordinator, 916-995-3805,
starlene at greens.org


Critical advances for Greens on Election Day 2006
lay foundation for 2008

? Greens win ballot status in Illinois, with
gubernatorial candidate Rich Whitney's 11%,
overcoming prohibitive ballot access rules, and
in Nevada

? Strong antiwar vote in favor of warhawk
Democrats shows a disconnect in U.S. politics;
only Greens offered an antiwar platform; Greens
warn that Democrats in Congress will do little to
reverse Bush's foreign policy

? 2006 Green Party election news and results:
http://www.gp.org/2006elections


WASHINGTON, D.C. -- Green Party leaders called
the 2006 midterm election a small but important
step forward for the party, preparing Greens for
the 2008 presidential campaign.

According to initial returns, Greens won at least
35 races nationwide, with 18 wins in California,
on November 7.  Among the California victories is
Gayle McLaughlin, who defeated the incumbent for
Mayor of Richmond, the first city with more than
100,000 residents to have a Green mayor

"The number of votes gained and the increased
percentages in significant races show the party's
steady growth," said Rebecca Rotzler, co-chair of
the Green Party of the United States and Deputy
Mayor of New Paltz, New York.  "We maintained
ballot access in most states where we already had
it, and gained a key state, Illinois, thanks to
Rich Whitney, who received 11% in his run for
Governor."

Greens warned that antiwar voters may find
themselves frustrated by Democrats in Congress
during the next two years, especially on the war
front.

"Some Green candidates running for Congress
probably contributed to the defeat of
Republicans," said Jim Coplen, co-chair of the
national party.  "While Democratic candidates
offered weak criticism of Republicans on issues
like the war in Iraq, Green candidates sharply
criticized the war and other Bush policies. 
Ironically, outspoken Green criticism may have
translated into votes for Democrats among voters
who decided it was time to end Republican rule in
Congress.  Unfortunately, many of the winning
Democrats, like Hillary Clinton [N.Y.] and Howard
Berman [Calif.], support the war.  They will only
call for changes in military strategy in Iraq,
they'll support President Bush's threats of an
attack against Iran, and they'll maintain
uncritical endorsement of Israel's murderous and
illegal policies in regard to the Palestinian
people."


Thumbnail reports on Green campaigns across the
U.S.:

? Green candidate Rich Whitney drew 11% (325,598
votes) for Governor in Illinois, achieving ballot
status for the Green Party in preparation for the
2008 election.  This is the first time a national
third party has achieved ballot status in
Illinois since 1920; Illinois has difficult
ballot access rules and Gov. Rod Blagojevich
spent $800,000 in taxpayers' money trying to keep
Greens off the state ballot.
http://www.whitneyforgov.org http://www.ilgp.org

? Pat LaMarche, running on a strong universal
health care platform, drew nearly 10% in her
campaign for Governor of Maine.  Ms. LaMarche,
who qualified as a 'clean elections' candidate,
competed with the incumbent Democrat and a former
Democrat who had reregistered as an independent
in order to run, as well as a Republican.

Also in Maine, the Green Independent Party won
two seats on Portland City Council and maintained
four seats on the city's School Committee,
according to preliminary results.  Maine Greens
were disappointed in the defeat of John Eder, two
term member of the Maine statehouse.
http://pressherald.mainetoday.com/news/local/061108portland.html

? DC Statehood Greens won eight Advisory
Neighborhood Commission races and easily kept its
ballot line.  The Statehood Green Party has
replaced the Republican Party as Washington,
D.C.'s second party in terms of electoral
participation.

Joyce Robinson-Paul finished second out of two,
receiving 14,109 votes for 14.7% in her race for
D.C.'s U.S. Senate seat ('Shadow Senator'). 
Keith Ware finished second out of three in his
race for U.S. Representative, beating the
Republican. He received 12,533 votes for 12.7%.

? Green candidate Tom Kelly, running for the U.S.
House in Colorado's District 1, has received
25,096 votes for 21%. This is the highest
percentage for a Green running for Congress this
year.

? Green candidate Malachy McCourt, running for
Governor of New York, received 40,485 votes,
missing the state's requirement of 50,000 votes
in a presidential or gubernatorial race for
ballot status.  However, several other statewide
candidates received over 50,000 votes, and New
York Greens, led by senatorial candidate Howie
Hawkins <http://www.hawkinsforsenate.org>, are
calling for a legal challenge asking for the
state to recognize these votes as qualification
for Green Party ballot status in 2008:

Malachy McCourt for Governor/Alison Duncan for
Lt. Governor: 40,351 votes (0.97%)
Rachel Treichler for Attorney General: 57,564
votes (1.43%)
Julia Willebrand for Comptroller: 108,030 votes
(2.82%)
Howie Hawkins for U.S. Senate: 51,538 votes
(1.22%)

? Green candidate Gayle McLaughlin
<http://www.gaylemclaughlin.net> appears to have
won her race against an incumbent for Mayor of
Richmond, California, a few miles from Oakland
and San Francisco.  Ms. McLaughlin, who refused
corporate donations and raised about $14,000, was
outspent by the incumbent, who raised more than
$110,000 from contributors, the biggest of which
was Chevron.  Gayle first won office two years
ago when she ran for Richmond City Council. 
Richmond, with a population of 103,000, is now
the largest city with a Green mayor.

Also in California, incumbent City Council member
Larry Robinson was reelected in Sebastopol,
retaining the Council's Green majority, in place
since 2000

? In U.S. Senate races, Todd Chretien
(California) drew over 110,000 votes (some
precincts still haven't reported), more than any
other Green senatorial candidate.  In
Pennsylvania's 15th District, Greta Brown drew
31,443 votes, the most of any Green candidate for
the U.S. House.  14 Greens ran for the Senate, 42
for the House.

? The Massachusetts Green-Rainbow Party needed 3%
in a statewide vote to maintain ballot status. 
Dr. Jill Stein, running for Secretary of the
Commonwealth, accomplished this by receiving
351,495 votes (the most votes for any Green
candidate on November 7) for 18% in a two way
race.  Jamie O'Keefe, running for State Treasure,
also had a high enough vote percentage to
accomplish this. He received 16% (322,493 votes).

? The following state Green Parties appear to
have lost ballot status in the 2006 election:
Alaska, Connecticut, and Maryland.  However,
these parties have sufficient infrastructure to
collect petition signatures and place candidates
on the ballot in 2008 and are likely to regain
ballot status.

? 8.7 million voters across the U.S. voted for
withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq and for
impeachment resolutions on local and state
ballots that were promoted or supported by
Greens.  Troop withdrawal initiatives won in all
ten localities in Wisconsin, including Milwaukee,
and all 11 communities in Illinois, including
Chicago.  Of 139 cities and towns in
Massachusetts voting on the troop withdrawal
measures, only a handful voted nay on initiatives
demanding that Congress and the White House end
the war immediately.  In California, San
Francisco voters supported a local impeachment
measure by 59.41%. In Berkeley, a similar
resolution won the support of 68.56% of the
electorate.  Greens supported and led the
initiative campaigns; in April, 24 of 32
communities voted in support of the 'Troops Home
Now' resolutions that were promoted by Greens.
(More information:
<http://www.LibertyTreeFDR.org>)

"Tuesday's vote represents more of a defeat for
Republicans and the Bush agenda than a victory
for Americans who oppose the war on Iraq," said
Liz Arnone, co-chair of the Green Party of the
United States.  "Only the Green Party offered a
real antiwar platform, calling for immediate
withdrawal of U.S. forces from Iraq.  The danger
now is that Democrats in Congress will ignore the
will of the American people, according to
numerous polls and voters' initiatives, and keep
U.S. troops in Iraq while only criticizing the
Bush Administration on strategic grounds.  A lot
of antiwar votes may prove to have been wasted on
November 7."


MORE INFORMATION

Green Party of the United States
http://www.gp.org
1700 Connecticut Avenue NW, Suite 404
Washington, DC 20009.
202-319-7191, 866-41GREEN
Fax 202-319-7193

Green campaign listings, news, photos, and web
sites http://www.gp.org/2006elections
Database of 2006 Green candidates
http://www.greens.org/elections
Video clips of Green candidates
http://www.gp.org/2006elections/media.shtml
Green Party News Center
http://www.gp.org/newscenter.shtml


~ END ~


       
  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Tim McKee cell (860) 778-1304 or (860) 643-2282
   National Committee Member of the Green Party(Connecticut)
    Cliff Thornton for Governor- Campaign Manager


  Paid for by Thornton For Governor, Max Wentworth, Treasurer-   www.VoteThornton.com
   



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist10.pair.net/mailman/private/ctgp-news/attachments/20061109/f9f477d0/attachment.html>

From dbedellgreen at hotmail.com  Sat Nov 11 12:25:35 2006
From: dbedellgreen at hotmail.com (David Bedell)
Date: Sat, 11 Nov 2006 17:25:35 +0000
Subject: {news} election results
In-Reply-To: <BAY114-F17EC58E8A5EA044EBEDCD5A4F60@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <BAY124-F38049C904BCF1C3B5FCDBFD6F60@phx.gbl>

Chris:

I think the results posted on ctgreens.org are preliminary unofficial 
counts.  The official count is on the SotS website at
http://www.statementofvote-sots.ct.gov/StatementOfVote/WebModules/ReportsLink/OfficeTitle.aspx

I've used these figures to update the database at greens.org/elections

David

_________________________________________________________________
Stay in touch with old friends and meet new ones with Windows Live Spaces 
http://clk.atdmt.com/MSN/go/msnnkwsp0070000001msn/direct/01/?href=http://spaces.live.com/spacesapi.aspx?wx_action=create&wx_url=/friends.aspx&mkt=en-us



From dbedellgreen at hotmail.com  Tue Nov 14 00:42:07 2006
From: dbedellgreen at hotmail.com (David Bedell)
Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2006 05:42:07 +0000
Subject: {news} Nancy Burton's goat caravan in New Canaan Advertiser
In-Reply-To: <20061107060729.52005.qmail@web33612.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <BAY124-F3931B551FBF5AA3D679061D6EB0@phx.gbl>

Green Attorney General candidate uses goats to make nuclear impact

Thu 11/09/06
by Rachel Kirkpatrick
New Canaan Advertiser

Some may have thought it was a Halloween prank while driving by Town Hall 
last Wednesday, but the goats, standing in a green trailer, were actually 
there to campaign with Green Party attorney general candidate Nancy Burton, 
who finished third of three candidates in Tuesday's election.

Between October 30 and November 3, the "Goat Caravan" made stops all across 
the state, including the front lawn of the State Capitol in Hartford, as 
part of an effort to raise awareness of the dangers posed by nuclear plants, 
specifically Millstone Nuclear Power Station in Waterford.

The three goats, a mother, Katie, and two babies, were adopted by the 
Connecticut Coalition Against Millstone in October of 2005 after their farm, 
five miles north of Millstone, was sold to a developer.

Katie's milk has tested positive for high levels of strontium-90, a 
radioactive byproduct from nuclear materials.

Ms. Burton was running in the hopes of shutting down Millstone, which she 
said is posing a serious threat to the environment and residents who live 
within 50 miles of the plant. This includes some residents of Long Island.

Katie now provides her milk for monitoring radiation from Millstone.

Ms. Burton said Gov. Jodi Rell, a breast cancer survivor, "fell back" on her 
pledge to fund a $25,000 grant for the Tooth Fairy Project. Through the 
project, teeth are collected from children who suffer from cancer to analyze 
the levels of strontium-90 in their bodies. Strontium-90 is said to cause 
bone cancer and leukemia.

According to the Web site radiation.org, women living within 100 miles of a 
nuclear reactor have the greatest risk of dying of breast cancer. Alec 
Baldwin is among the many that support the Tooth Fairy Project.

Lucy Lee Evans and Gail Merrill, both of New Canaan, as well as David 
Bedell, Green Party candidate for State Senate in the 36th District, were 
among the group that campaigned November 1.

Ms. Merrill is surviving non-genetic breast cancer. She lives 25 miles 
"downwind" from a nuclear reactor and lost her mother to breast cancer.

"It's not about the money and it's not to benefit us. It's about keeping 
people - children, safe," said Ms. Merrill.

Information on the Millstone Nuclear Power Station can be found at the 
Connecticut Coalition Against Millstone Web site, mothballmillstone.org, and 
at Ms. Burton's campaign site, voteburton.org.

_________________________________________________________________
Try the next generation of search with Windows Live Search today!  
http://imagine-windowslive.com/minisites/searchlaunch/?locale=en-us&source=hmtagline



From greenpartyct at yahoo.com  Tue Nov 14 08:29:16 2006
From: greenpartyct at yahoo.com (Green Party-CT)
Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2006 05:29:16 -0800 (PST)
Subject: {news} (NEWS RELEASE) CT Greens Look to '07 and '08 After Historic
	Slate of Candidates
Message-ID: <20061114132917.52151.qmail@web81412.mail.mud.yahoo.com>


GREEN PARTY OF CONNECTICUT

 

  NEWS RELEASE- For Immediate Release- November 14, 2006

  Contact: Tim McKee, CT Green Party National Committee Person, cell

(860)860-778- 1304 or (860)-643-2282

  Ralph Ferrucci, U.S. Senate candidate (203) 430-9342

  Cliff Thornton, Green Party Candidate for Governor (860)

657-8438-Home or (860) 268-1294 cell

  Jean de Smet, State Co-Chair (860)456-2188 (Lt. Governor candidate)

 

CT GREENS LOOK TO `07 AND '08 AFTER HISTORIC SLATE OF CANDIDATES

  Millions vote for US Greens, elect 64 in 2006- total 223 in office

 

 

  Hartford, CT- Green Party candidates and officials reflected back on

their historic slate of state wide candidates and said it was well

worth the effort, in a statement released today. Breaking new ground

in Connecticut politics, with the first slate of third party

candidates for U.S. Senate and State Constitutional officers and the

first African-American candidate for Governor, Greens felt like they

made real progress in reaching these milestones, despite being shut

out of the debates by the Democrats and Republicans.

 

  Tim McKee, a National Committee person for The Greens explained,

"State Greens have elected city councilors in the past, but this time

we raised our profile to the highest level, on a state wide basis, for

the first time. We will continue to be part of the state political

process and have learned a lot from the past election. We gain several

ballot lines that we did not have before, but I think there IS STILL

SOME racism in the state as our line for Governor fell just short,

while all the under ticket including a few candidates who spent no

money GAINED ballot lines, mysteriously. But next time, if we have to

file lawsuits to get into debates, we will!

 

  McKee added "Our lawsuit against the new horrible campaign finance

reform law that SHUTS OUT Independents and third parties and that

Governor Rell bragged about in commercials, goes to a hearing this

spring."

 

  Cliff Thornton, candidate for Governor said "Our goal was to reach

out to young leaders, minority kids and those who did not have a voice

in the state's insider's mentality of government and politics. Yes,

Governor Rell and Mayor DeStefano LIED to the public that they wanted

me included in the debates and we did not get to discuss REAL issues

like the crumbing infrastructure, health care, race and crime, but I

will not go away! I spoke to media from across the country and even

world news outlets about our issues and almost every state paper or

media outlet, but I was shut OUT of the daily coverage of the nightly

news, that the two other candidates got as well as the debates. In the

end, Rell's "Rose Garden" strategy of playing it safe, swamped the

Democrat by almost 2 to 1 and the state lost out on debating OUR new

ideas."

 

  Most of the other state wide Green candidates said their were NO DEBATES for their office races, so even the Republicans were also shut out of debating the Democrat office holders. Mike DeRosa, candidate for

Secretary of State, said the other candidates held a debate but Susan

BYSIEWICZ refused to show or debate at another time.

 

  Nationally, Greens elected 64 candidates out OF 380 running in 2006

with several passing the 100,000 vote mark. Highlights include:

       Illinois Governor candidate RICH Whitney 11% or 325,589 votes

       Jill Stein, Sec of State MA 18% 351,495

       Jaime O'Keefe, Treasurer MA 16% 322,493

       Peter Camejo, Governor CA 2.3% 160,402

       Todd CHRETIEN, Senate CA 1.7% 111,402

       Pat LaMarche, Gov. ME. 10% 51,991 

 

  Local Greens are looking at the many town and city council races. In

2005, CT Greens ran 18 candidates for local offices.  Greens hope to elect new local city leaders, and having previously elected Greens in Hartford, New Haven and other towns.

 

  McKee added on a national level Greens are united in running a full,

strong candidate for President in 2008. Several Greens have announced

that they are planning Presidential runs, and Ralph Nader has not

ruled out a Presidential run in 2008, after supporting local Greens

and state parties.
   
  -30-
   
  National Green Party Press Release:  http://www.gp.org/press/pr_2006_11_09.shtml
  Web site: www.gp.org
   
  

       
  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Tim McKee cell (860) 778-1304 or (860) 643-2282
   National Committee Member of the Green Party(Connecticut)
    Cliff Thornton for Governor- Campaign Manager


  Paid for by Thornton For Governor, Max Wentworth, Treasurer-   www.VoteThornton.com
   



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist10.pair.net/mailman/private/ctgp-news/attachments/20061114/334111fb/attachment.html>

From greenpartyct at yahoo.com  Tue Nov 14 08:51:15 2006
From: greenpartyct at yahoo.com (Green Party-CT)
Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2006 05:51:15 -0800 (PST)
Subject: {news} (CT Green and play write Bill C. Davis)-" Whose Table?" (A
	case for impeachment)
Message-ID: <20061114135115.92726.qmail@web81410.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

Published on Sunday, November 12, 2006 by CommonDreams.org 
      Whose Table? 
     by Bill C. Davis
        When Nancy Pelosi and Howard Dean declare that impeachment is off the table one has to ask, at what table are they sitting? Do they see the Bush administration as chairman of a board on which they serve? Is this an investor stockholder meeting that is being given arbitrary goodfella parameters? 
When speaker Pelosi speaks about the "incompetence" of the president she is being polite and misleading. Neither she nor Howard Dean know in depth or in truth what created the decisions that have all our hands drenched in blood. They need to find out how the decision to invade Iraq happened and then decide what is on or off this odd, polished table at which we find ourselves having to sit quietly. 
Accusations of "Incompetence" take both Bush and Pelosi off the hook. Bush can say - "If I only knew." Pelosi can be the school principal who will know how to correct the execution of a criminal decision. But until she calls it what it is her exact articulation of words will be worthless. The "new direction" and "change of course" chatter will be revealed as the hollow bromides they are unless and until she stops calling what happened "incompetence." 
The arsonist who caused the most recent fires in California was tracked down as the fires were being fought. So too the culprits for this war need to be found, questioned and at least be relieved of their positions. And this can happen as and if the war begins to end. And as James Baker reports his findings and makes his suggestions someone from the newly elected congress might suggest that all war profits be returned to the US treasury. That would put a few scratch marks on the table. 
The population of the United States also needs to do a kind of examination of conscience. 76% of Americans were for the war in Iraq in April 2003. Sterile and exhilarating at the same time, it was a light show whose victims were far away and remote in every way. The protestors and human shields emerge now as American heroes. The manipulated population might be waking up and the question of how could this happen to us is one we need to ask not only of ourselves but demand that the new congress ask the commander-in-chief. 
While in Richmond, Virginia recently I saw a stunning piece of graffiti written in red - "Atone. Impeach. Now." It implies citizen culpability and power. We let this happen and we, through this newly elected congress, have a chance to atone. But taking the most powerful remedy off the table makes the table a set decoration and the people sitting at it actors mouthing words and playing pre-digested scenes. 
These seemingly fraternal and "bi-partisan" assurances are insults not only to the voters but to the integrity of the American logistics of representative government. If a president dupes congress, and uses the military as hitmen for reasons that were never and still are not clear, then he needs to be asked serious questions. And if his answers reveal high crimes, then the constitution provides for that. 
In fact, at this shiny, slippery table it's the constitution that should be engrained as the centerpiece. For awhile and for many dark and troubling reasons the president has kept it off and now the new speaker has decided to keep it off. But the question remains and needs to be asked again and again - at whose table do they think they're sitting? 
Bill C. Davis is a playwright. www.billcdavis.com 
###


       
  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Tim McKee cell (860) 778-1304 or (860) 643-2282
   National Committee Member of the Green Party(Connecticut)
    Cliff Thornton for Governor- Campaign Manager


  Paid for by Thornton For Governor, Max Wentworth, Treasurer-   www.VoteThornton.com
   



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist10.pair.net/mailman/private/ctgp-news/attachments/20061114/869c3a45/attachment.html>

From chapillsbury at igc.org  Wed Nov 15 22:46:11 2006
From: chapillsbury at igc.org (Charlie Pillsbury)
Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2006 22:46:11 -0500
Subject: {news} National Green Pages request for submissions
References: <008201c6ea80$2cec3970$6500a8c0@S0031616584>
Message-ID: <005f01c70931$c22e4c10$6500a8c0@S0031616584>

This is a reminder to submit your Op.Eds., Cartoons,
Pictures or State Reports to Green Pages for the
Winter issue. Please pass this on to your states,
caucuses and committees.

Green Pages, the national newspaper of the Green Party
of the United States,
is looking for concise opinion pieces (op-eds) for the
winter, 2006 issue,
as well as timely reports from states, caucuses, and
committees. (Please see
reports guidelines below.)

Opinion submissions are evaluated by the entire
editorial board on the basis
of relevance, timeliness, writing quality, research
quality and diversity. A
publishable opinion piece is informative, grounded in
fact, and uses logical
argument to make its case. Topics specific to Green
issues preferred.

DEADLINES AND WHERE TO SEND YOUR GREEN NEWS

-Op-eds (max 800 words) and letters to the editor (max
200 words) should be
sent by Novenber 30 to  baatty at gmail.com
-Unsolicited news briefs (max 350 words) should be
sent by November 30 to
greenpages at greens.org .
-Cartoons, illustrations, and charts should be sent by
November 30 to
ninth.st at verizon.net.
-Photos for op-eds, photos of Greens in action for
unsolicited news briefs,
with captions and photographer credits, should be sent
by November 30 to
the section editor who is receiving the related
article. Please indicate which story they are for.
-Head shots for op-eds should be sent by November 30
to
baatty at gmail.com
-State reports (max 300 words) or Caucus or committee
reports (max 300 words) should be sent by November 30
to mccorq at comcast.net or contact if expecting late
breaking news.  Please note that if the state report
concerns election results, it may be included in the
elections section which will be extensive this issue.
-Photos or logos for state/caucus/committee reports,
with captions and photographer
credits, should be sent by November 30 to
mccorq at comcast.net, Please
indicate which report they are for.

***If you have story ideas that don't fall into the
above categories, get in
touch with us at greenpages at greens.org.

***All text should be sent as an attached Word
document. Include a byline
indicating your Green affiliation (i.e. what state, if
any, you are
registered in). Word counts will be strictly enforced.
Submissions that are
longer than the word counts suggested above or that
are received after the
due date will not be considered.***

REPORTS GUIDELINES

Whenever possible, we strongly encourage you to
identify Greens from your
state/caucus/committee with a journalism/media
background to prepare the
state report and photos. In most cases, the person/s
who have knowledge
about what has happened in the past couple of months
would best be used as a
source for the reporter rather than actually writing
the report.

Here are some tips to keep in mind:

-Reports should be kept to a maximum of 300 words. If
you have a longer
feature in mind about major events in your state, or a
profile of a Green
officeholder or activist who has accomplished
something of note that would
make a good feature story for Green Pages, please
contact Deyva Arthur at
darthur at nycap.rr.com as soon as possible with a brief
query.

-Reports should have an emphasis on newsworthiness.
Some examples:
accomplishments, recognitions, trends, major plans
(e.g., the state plans to
run a full slate of candidates next year), new
projects in the works, etc.

-Think about your piece visually and find out early on
who can provide a
photograph to run with the text.
-Reports are news briefs and should follow basic
journalism standards. In
general we suggest that reports follow traditional
inverted pyramid format
(i.e. the most important information should be at the
top-if the editors
need to cut the report due to space constraints, they
should be able to cut
the last paragraph first, then the second-to-last
paragraph, etc.)

-Use the third person ("they"), not first person
("we") in reporting about
your states/caucus/committee activities. Avoid
editorializing in the
reports-just
report on the facts about what's happening in the
state/caucus/committee.
Stick to the basics: what, when, where, why, who, and
how.

-Consider using brief quotes to give voice to Greens,
to offer different
viewpoints and perspectives, and for reader interest.

-Be concise! Edit out any extra words or phrases.
Identify somebody ahead of
time who can edit your piece to cut out the fat.

-Avoid cliches. We get a lot of reports that include
lines like, "It isn't
easy being Green in XX state," or "XX state is working
hard and is Green and
growing," or other generalizations. While we
appreciate the sentiments,
space for reports is limited, and we ask that you
focus on issues and
actions.

-Avoid long lists and other information that make for
dull reading.

-Plan accordingly. Identify one or more writers,
photographers, and
editor/coordinators early on. We really appreciate
early submissions. Late
submissions cannot be accepted.

-Submit text as a Word document. Include a byline
indicating the reporter's
Green affiliation (i.e. what state, if any, they are
registered in).

-Photos should be JPGs, 200 dpi or larger, at a
physical size (height and
width) that they should be printed at. Minimum size is
1.875 inches wide
(one column wide--for head shots, for example. Submit
larger photos if they
include many people or complicated activity.). Include
who should be
credited for the photo, and the photographer's Green
affiliation (i.e. what
state, if any, they are registered in). Be sure to
include a one-sentence
caption with the photo to explain the content of the
photo to readers.

For complete submission guidelines, the Green Pages
editorial policy and a
style sheet, visit:
http://www.gp.org/greenpages/submissions.php

Still have questions? Reach us at
greenpages at greens.org.

David McCorquodale
Delaware delegate and Co-chair, Green Pages
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist10.pair.net/mailman/private/ctgp-news/attachments/20061115/61540258/attachment.html>

From chapillsbury at igc.org  Wed Nov 15 22:54:29 2006
From: chapillsbury at igc.org (Charlie Pillsbury)
Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2006 22:54:29 -0500
Subject: {news} GPUS Proposal ID 248: Establishment of Outreach Committee  
References: <BAY124-F39B4E8AF16E31F1CD1E860D6130@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <006701c70932$eb39ff90$6500a8c0@S0031616584>

(Note:  I voted in favor of this proposal, but have until 11/19 to reconsider my vote if a number of people object to my yes vote on this proposal)
      Proposal ID 248 
      Proposal Establishment of the Outreach Committee and approval of the Committee PPs 
      Presenter Fundraising Committee and Georgia Green Party 
      Floor Manager Jody Grage 
      Phase Voting 
      Discussion 10/16/2006 - 11/12/2006 
      Voting 11/13/2006 - 11/19/2006 
      Presens Quorum 0.6666 
      Consens Quorum A Majority of Yes and No Votes 

Background
While most committees address outreach to some extent, the Outreach
Committee (OC) is focused entirely on getting the Green message out to
people who have never heard of the Green Party or who don't know much about
GP-US. We want everybody in the USA to know about our 10 Key Values, and we
are developing tools and materials that state, local, and individual Greens
can easily use to educate and engage the public.

In July 2006, we launched our first two print projects: "Democracy Is
Coming," a 4-page handout that is an introduction to the Green Party; and an
English-Spanish palm-sized handout of the 10 Key Values. Both are available
for free download at http://www.gp.org/committees/outreach, and printed
copies of "Democracy Is Coming" are available in bulk from the online store.
Upcoming projects include web banner ad campaigns; and bilingual 10KV
handouts in Arabic, Chinese, and other languages. 
Proposal
The National Committee shall recognize the Outreach Committee as a standing
committee and approve its Policies & Procedures. 
Resources
CONTACT: Jody Grage; 2428 NW 56th, Seattle WA 98107; 206.71801529;
jody at gp.org 

http://www.gp.org/committees/outreach/

Becky Weber (DC) amandlagreen at yahoo dot com

Richard Scott (AZ) scotty at zygotz dot com

The ad-hoc Outreach Committee began preparing these Policies & Procedures
(P&Ps) in December 2005, shortly after its first teleconference in November
2005, but before application to the National Committee for approval as a
formal committee. The Outreach Committee was formed in the recognition of
the need for unified, creative, and engaging messages to new Green Party
members. A number of existing committees, such as the Media Committee, Green
Pages Editorial Board, Fundraising Committee, Merchandise Committee and the
Communications Committee are already engaged in such work; the purpose of
the Outreach Committee is to unify talents and avoid duplication of efforts.
Getting more people each day to register, vote, and identify as Greens is
vital to the Green Party.

Outreach Committee: Policies and Procedures

Outline

I. Mission statement and Committee structure

II. Membership eligibility, conduct, and removal
  1. Eligibility
  2. Membership
  a. Selection
  b. Provisional status
  c. Transferring membership to a different state
  d. Definition of active and inactive members
  1. Active member
  2. Inactive member
  3. Leave of absence
  3. Terms
  4. Responsibilities, Appropriate Conduct, and Censure
  a. Responsibilities
  b. Appropriate conduct
  c. Censure
  5. Resignations, Grounds for Removal, Removal Process, and Appeals
  a. Resignations
  b. Removal
  c. Grounds for removal
  d. Removal process
  e. Appeal process

III. Functioning of the committee
  1. Workflow
  2. Voting
  a. Consensus procedures
  b. Conduct of meetings
  3. Grievance procedures

IV. Appendices
  1. Netiquette guidelines
  2. Consensus procedure
  3. Minutes and the role of the minute taker

I. Mission statement

The Outreach Committee (OC) recognizes the need to develop innovative,
engaging long-term strategies to attract and recruit new members to the
Green Party. Numerous existing committees are already engaged in various
forms of outreach, and the OC is charged with unifying these efforts to
reinforce consistent messaging. The OC brings together representatives from
groups such as the Media Committee, Green Pages Editorial Board, Fundraising
Committee, and Merchandising Committee to avoid
duplication and to reinforce the work that each is doing. Its primary
purpose is to inform, engage, register, and recruit potential new members of
the Green Party. Secondarily, it will strive to better inform all US
residents about the Green Party.

COMMITTEE STRUCTURE

The Committee shall consist of Green Party members from the various state
parties who either have been approved by their state parties and/or are
currently serving as delegates to the GP-US Coordinating Committee.

Members who have not participated on line, in subcommittees, or on
teleconferences in the last three months shall be considered inactive
members and shall not be counted toward a quorum. An updated roster shall be
sent to the e-mail list at least every three months.

Two co-chairs, preferably reflecting gender balance, shall be elected with
staggered terms of two years each. If more than two candidates are nominated
for a single co-chair position, the committee shall vote using IRV. Members
may nominate themselves. Vacancies shall cause a vote for a replacement
co-chair. A recall election of a chair may be called, following the
procedure for any proposal.

The responsibilities of the co-chairs shall include keeping the committee on
task, maintaining a current roster of committee members, conducting votes,
and communicating with NC and SC members for the Outreach Committee and its
subcommittees. Co-chairs shall submit formal monthly reports to the NC list
detailing committee activities. The co-chairs shall come to explicit
agreement and continue to consult with each other about how their joint
responsibility is to be shared.

The committee may create working groups and subcommittees.

II. Membership eligibility, conduct, and removal

1. Eligibility

The Outreach Committee is a skills-based group which consists of Greens who
are already actively involved with existing GP-US committees, caucuses,
state/local offices, and working groups. Due to the overlapping nature of
the projects of the OC, part of the role of OC members will be to act as a
liaison between the OC and other committees. Sensitive strategy information
will be discussed and therefore it is crucial that OC members can be trusted
with access to such info, as demonstrated by their conduct with other GP-US
committees, caucuses, state/local offices, and working groups. Members
should bring experience in one or more of the following, or related areas:
media, public relations, information technology, fundraising and
development, or other areas as necessary.

Prospective members should provide information on their Green affiliation,
skills, and background to the OC, via the co-chairs. A r?sum?, curriculum
vitae, or website URL with work samples is helpful, but not required.

Technical skills: The OC communicates via e-mail, wikis (on the internet),
and phone conferences. Thus, familiarity with computers and access to the
web and e-mail is required. Wiki tutorials will be made available for those
who are not familiar with them.

2. Membership

a. Selection: Outreach Committee members may be proposed for appointment to
the OC in accordance with GP-US policy and procedure by a state Green Party,
Green caucus, local Green Party, or other known Green working group. New
members shall be selected by the OC, as per Article III of the GP-US bylaws,
from those proposed by a state, caucus, or network; at the invitation of the
OC; or from volunteers. The respective state parties and/or caucuses must
approve all prospective members, in writing usually via e-mail, to the
co-chairs. The OC shall select new members by consensus, giving due
consideration to the skills and commitment to growing the Green Party of the
prospective member. Decisions about Outreach Committee membership must be
based on the merits of a prospective member's demonstrated skills, expressed
intents, and performance as a provisional member. If consensus cannot be
reached, then approval shall require a two-thirds majority vote by the
active membership of the OC.

b. Provisional status: New members approved by the OC are considered in
provisional status for the first three months. The OC and the provisional
member can use this time to evaluate the new member's strengths and
weaknesses and determine suitability for a particular role and/or for
continued membership. Members who have been formally reprimanded for
inappropriate conduct, failure to fulfill their responsibilities, or other
reasonable cause that could result in removal if continued, are also in
provisional status. An established member may be placed in provisional
status by a majority vote of the OC.

c. Transferring membership to a different state: OC members should contact
their new state as soon as possible via e-mail when moving to a new state,
and cc the OC co-chairs, to seek approval for continued membership. A member
who is awaiting such approval is in provisional status. Assuming a
good-faith effort has been made within three months of the move, OC members
will retain their voting rights in the interim.

d. Definition of active and inactive members:

  1. Active member: Active members are defined as those members who have:
posted to the listserve or wiki in the last three months, or participated in
a telephone conference call. (See Voting, below).

  2. Inactive member: A member who has done none of the actions listed
above as evidence as active membership is considered inactive. A member who
has been inactive for six months, is, effectively, no longer a working
member and may be subject to removal from the OC.

  3. Leave of absence: OC members may request a leave of absence from the
co-chairs for a stated period of time up to 12 months; upon confirmation of
leave of absence by the co-chairs, this time will not be counted as
inactivity.

3. Terms

Length of service: OC members do not have set term limits. The OC requests a
blanket waiver from the National Committee so that more than three members
per state may serve on the OC. Advisors may participate on the listserve or
phone conferences.

Roles are discussed on an on-going basis and are subject to change.
Co-chairs serve two-year terms. The position of production editor for
producing the tabloid or other materials is a work-for-hire position and
that person is responsible for all federal, state, local withholdings due in
regards to compensation for work.

4. Responsibilities, Appropriate Conduct, and Censure

a. Responsibilities: OC members are expected to serve in any of the roles
defined above and to devote a sufficient amount of time to get their tasks
done. Once a task is accepted, the member is expected to finish it, or to
find another who can take on the work and complete it by deadline. Members
are expected to work to promote and improve the Green Party of the United
States and refrain from conduct that is detrimental to the OC or the Green
Party.

b. Appropriate conduct: Members in good standing are expected to be active,
working members of a team. To that end, they are expected to fulfill
membership responsibilities and work toward smooth functioning of outreach
projects.

  1. The listserve exists for the business of GP-US Outreach Committee
projects; hence, posting that interferes with existing or potential projects
cannot be tolerated. Please refrain from posting tangential messages.

  2. Members of the OC's listserve are expected to observe netiquette
guidelines (see Appendix I), keep off-topic posts to a minimum, and
immediately take any off-topic discussion off list if requested by another
OC member.

  3. Members who consistently violate netiquette guidelines or whose
posts prevent timely progress or completion of OC projects may be
temporarily removed or censured from the list.

c. Censure: The OC reserves the right to censure a OC member by removal from
the listserve if the member repeatedly violates appropriate conduct. Censure
is considered a serious action.

  1. A vote of the OC should be held before a member is censured or
permanently removed from the listserve. Grounds for censure should be
documented and presented to the OC for consideration prior to voting.
  2. However, in an extreme situation, the OC officers may temporarily
remove a OC member but must then immediately seek consensus, or two-thirds
majority support for continuing such actions (i.e. removal or censure) from
the full OC.
  3. All votes regarding censure or removal require a quorum of the OC.
  4. The offending OC member will be allowed to stand in his/her own
defense and cast a vote regarding removal or censure.
  5. Removal or censure from the listserve may be short-term, long-term,
or permanent, and each allegation will be judged individually and term of
censure will be set by consensus of the OC.
  6. Two or more incidents of censure by the OC will constitute grounds
for permanent removal from the OC.
  7. If and when GP-US creates or appoints a working judicial authority
to review such matters, an appeal may be made to such authority.

5. Resignations, Grounds for Removal, Removal Process, and Appeals

At the time that these P&Ps were submitted, the BRPP was in the process of
creating a proposal for removal procedures. Once such a proposal is approved
by the National Committee, the OC will modify these P&Ps in accordance with
National Committee guidelines.

a. Resignations. Members may resign by sending a notice of resignation to
one or both of the co-chairs via e-mail.

  1. Resignations must be in writing, and should be copied to the
member's state party.
  2. Members are enjoined not to time their resignation in the midst of
OC projects. All resignations will take effect after current projects are
completed, ensuring their portion of the project has been completed and they
remain available for questions.

b. Removal. OC members may be removed from the OC for inactivity or for
cause, by either the OC or the state, in accordance with their procedures.

c. Grounds for removal include, but need not be limited to:
  (i) Inactivity of six months or longer
  (ii) Misrepresentation of the policies or decisions of the OC to
states, the CC, the public, or others with whom the OC interacts
  (iii) Falsification of content or distortion of facts about the Green
Party of the United States
  (iv) Plagiarism
  (v) Sustained or repeated disruption of production or other OC business
(See Appendix 1)
  (vi) Distributing or informing non-OC members about sensitive strategy
or plans for OC projects in such a manner that will potentially harm the
impact of such projects
  (vii) Sustained or repeated disruptive use of the listserve for a
personal agenda, non-OC business, or repeated netiquette violations
  (viii) Misrepresentation of skills or falsification of credentials
  (ix) Sustained or repeated dishonesty, aggressive or violent behavior,
or, in extreme cases, a single such action
  (x) Repeated failure to meet deadlines that have an impact on a
project's timely completion

d. Removal process:

  1. If consensus is not reached regarding the removal of a OC member, a
two-thirds majority of the active membership is sufficient to remove a
member. Once this has been reached, the member in question may be
temporarily removed from the listserve if the nature of the member's e-mail
postings is, in part or whole, the reason that they are being removed from
the OC.
  2. Prior to actual removal of membership, the OC or some portion
thereof must first request resignation from the member.
  3. In presenting such a request for resignation, the OC or individual
members must detail the reasoning, providing evidence of one or more of the
above grounds for removal.
  4. If the member in question declines to resign, then, as a courtesy,
the OC may request recall from the state/caucus.
  5. If no response is received within one week of a good faith effort to
contact the individual via e-mail and by a phone call, the OC must send
notice of removal to the state/caucus, or, as a courtesy, request recall.
  6. Should the state/caucus refuse to recall its member, or fail to
respond in a timely fashion, the OC may then remove that member from the OC,
providing a statement outlining its reasons for doing so, with
aforementioned evidence, notifying both the member and the appropriate
state/caucus party contacts (i.e., state party chair, state party recording
secretary, and the Secretary of the GP-US).
  7. A member removed by a state/caucus may be retained, as an observer,
contributor, or advisor to the OC should the OC so decide. Such a decision
should be reached by consensus, or, failing that, two-thirds approval.

e. Appeal Process: After nine months the ex-member may appeal the decision
of the OC, or, after one and a half years, re-apply for membership. An
appeal or reapplication should be made in writing and sent by e-mail to the
co-chairs. The burden is on the ex-member to demonstrate why they should be
reinstated. The OC will review the appeal or reapplication and inform the
ex-member of its decision within three month. If and when the GP-US
identifies a working judicial authority to review such matters, an appeal
will be made to such authority.

III. Functioning of the OC

1. Workflow

a. Work plan: The OC may choose to produce an annual work plan for the
year's projects as a guideline. The work plan will serve as a flexible
outline, to be adapted as needed.

b. Work process: The OC shall choose the working process that best suits its
members, according to its work plan, availability of its members and the
flow of work.

2. Voting

Online voting takes place among the OC when a member submits an e-mail to
the listserve with the subject line "Decision Item: XXX" (where XXX
indicates the topic to be voted on). The default time to cast a vote, unless
otherwise specified, is 48 hours, from official proposal of a motion or
action. Voting may also take place via phone conferences; in this case,
members who were not on the phone or who did not vote may also cast a vote
on line within 48 hours from the beginning of the phone conference. The onus
is on the members who were not on the phone call. Final tallies are taken
from those votes or formal abstentions submitted. A quorum of one-half the
active membership is required for voting on major decisions, that will have
an impact on future issues of the OC, such as approval, removal, or censure
of members; changes to the policies and procedures; or grievance decisions.
For less significant matters that affect the timeliness of an OC project, a
quorum may not be
  necessary or practical, and simple majority voting will suffice.
Abstentions, like yeas or nays, must be actively submitted. Nonparticipation
in a vote does not constitute an abstention.

a. Consensus procedures (see Appendix II)

  The OC shall at all times attempt to come to decisions by consensus,
ranked voting (in the case of selecting contributions for publication), or
by majority voting (simple majority when it is a timely OC project decision
that immediately impacts the project at hand; or two-thirds, if it is a
major decision that will affect future projects as well), if consensus
cannot be achieved.

b. Conduct of meetings

  The OC will strive for consensus, encouraging input from all members
regarding important matters, but will operate by majority vote. All
decisions by the OC will be made by each member in good standing present
casting one vote with a majority of affirmative votes required for passage.
A majority is defined as more than half the total votes cast.

  During open discussions, all present are encouraged to participate in a
respectful and supportive manner and are discouraged from speaking too long
so that all may speak. The goal of a discussion is an open exchange of ideas
without personal biases and criticism.

OC meetings will be conducted by an agreement seeking process, as follows.
In this process, all items begin in consensus mode, with the facilitator
seeking to weave the input into a unified body that gradually approaches
consensus.

  If, in calling for concerns, stand-asides, and blocks, consensus is not
reached, the facilitator will make a second attempt, seeking to incorporate
the concerns of the person(s) blocking. If in the second call there are
still blocks, decision making will automatically shift to voting process for
the remainder of the item. The item under consideration must pass by a
simple majority in order to be adopted.

c. Selection of projects

  The OC strives for consensus when planning OC projects. Projects are
generated via the listserve as well as on phone conference calls.

3. Grievance procedures

A grievance is any dispute, controversy, or difference between the OC
members, or between or among OC members and/or non-members regarding the OC
and/or its projects. Examples of grievances could include, but are not
limited to: unfair treatment, discrimination, or failure to follow official
rules, procedures, principles, deadlines, etc., of the OC.

a. For contributors:

Non-OC members who have a grievance about an OC project or member concerning
OC projects may present a formal written complaint to the OC. Further appeal
must go through the complainant's state delegation.

b. For OC members:

1. The OC member must present a formal written description of the grievance
to the OC co-chairs or, in the case of a grievance against both co-chairs,
the Steering Committee member in whose portfolio the OC resides, within two
weeks of the occurrence of the difficulty. Consideration of any grievance
submitted later than two weeks from the date of the grievance shall not be
given.

2. The OC member shall discuss the written grievance with the co-chairs and
the individual or individuals against whom the grievance has been filed
within one week of its submission, or within one week of forwarding the
paper to the printer. The co-chairs shall respond in writing within one week
of this discussion.

3. If the grievance is not satisfactorily settled or if the co-chairs fail
to respond within the allocated time after having received the grievance or
after the discussion of the grievance, it shall be presented in writing to
the Steering Committee (SC) member in whose portfolio the Green Pages
resides, or to the Secretary of the GP-US if originally submitted to the SC
portfolio holder. The SC member shall schedule a meeting with the member
within two weeks of receipt of the grievance. Within one week of the
meeting, the SC member shall provide a written decision on this grievance,
or elect to refer the matter to the Dispute Resolution Committee.

4. If the problem remains undecided, the member, the OC, or the Steering
Committee may request in writing a review of the matter by the Dispute
Resolution Committee.

Any and all decisions made in accordance with the above provisions will be
made to afford the grievant the opportunity to be heard by those not
involved with the original decisions. In the event that a grievant has a
dispute with the entire OC or a significant number of OC members, the
grievance must be taken outside the OC and presented to the Dispute
Resolution Committee for hearing.

All decisions will be made based solely on the facts of the case.

All decisions made must be consistent with providing the grievant with due
process including decisions based upon taking the facts and applying the
Green Party principles.

IV. Appendices

Appendix I: Netiquette Guidelines

Please refer to "The Core Rules of Netiquette," by Virginia Shea, which can
be viewed at: http://www.albion.com/netiquette/book/

If and when GP-US creates its own set of netiquette guidelines for use by
all GP-US groups, the official GP-US netiquette guidelines would replace
those by Shea.

Appendix II: Consensus Procedure *

Note that consensus is a specific process as well as a result. Consensus
requires people to come to unity-agreeing with the essence of a decision,
and feeling that they can live with the decision. Consensus does not require
unanimity-feeling that every detail of the agreement is exactly as you would
have preferred.

Elements of consensus:

  * Standing or stepping aside

  If you cannot agree with a decision for personal reasons, you should
stand aside from the decision. You will not be expected to actively
implement it, but you do agree not to undermine it. Your position is noted
in the minutes.

  * Blocking or "standing in the way"

  If you cannot agree with a decision, not for personal reasons but
because you can see that it threatens the group on a very deep level, it is
your responsibility to block that decision. This step is taken only rarely
and after much reflection.

Appendix III: Minutes and the role of the minute taker

Minutes need to be carefully recorded and retained. An accurate record of
the exact wording of each decision made during the meeting is essential. The
ongoing implementation of actions depends on a clear statement of decisions
and the plans for their implementation. Every item on the agenda gets an
entry in the minutes. Minutes of a meeting summarize discussions and
actions, but no names are associated with particular statements of
positions. In consensus ideas are contributed to the group as a whole. Once
uttered, they are no longer "owned" by an individual but by the group. Names
are recorded when listing those present, when committee members are named,
when individuals volunteer for tasks or when someone stands aside from a
decision.

The secretary must be able to listen and summarize accurately. The summary
is general, recording only the salient points. It can usually be done in one
or two paragraphs, covering the main thrust of the discussion, the concerns
that have been raised, and ways that were formulated to carry the discussion
along. A decision must be recorded exactly, word for word, at the time of
the decision, and then read back to the group for its approval. It is
important that the minute taker read the decision exactly as it will be in
the minutes. This wording will be binding until a consensus is reached to
change it. It is vital that everyone hears, understands, and agrees to the
actual wording of any decision recorded.

A specific statement of how the decision will be implemented should
accompany each decision. This includes the names of those who will follow
through and a timetable for their action.

The entire minutes should be written promptly after the meeting, while the
memory of the discussion is still clear. Circulate the draft minutes to all
those who were present.

  * Note: Consensus and minute-taking procedures based on the work of
Lysbeth Borie and the Alpha Institute.

References
None

Questions about this system?
Contact the Voting Admin.
The Green Party of the United States voting system is free software, licensed under the GNU General Public License (GPL).
You can download a copy here.
To independently verify a ranked choice vote, or for information about how that works, go to Jonathan Lundell's Voting Page and upload the ballot file from the ranked choice vote result page. JL's ranked choice module is licensed under an alternate free software license. 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Green Party of the United States

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist10.pair.net/mailman/private/ctgp-news/attachments/20061115/90329a37/attachment.html>

From chapillsbury at igc.org  Wed Nov 15 23:01:23 2006
From: chapillsbury at igc.org (Charlie Pillsbury)
Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2006 23:01:23 -0500
Subject: {news} GPUS Proposal 250
References: <BAY124-F39B4E8AF16E31F1CD1E860D6130@phx.gbl>
	<007601c6ea7f$c12b1490$6500a8c0@S0031616584>
Message-ID: <008401c70933$e1e0b2d0$6500a8c0@S0031616584>

Discussion has begun for the following proposal: any comments?

Proposal ID: 250
Proposal: National Committee Certification of 2006 Steering Committee Election
Floor Manager: Budd Dickinson, budd.dickinson at sbcglobal.net
Discussion Dates: 11/13/2006 - 11/26/2006
Voting Dates: 11/27/2006 - 12/03/2006

Voting ends at Midnight Pacific Time

The GP-US strives for consensus, which involves several steps,
 taken in order..

Clarifying questions and responses from the group making the proposal.
Airing of concerns and discussion about how to improve the proposal
by taking into consideration those concersn
Call for consensus on the final proposal.

Background: It has been brought to our attention that we have been
remiss in not asking for NC approval (certification) of the Tabulation
Committee's report on the 2006 Steering Committee elections at the
Annual Meting in Tucson. Per our bylaws (Proposal #222), following
the Steering Committee election, there is a 14 day period in which the
report can be challenged. Given no challenge, the NC is to approve
(certify) the results.

Following the 2006 election, the 14 day challenge period was
announced, with no challenges being brought forth during that period.
The SC election, therefore, was settled, with the exception of the
remaining house-keeping measure of having the National Committee vote
to certify it. Since there were no challenges, the results stood as
originally reported, and it seems everyone forgot to take the final
step toward certification. Therefore, as a housekeeping measure, the
Steering Committee is sending this long overdue proposal.

Proposal: The GPUS National Committee hereby certifies the Tabluation
Committee's report on 2006 Steering Committee Election, and the
election results.

Resources: TIME FRAME: Retroactive to August, 2006.

CONTACT: Holly Hart hhart at blue.weeg.uiowa.edu

References:
"2. Receipt & Right to Challenge Election Results

When the GNC receives a report from the Election Tabulation Committee
or a properly filed Challenge as described in paragraph 3., below, the
question shall be put to the GNC, on the fourteenth day following the
transmittal of the report, on certifying the results as so reported,
and as a distinct question, on sustaining each Challenge as may have
been timely filed. . . . Such questions shall be resolved by a simple
majority vote of the GNC."

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist10.pair.net/mailman/private/ctgp-news/attachments/20061115/79a653ee/attachment.html>

From chapillsbury at igc.org  Wed Nov 15 23:03:48 2006
From: chapillsbury at igc.org (Charlie Pillsbury)
Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2006 23:03:48 -0500
Subject: {news} GPUS Proposal 251
References: <BAY124-F39B4E8AF16E31F1CD1E860D6130@phx.gbl>
	<007601c6ea7f$c12b1490$6500a8c0@S0031616584>
Message-ID: <009001c70934$37fa7a20$6500a8c0@S0031616584>

Discussion has begun for the following proposal: any comments?

Proposal ID: 251
Proposal: Proposal to Amend the Steering Committee PPs
Floor Manager: Jim Coplen, jcoplen at fastmail.fm
Discussion Dates: 11/13/2006 - 11/26/2006
Voting Dates: 11/27/2006 - 12/03/2006

Voting ends at Midnight Pacific Time

The GP-US strives for consensus, which involves several steps,
 taken in order..

Clarifying questions and responses from the group making the proposal.
Airing of concerns and discussion about how to improve the proposal
by taking into consideration those concersn
Call for consensus on the final proposal.

Background: The Steering Committee P&Ps, 2. Meeting and Conference Call Procedures,
B. Executive Session Policy currently reads:

 The GPUS Steering Committee will go into Executive Session only under
very specific circumstances. Executive Session is appropriate only for
personnel matters, sensitive legal and financial matters in which the
Party itself is involved in actual or likely legal proceedings, and
when dealing with the proprietary information of vendors and
contractors. No other circumstances are appropriate for Executive
Session.

 Since there are times when the Steering Committee needs to have
sensitive conversations concerning potential electoral candidates or
elected officials, this situation is being added to appropriate
circumstances for Executive Session.

Proposal: The Steering Committee P&Ps, 2. Meeting and Conference Call Procedures,
B. Executive Session Policy will be amended to read:

 The GPUS Steering Committee will go into Executive Session only under
very specific circumstances. Executive Session is appropriate only for
personnel matters, sensitive legal and financial matters in which the
Party itself is involved in actual or likely legal proceedings,
sensitive conversations concerning potential electoral candidates or
elected officials, and when dealing with the proprietary information of
vendors and contractors. No other circumstances are appropriate for
Executive Session.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist10.pair.net/mailman/private/ctgp-news/attachments/20061115/ae33ba3a/attachment.html>

From greenpartyct at yahoo.com  Thu Nov 16 14:41:17 2006
From: greenpartyct at yahoo.com (Green Party-CT)
Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2006 11:41:17 -0800 (PST)
Subject: {news} Iran hangs man on Sodomy charge, condemns German Green Party
Message-ID: <20061116194117.71550.qmail@web81411.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

Iran hangs another man on sodomy charge         Wed Nov 15, 6:38 PM ET 
  

  SUMMARY: The latest victim of Iran's anti-gay repression is executed before hundreds of people, allegedly for running a prostitution ring.
  Another Iranian man has been hanged in public on the charge of sodomy, this time Tuesday in the western city of Kermanshah, the nonprofit news service Iran Focus reported. 
  Shahab Darvishi was charged with organizing a "corruption ring," assault and "lavat," or sodomy, Iran Focus reported, quoting Iran's official news agency. 
  Darvishi was hanged in the evening in Kermanshah's Freedom Square in front of hundreds of people, the report said. 
  "Iran tries to portray these people as dangerous criminals," said Hossein Alizadeh, communications coordinator of the International Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Commission in New York. 
  "Though sodomy itself is a capital crime, they always say there were other things that were wrong. In this case, they accused him of running a prostitution ring. 
  "Unfortunately, the lack of due process makes it practically impossible to investigate what really happened," Alizadeh said. 
  Under Iran's Islamic penal code, gay sex even between consenting adults is punishable by death. Several public hangings of reputed gay men have been reported in the last two years, prompting the international gay rights group to call for a United Nations investigation. 
  When Iran in July 2005 hanged two teenagers accused of being gay, human rights activists around the world took note. In that case, the youths had been detained for 14 months and lashed 228 times. Several European nations began accepting homosexuality as cause for granting asylum to Iranian refugees, most recently the Netherlands, after a long partisan struggle, in October of this year. 
  Significantly, Alizadeh said, Iran issued its report of the latest execution only in Persian. "They wanted to send a lesson to the people in the country," he said. "They didn't want to call international attention to it." 
  Alizadeh said that despite official harassment and against long odds, gay Iranians have a Persian Gay and Lesbian Organization and an Internet presence, based in Canada, at www.pglo.net. The group operates largely in secret; last month, Alizadeh said, the person in charge of health issues had his identity revealed and had to flee the country. 
  Iranian officials condemn homosexuality abroad as well. A 2005 Iranian state radio commentary criticized same-sex marriages in Western countries. Ayatollah Ebrahim Amini, an influential cleric, said in a 2002 sermon in Qom that gay and lesbian marriages reflect a weakness of Western culture, and Ayatollah Ali Meshkini in a 2000 sermon in Qom criticized the German Green Party for being pro-gay, Iran Focus reported. (Barbara Wilcox, Advocate) If you'd like to know more, you can find stories related to Iran hangs another man on sodomy charge .
  
  


  
    Copyright ? 2006 Planet Out. 
Copyright ? 2006 Yahoo! Inc. All rights reserved.

          Copyright 2006 ? Yahoo! Inc.  Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Send Feedback | Help   if (window.yzq_a == null) document.write("");          if (window.yzq_a) { yzq_a('p', 'P=bp1DqkSOwhUxIolURS6Fnwp1RAkfh0VcvhgAAOpc&T=1afuhtnig%2fX%3d1163705880%2fE%3d7666256%2fR%3dnews%2fK%3d5%2fV%3d1.1%2fW%3d8%2fY%3dYAHOO%2fF%3d3797821798%2fH%3dY2FjaGVoaW50PSJuZXdzIiBjb250ZW50PSJtYW47Y29ycnVwdGlvbjtjcmltZTtpdDtJbnRlcm5ldDtoZWFsdGg7aWRlbnRpdHk7cmVmdXJsX25ld3NfeWFob29fY29tIiByZWZ1cmw9InJlZnVybF9uZXdzX3lhaG9vX2NvbSIgdG9waWNzPSJyZWZ1cmxfbmV3c195YWhvb19jb20i%2fS%3d1%2fJ%3d52C28E44'); yzq_a('a', '&U=1395dfamj%2fN%3dZ1wgE9G_fyw-%2fC%3d229842.2255380.3690798.1919853%2fD%3dFOOT%2fB%3d1194356'); }   
   if (window.yzq_a == null) document.write("");      if (window.yzq_a) yzq_a('p', 'P=bp1DqkSOwhUxIolURS6Fnwp1RAkfh0VcvhgAAOpc&T=1afk1ud6e%2fX%3d1163705880%2fE%3d7666256%2fR%3dnews%2fK%3d5%2fV%3d1.1%2fW%3d9%2fY%3dYAHOO%2fF%3d2112542972%2fH%3dY2FjaGVoaW50PSJuZXdzIiBjb250ZW50PSJtYW47Y29ycnVwdGlvbjtjcmltZTtpdDtJbnRlcm5ldDtoZWFsdGg7aWRlbnRpdHk7cmVmdXJsX25ld3NfeWFob29fY29tIiByZWZ1cmw9InJlZnVybF9uZXdzX3lhaG9vX2NvbSIgdG9waWNzPSJyZWZ1cmxfbmV3c195YWhvb19jb20i%2fS%3d1%2fJ%3d52C28E44'); if (window.yzq_gb & window.yzq4) yzq4(); else if (window.yzq_eh) yzq_eh();   
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist10.pair.net/mailman/private/ctgp-news/attachments/20061116/ec85a636/attachment.html>

From greenpartyct at yahoo.com  Thu Nov 16 14:44:21 2006
From: greenpartyct at yahoo.com (Green Party-CT)
Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2006 11:44:21 -0800 (PST)
Subject: {news} Gore vs. Nader in Oscar hunt
Message-ID: <20061116194422.47223.qmail@web81402.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

      Back to Story - Help
  

      
Al Gore's `Truth' competes for an Oscar         By DAVID GERMAIN, AP Movie Writer 52 minutes ago 
  

  Al Gore has entered the Academy Awards campaign.
  "An Inconvenient Truth," which presents the former vice president's case about the dangers of global warming, is among 15 feature-length documentaries that made the short list for Oscar consideration, the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences announced Wednesday.
  Ralph Nader, the Green Party candidate who Democrats say siphoned votes from Gore in the 2000 presidential election, also is in the Oscar mix with "An Unreasonable Man," a documentary examining his decades as a consumer activist and critic of the establishment.
  Also in the running are two documentaries featuring church leaders involved in sex scandals. "Jesus Camp," which follows children being groomed in evangelical beliefs, features a scene in which superstar minister Ted Haggard condemns homosexuality. Haggard has since been fired from his megachurch amid allegations he had sex with a male prostitute and took drugs.
  "Deliver Us From Evil" centers on defrocked Roman Catholic priest Oliver O'Grady, who was deported to his native Ireland after serving seven years in a California prison for molesting two boys. O'Grady has admitted abusing at least 25 children, the film questioning how much church leaders, including Los Angeles Cardinal Roger Mahony, knew about those crimes.
  The U.S. war in Iraq and its ramifications also are well represented among potential documentary nominees. On the Oscar short list is "Shut Up & Sing," which examines the backlash against the Dixie Chicks after lead singer Natalie Maines told a concert crowd on the eve of the war in 2003 that the country trio was ashamed President Bush comes from Texas, their home state.
  Other Iraq-related documentaries up for consideration include "The War Tapes," edited from footage shot by troops serving in Iraq; "The Ground Truth," featuring Iraq veterans discussing their disillusionment with the war; and "Iraq in Fragments," offering portraits of Iraqis coping with the U.S. led occupation.
  The list of 15 contenders was selected by the academy's documentary screening committee from 81 eligible films. Members of the academy's documentary branch will select five nominees from the short list, and finalists will be announced with the rest of the Oscar nominations Jan. 23.
  The 79th Oscars will be presented Feb. 25.
  http://www.oscars.org
  
  


  


    Copyright ? 2006 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. The information contained in the AP News report may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without the prior written authority of The Associated Press. 

          Copyright 2006 ? Yahoo! Inc.  Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Send Feedback | Help   if (window.yzq_a == null) document.write("");          if (window.yzq_a) { yzq_a('p', 'P=X.3mT0SOwhUxIolURS6Fnw5SRAkfh0VcvzAACblX&T=1b3vi1k60%2fX%3d1163706160%2fE%3d8903512%2fR%3dnews%2fK%3d5%2fV%3d1.1%2fW%3d8%2fY%3dYAHOO%2fF%3d2294877243%2fH%3dY2FjaGVoaW50PSJuZXdzIiBjb250ZW50PSJ2aWNlIHByZXNpZGVudDtnbG9iYWwgd2FybWluZztlbGVjdGlvbjtNYW47Y2hpbGRyZW47aG9tZTtJcmFxO3JlZnVybF9uZXdzX3lhaG9vX2NvbSIgcmVmdXJsPSJyZWZ1cmxfbmV3c195YWhvb19jb20iIHRvcGljcz0icmVmdXJsX25ld3NfeWFob29fY29tIg--%2fS%3d1%2fJ%3d4DC28E44'); yzq_a('a', '&U=139jen63m%2fN%3dc94nE9G_fyw-%2fC%3d229842.2255380.3690798.1919853%2fD%3dFOOT%2fB%3d1194356'); }   

   if (window.yzq_a == null) document.write("");      if (window.yzq_a) yzq_a('p', 'P=X.3mT0SOwhUxIolURS6Fnw5SRAkfh0VcvzAACblX&T=1b3dpbnq5%2fX%3d1163706160%2fE%3d8903512%2fR%3dnews%2fK%3d5%2fV%3d1.1%2fW%3d9%2fY%3dYAHOO%2fF%3d2178087508%2fH%3dY2FjaGVoaW50PSJuZXdzIiBjb250ZW50PSJ2aWNlIHByZXNpZGVudDtnbG9iYWwgd2FybWluZztlbGVjdGlvbjtNYW47Y2hpbGRyZW47aG9tZTtJcmFxO3JlZnVybF9uZXdzX3lhaG9vX2NvbSIgcmVmdXJsPSJyZWZ1cmxfbmV3c195YWhvb19jb20iIHRvcGljcz0icmVmdXJsX25ld3NfeWFob29fY29tIg--%2fS%3d1%2fJ%3d4DC28E44'); if (window.yzq_gb & window.yzq4) yzq4(); else if (window.yzq_eh) yzq_eh();   
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist10.pair.net/mailman/private/ctgp-news/attachments/20061116/a975b5aa/attachment.html>

From amyvasnunes at hotmail.com  Thu Nov 16 23:20:36 2006
From: amyvasnunes at hotmail.com (Amy Vas Nunes)
Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2006 23:20:36 -0500
Subject: {news} GPUS Proposal ID 248: Establishment of Outreach Committee
In-Reply-To: <006701c70932$eb39ff90$6500a8c0@S0031616584>
Message-ID: <BAY112-F1363F385D0DE36CAEC1241BDE80@phx.gbl>

As a former "victim " of such Witch Trials I object. We need COMPLETE open 
speech and transparency.The other major Parties do not "kick people out" 
they laughed at the PC of my story when told to Ds and Rs. The ACLU said it 
was illegal. Is this committee the same as "Diversity"{part oif why 
Elizabeth quit}Poor people and most people of color do not own computers or 
"teleconferance. If we got REAL we would attract REAL people not just WHITE 
EDUCATED  Amy>>>> VOTE NO!  POLITICS IS INHERANTLY MESSY< NO THOUGHT POLICE


>From: "Charlie Pillsbury" <chapillsbury at igc.org>
>To: <ctgp-news at ml.greens.org>
>Subject: {news} GPUS Proposal ID 248: Establishment of Outreach Committee  
>Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2006 22:54:29 -0500
>
>Connecticut Green Party - Part of the GPUS
>http://www.ctgreens.org/ - http://www.greenpartyus.org/
>
>to unsubscribe click here
>mailto://ctgp-news-unsubscribe at ml.greens.org


>(Note:  I voted in favor of this proposal, but have until 11/19 to 
>reconsider my vote if a number of people object to my yes vote on this 
>proposal)
>       Proposal ID 248
>       Proposal Establishment of the Outreach Committee and approval of the 
>Committee PPs
>       Presenter Fundraising Committee and Georgia Green Party
>       Floor Manager Jody Grage
>       Phase Voting
>       Discussion 10/16/2006 - 11/12/2006
>       Voting 11/13/2006 - 11/19/2006
>       Presens Quorum 0.6666
>       Consens Quorum A Majority of Yes and No Votes
>
>Background
>While most committees address outreach to some extent, the Outreach
>Committee (OC) is focused entirely on getting the Green message out to
>people who have never heard of the Green Party or who don't know much about
>GP-US. We want everybody in the USA to know about our 10 Key Values, and we
>are developing tools and materials that state, local, and individual Greens
>can easily use to educate and engage the public.
>
>In July 2006, we launched our first two print projects: "Democracy Is
>Coming," a 4-page handout that is an introduction to the Green Party; and 
>an
>English-Spanish palm-sized handout of the 10 Key Values. Both are available
>for free download at http://www.gp.org/committees/outreach, and printed
>copies of "Democracy Is Coming" are available in bulk from the online 
>store.
>Upcoming projects include web banner ad campaigns; and bilingual 10KV
>handouts in Arabic, Chinese, and other languages.
>Proposal
>The National Committee shall recognize the Outreach Committee as a standing
>committee and approve its Policies & Procedures.
>Resources
>CONTACT: Jody Grage; 2428 NW 56th, Seattle WA 98107; 206.71801529;
>jody at gp.org
>
>http://www.gp.org/committees/outreach/
>
>Becky Weber (DC) amandlagreen at yahoo dot com
>
>Richard Scott (AZ) scotty at zygotz dot com
>
>The ad-hoc Outreach Committee began preparing these Policies & Procedures
>(P&Ps) in December 2005, shortly after its first teleconference in November
>2005, but before application to the National Committee for approval as a
>formal committee. The Outreach Committee was formed in the recognition of
>the need for unified, creative, and engaging messages to new Green Party
>members. A number of existing committees, such as the Media Committee, 
>Green
>Pages Editorial Board, Fundraising Committee, Merchandise Committee and the
>Communications Committee are already engaged in such work; the purpose of
>the Outreach Committee is to unify talents and avoid duplication of 
>efforts.
>Getting more people each day to register, vote, and identify as Greens is
>vital to the Green Party.
>
>Outreach Committee: Policies and Procedures
>
>Outline
>
>I. Mission statement and Committee structure
>
>II. Membership eligibility, conduct, and removal
>   1. Eligibility
>   2. Membership
>   a. Selection
>   b. Provisional status
>   c. Transferring membership to a different state
>   d. Definition of active and inactive members
>   1. Active member
>   2. Inactive member
>   3. Leave of absence
>   3. Terms
>   4. Responsibilities, Appropriate Conduct, and Censure
>   a. Responsibilities
>   b. Appropriate conduct
>   c. Censure
>   5. Resignations, Grounds for Removal, Removal Process, and Appeals
>   a. Resignations
>   b. Removal
>   c. Grounds for removal
>   d. Removal process
>   e. Appeal process
>
>III. Functioning of the committee
>   1. Workflow
>   2. Voting
>   a. Consensus procedures
>   b. Conduct of meetings
>   3. Grievance procedures
>
>IV. Appendices
>   1. Netiquette guidelines
>   2. Consensus procedure
>   3. Minutes and the role of the minute taker
>
>I. Mission statement
>
>The Outreach Committee (OC) recognizes the need to develop innovative,
>engaging long-term strategies to attract and recruit new members to the
>Green Party. Numerous existing committees are already engaged in various
>forms of outreach, and the OC is charged with unifying these efforts to
>reinforce consistent messaging. The OC brings together representatives from
>groups such as the Media Committee, Green Pages Editorial Board, 
>Fundraising
>Committee, and Merchandising Committee to avoid
>duplication and to reinforce the work that each is doing. Its primary
>purpose is to inform, engage, register, and recruit potential new members 
>of
>the Green Party. Secondarily, it will strive to better inform all US
>residents about the Green Party.
>
>COMMITTEE STRUCTURE
>
>The Committee shall consist of Green Party members from the various state
>parties who either have been approved by their state parties and/or are
>currently serving as delegates to the GP-US Coordinating Committee.
>
>Members who have not participated on line, in subcommittees, or on
>teleconferences in the last three months shall be considered inactive
>members and shall not be counted toward a quorum. An updated roster shall 
>be
>sent to the e-mail list at least every three months.
>
>Two co-chairs, preferably reflecting gender balance, shall be elected with
>staggered terms of two years each. If more than two candidates are 
>nominated
>for a single co-chair position, the committee shall vote using IRV. Members
>may nominate themselves. Vacancies shall cause a vote for a replacement
>co-chair. A recall election of a chair may be called, following the
>procedure for any proposal.
>
>The responsibilities of the co-chairs shall include keeping the committee 
>on
>task, maintaining a current roster of committee members, conducting votes,
>and communicating with NC and SC members for the Outreach Committee and its
>subcommittees. Co-chairs shall submit formal monthly reports to the NC list
>detailing committee activities. The co-chairs shall come to explicit
>agreement and continue to consult with each other about how their joint
>responsibility is to be shared.
>
>The committee may create working groups and subcommittees.
>
>II. Membership eligibility, conduct, and removal
>
>1. Eligibility
>
>The Outreach Committee is a skills-based group which consists of Greens who
>are already actively involved with existing GP-US committees, caucuses,
>state/local offices, and working groups. Due to the overlapping nature of
>the projects of the OC, part of the role of OC members will be to act as a
>liaison between the OC and other committees. Sensitive strategy information
>will be discussed and therefore it is crucial that OC members can be 
>trusted
>with access to such info, as demonstrated by their conduct with other GP-US
>committees, caucuses, state/local offices, and working groups. Members
>should bring experience in one or more of the following, or related areas:
>media, public relations, information technology, fundraising and
>development, or other areas as necessary.
>
>Prospective members should provide information on their Green affiliation,
>skills, and background to the OC, via the co-chairs. A r?sum?, curriculum
>vitae, or website URL with work samples is helpful, but not required.
>
>Technical skills: The OC communicates via e-mail, wikis (on the internet),
>and phone conferences. Thus, familiarity with computers and access to the
>web and e-mail is required. Wiki tutorials will be made available for those
>who are not familiar with them.
>
>2. Membership
>
>a. Selection: Outreach Committee members may be proposed for appointment to
>the OC in accordance with GP-US policy and procedure by a state Green 
>Party,
>Green caucus, local Green Party, or other known Green working group. New
>members shall be selected by the OC, as per Article III of the GP-US 
>bylaws,
>from those proposed by a state, caucus, or network; at the invitation of 
>the
>OC; or from volunteers. The respective state parties and/or caucuses must
>approve all prospective members, in writing usually via e-mail, to the
>co-chairs. The OC shall select new members by consensus, giving due
>consideration to the skills and commitment to growing the Green Party of 
>the
>prospective member. Decisions about Outreach Committee membership must be
>based on the merits of a prospective member's demonstrated skills, 
>expressed
>intents, and performance as a provisional member. If consensus cannot be
>reached, then approval shall require a two-thirds majority vote by the
>active membership of the OC.
>
>b. Provisional status: New members approved by the OC are considered in
>provisional status for the first three months. The OC and the provisional
>member can use this time to evaluate the new member's strengths and
>weaknesses and determine suitability for a particular role and/or for
>continued membership. Members who have been formally reprimanded for
>inappropriate conduct, failure to fulfill their responsibilities, or other
>reasonable cause that could result in removal if continued, are also in
>provisional status. An established member may be placed in provisional
>status by a majority vote of the OC.
>
>c. Transferring membership to a different state: OC members should contact
>their new state as soon as possible via e-mail when moving to a new state,
>and cc the OC co-chairs, to seek approval for continued membership. A 
>member
>who is awaiting such approval is in provisional status. Assuming a
>good-faith effort has been made within three months of the move, OC members
>will retain their voting rights in the interim.
>
>d. Definition of active and inactive members:
>
>   1. Active member: Active members are defined as those members who have:
>posted to the listserve or wiki in the last three months, or participated 
>in
>a telephone conference call. (See Voting, below).
>
>   2. Inactive member: A member who has done none of the actions listed
>above as evidence as active membership is considered inactive. A member who
>has been inactive for six months, is, effectively, no longer a working
>member and may be subject to removal from the OC.
>
>   3. Leave of absence: OC members may request a leave of absence from the
>co-chairs for a stated period of time up to 12 months; upon confirmation of
>leave of absence by the co-chairs, this time will not be counted as
>inactivity.
>
>3. Terms
>
>Length of service: OC members do not have set term limits. The OC requests 
>a
>blanket waiver from the National Committee so that more than three members
>per state may serve on the OC. Advisors may participate on the listserve or
>phone conferences.
>
>Roles are discussed on an on-going basis and are subject to change.
>Co-chairs serve two-year terms. The position of production editor for
>producing the tabloid or other materials is a work-for-hire position and
>that person is responsible for all federal, state, local withholdings due 
>in
>regards to compensation for work.
>
>4. Responsibilities, Appropriate Conduct, and Censure
>
>a. Responsibilities: OC members are expected to serve in any of the roles
>defined above and to devote a sufficient amount of time to get their tasks
>done. Once a task is accepted, the member is expected to finish it, or to
>find another who can take on the work and complete it by deadline. Members
>are expected to work to promote and improve the Green Party of the United
>States and refrain from conduct that is detrimental to the OC or the Green
>Party.
>
>b. Appropriate conduct: Members in good standing are expected to be active,
>working members of a team. To that end, they are expected to fulfill
>membership responsibilities and work toward smooth functioning of outreach
>projects.
>
>   1. The listserve exists for the business of GP-US Outreach Committee
>projects; hence, posting that interferes with existing or potential 
>projects
>cannot be tolerated. Please refrain from posting tangential messages.
>
>   2. Members of the OC's listserve are expected to observe netiquette
>guidelines (see Appendix I), keep off-topic posts to a minimum, and
>immediately take any off-topic discussion off list if requested by another
>OC member.
>
>   3. Members who consistently violate netiquette guidelines or whose
>posts prevent timely progress or completion of OC projects may be
>temporarily removed or censured from the list.
>
>c. Censure: The OC reserves the right to censure a OC member by removal 
>from
>the listserve if the member repeatedly violates appropriate conduct. 
>Censure
>is considered a serious action.
>
>   1. A vote of the OC should be held before a member is censured or
>permanently removed from the listserve. Grounds for censure should be
>documented and presented to the OC for consideration prior to voting.
>   2. However, in an extreme situation, the OC officers may temporarily
>remove a OC member but must then immediately seek consensus, or two-thirds
>majority support for continuing such actions (i.e. removal or censure) from
>the full OC.
>   3. All votes regarding censure or removal require a quorum of the OC.
>   4. The offending OC member will be allowed to stand in his/her own
>defense and cast a vote regarding removal or censure.
>   5. Removal or censure from the listserve may be short-term, long-term,
>or permanent, and each allegation will be judged individually and term of
>censure will be set by consensus of the OC.
>   6. Two or more incidents of censure by the OC will constitute grounds
>for permanent removal from the OC.
>   7. If and when GP-US creates or appoints a working judicial authority
>to review such matters, an appeal may be made to such authority.
>
>5. Resignations, Grounds for Removal, Removal Process, and Appeals
>
>At the time that these P&Ps were submitted, the BRPP was in the process of
>creating a proposal for removal procedures. Once such a proposal is 
>approved
>by the National Committee, the OC will modify these P&Ps in accordance with
>National Committee guidelines.
>
>a. Resignations. Members may resign by sending a notice of resignation to
>one or both of the co-chairs via e-mail.
>
>   1. Resignations must be in writing, and should be copied to the
>member's state party.
>   2. Members are enjoined not to time their resignation in the midst of
>OC projects. All resignations will take effect after current projects are
>completed, ensuring their portion of the project has been completed and 
>they
>remain available for questions.
>
>b. Removal. OC members may be removed from the OC for inactivity or for
>cause, by either the OC or the state, in accordance with their procedures.
>
>c. Grounds for removal include, but need not be limited to:
>   (i) Inactivity of six months or longer
>   (ii) Misrepresentation of the policies or decisions of the OC to
>states, the CC, the public, or others with whom the OC interacts
>   (iii) Falsification of content or distortion of facts about the Green
>Party of the United States
>   (iv) Plagiarism
>   (v) Sustained or repeated disruption of production or other OC business
>(See Appendix 1)
>   (vi) Distributing or informing non-OC members about sensitive strategy
>or plans for OC projects in such a manner that will potentially harm the
>impact of such projects
>   (vii) Sustained or repeated disruptive use of the listserve for a
>personal agenda, non-OC business, or repeated netiquette violations
>   (viii) Misrepresentation of skills or falsification of credentials
>   (ix) Sustained or repeated dishonesty, aggressive or violent behavior,
>or, in extreme cases, a single such action
>   (x) Repeated failure to meet deadlines that have an impact on a
>project's timely completion
>
>d. Removal process:
>
>   1. If consensus is not reached regarding the removal of a OC member, a
>two-thirds majority of the active membership is sufficient to remove a
>member. Once this has been reached, the member in question may be
>temporarily removed from the listserve if the nature of the member's e-mail
>postings is, in part or whole, the reason that they are being removed from
>the OC.
>   2. Prior to actual removal of membership, the OC or some portion
>thereof must first request resignation from the member.
>   3. In presenting such a request for resignation, the OC or individual
>members must detail the reasoning, providing evidence of one or more of the
>above grounds for removal.
>   4. If the member in question declines to resign, then, as a courtesy,
>the OC may request recall from the state/caucus.
>   5. If no response is received within one week of a good faith effort to
>contact the individual via e-mail and by a phone call, the OC must send
>notice of removal to the state/caucus, or, as a courtesy, request recall.
>   6. Should the state/caucus refuse to recall its member, or fail to
>respond in a timely fashion, the OC may then remove that member from the 
>OC,
>providing a statement outlining its reasons for doing so, with
>aforementioned evidence, notifying both the member and the appropriate
>state/caucus party contacts (i.e., state party chair, state party recording
>secretary, and the Secretary of the GP-US).
>   7. A member removed by a state/caucus may be retained, as an observer,
>contributor, or advisor to the OC should the OC so decide. Such a decision
>should be reached by consensus, or, failing that, two-thirds approval.
>
>e. Appeal Process: After nine months the ex-member may appeal the decision
>of the OC, or, after one and a half years, re-apply for membership. An
>appeal or reapplication should be made in writing and sent by e-mail to the
>co-chairs. The burden is on the ex-member to demonstrate why they should be
>reinstated. The OC will review the appeal or reapplication and inform the
>ex-member of its decision within three month. If and when the GP-US
>identifies a working judicial authority to review such matters, an appeal
>will be made to such authority.
>
>III. Functioning of the OC
>
>1. Workflow
>
>a. Work plan: The OC may choose to produce an annual work plan for the
>year's projects as a guideline. The work plan will serve as a flexible
>outline, to be adapted as needed.
>
>b. Work process: The OC shall choose the working process that best suits 
>its
>members, according to its work plan, availability of its members and the
>flow of work.
>
>2. Voting
>
>Online voting takes place among the OC when a member submits an e-mail to
>the listserve with the subject line "Decision Item: XXX" (where XXX
>indicates the topic to be voted on). The default time to cast a vote, 
>unless
>otherwise specified, is 48 hours, from official proposal of a motion or
>action. Voting may also take place via phone conferences; in this case,
>members who were not on the phone or who did not vote may also cast a vote
>on line within 48 hours from the beginning of the phone conference. The 
>onus
>is on the members who were not on the phone call. Final tallies are taken
>from those votes or formal abstentions submitted. A quorum of one-half the
>active membership is required for voting on major decisions, that will have
>an impact on future issues of the OC, such as approval, removal, or censure
>of members; changes to the policies and procedures; or grievance decisions.
>For less significant matters that affect the timeliness of an OC project, a
>quorum may not be
>   necessary or practical, and simple majority voting will suffice.
>Abstentions, like yeas or nays, must be actively submitted. 
>Nonparticipation
>in a vote does not constitute an abstention.
>
>a. Consensus procedures (see Appendix II)
>
>   The OC shall at all times attempt to come to decisions by consensus,
>ranked voting (in the case of selecting contributions for publication), or
>by majority voting (simple majority when it is a timely OC project decision
>that immediately impacts the project at hand; or two-thirds, if it is a
>major decision that will affect future projects as well), if consensus
>cannot be achieved.
>
>b. Conduct of meetings
>
>   The OC will strive for consensus, encouraging input from all members
>regarding important matters, but will operate by majority vote. All
>decisions by the OC will be made by each member in good standing present
>casting one vote with a majority of affirmative votes required for passage.
>A majority is defined as more than half the total votes cast.
>
>   During open discussions, all present are encouraged to participate in a
>respectful and supportive manner and are discouraged from speaking too long
>so that all may speak. The goal of a discussion is an open exchange of 
>ideas
>without personal biases and criticism.
>
>OC meetings will be conducted by an agreement seeking process, as follows.
>In this process, all items begin in consensus mode, with the facilitator
>seeking to weave the input into a unified body that gradually approaches
>consensus.
>
>   If, in calling for concerns, stand-asides, and blocks, consensus is not
>reached, the facilitator will make a second attempt, seeking to incorporate
>the concerns of the person(s) blocking. If in the second call there are
>still blocks, decision making will automatically shift to voting process 
>for
>the remainder of the item. The item under consideration must pass by a
>simple majority in order to be adopted.
>
>c. Selection of projects
>
>   The OC strives for consensus when planning OC projects. Projects are
>generated via the listserve as well as on phone conference calls.
>
>3. Grievance procedures
>
>A grievance is any dispute, controversy, or difference between the OC
>members, or between or among OC members and/or non-members regarding the OC
>and/or its projects. Examples of grievances could include, but are not
>limited to: unfair treatment, discrimination, or failure to follow official
>rules, procedures, principles, deadlines, etc., of the OC.
>
>a. For contributors:
>
>Non-OC members who have a grievance about an OC project or member 
>concerning
>OC projects may present a formal written complaint to the OC. Further 
>appeal
>must go through the complainant's state delegation.
>
>b. For OC members:
>
>1. The OC member must present a formal written description of the grievance
>to the OC co-chairs or, in the case of a grievance against both co-chairs,
>the Steering Committee member in whose portfolio the OC resides, within two
>weeks of the occurrence of the difficulty. Consideration of any grievance
>submitted later than two weeks from the date of the grievance shall not be
>given.
>
>2. The OC member shall discuss the written grievance with the co-chairs and
>the individual or individuals against whom the grievance has been filed
>within one week of its submission, or within one week of forwarding the
>paper to the printer. The co-chairs shall respond in writing within one 
>week
>of this discussion.
>
>3. If the grievance is not satisfactorily settled or if the co-chairs fail
>to respond within the allocated time after having received the grievance or
>after the discussion of the grievance, it shall be presented in writing to
>the Steering Committee (SC) member in whose portfolio the Green Pages
>resides, or to the Secretary of the GP-US if originally submitted to the SC
>portfolio holder. The SC member shall schedule a meeting with the member
>within two weeks of receipt of the grievance. Within one week of the
>meeting, the SC member shall provide a written decision on this grievance,
>or elect to refer the matter to the Dispute Resolution Committee.
>
>4. If the problem remains undecided, the member, the OC, or the Steering
>Committee may request in writing a review of the matter by the Dispute
>Resolution Committee.
>
>Any and all decisions made in accordance with the above provisions will be
>made to afford the grievant the opportunity to be heard by those not
>involved with the original decisions. In the event that a grievant has a
>dispute with the entire OC or a significant number of OC members, the
>grievance must be taken outside the OC and presented to the Dispute
>Resolution Committee for hearing.
>
>All decisions will be made based solely on the facts of the case.
>
>All decisions made must be consistent with providing the grievant with due
>process including decisions based upon taking the facts and applying the
>Green Party principles.
>
>IV. Appendices
>
>Appendix I: Netiquette Guidelines
>
>Please refer to "The Core Rules of Netiquette," by Virginia Shea, which can
>be viewed at: http://www.albion.com/netiquette/book/
>
>If and when GP-US creates its own set of netiquette guidelines for use by
>all GP-US groups, the official GP-US netiquette guidelines would replace
>those by Shea.
>
>Appendix II: Consensus Procedure *
>
>Note that consensus is a specific process as well as a result. Consensus
>requires people to come to unity-agreeing with the essence of a decision,
>and feeling that they can live with the decision. Consensus does not 
>require
>unanimity-feeling that every detail of the agreement is exactly as you 
>would
>have preferred.
>
>Elements of consensus:
>
>   * Standing or stepping aside
>
>   If you cannot agree with a decision for personal reasons, you should
>stand aside from the decision. You will not be expected to actively
>implement it, but you do agree not to undermine it. Your position is noted
>in the minutes.
>
>   * Blocking or "standing in the way"
>
>   If you cannot agree with a decision, not for personal reasons but
>because you can see that it threatens the group on a very deep level, it is
>your responsibility to block that decision. This step is taken only rarely
>and after much reflection.
>
>Appendix III: Minutes and the role of the minute taker
>
>Minutes need to be carefully recorded and retained. An accurate record of
>the exact wording of each decision made during the meeting is essential. 
>The
>ongoing implementation of actions depends on a clear statement of decisions
>and the plans for their implementation. Every item on the agenda gets an
>entry in the minutes. Minutes of a meeting summarize discussions and
>actions, but no names are associated with particular statements of
>positions. In consensus ideas are contributed to the group as a whole. Once
>uttered, they are no longer "owned" by an individual but by the group. 
>Names
>are recorded when listing those present, when committee members are named,
>when individuals volunteer for tasks or when someone stands aside from a
>decision.
>
>The secretary must be able to listen and summarize accurately. The summary
>is general, recording only the salient points. It can usually be done in 
>one
>or two paragraphs, covering the main thrust of the discussion, the concerns
>that have been raised, and ways that were formulated to carry the 
>discussion
>along. A decision must be recorded exactly, word for word, at the time of
>the decision, and then read back to the group for its approval. It is
>important that the minute taker read the decision exactly as it will be in
>the minutes. This wording will be binding until a consensus is reached to
>change it. It is vital that everyone hears, understands, and agrees to the
>actual wording of any decision recorded.
>
>A specific statement of how the decision will be implemented should
>accompany each decision. This includes the names of those who will follow
>through and a timetable for their action.
>
>The entire minutes should be written promptly after the meeting, while the
>memory of the discussion is still clear. Circulate the draft minutes to all
>those who were present.
>
>   * Note: Consensus and minute-taking procedures based on the work of
>Lysbeth Borie and the Alpha Institute.
>
>References
>None
>
>Questions about this system?
>Contact the Voting Admin.
>The Green Party of the United States voting system is free software, 
>licensed under the GNU General Public License (GPL).
>You can download a copy here.
>To independently verify a ranked choice vote, or for information about how 
>that works, go to Jonathan Lundell's Voting Page and upload the ballot file 
>from the ranked choice vote result page. JL's ranked choice module is 
>licensed under an alternate free software license.
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>Green Party of the United States
>


>To be removed please mailto://ctgp-news-unsubscribe at ml.greens.org
>_______________________________________________
>CTGP-news mailing list
>CTGP-news at ml.greens.org
>http://ml.greens.org/mailman/listinfo/ctgp-news
>
>ATTENTION!
>The information in this transmission is privileged and confidential and 
>intended only for the recipient listed above.  If you have received this 
>transmission in error, please notify us immediately by email and delete the 
>original message.  The text of this email is similar to ordinary or 
>face-to-face conversations and does not reflect the level of factual or 
>legal inquiry or analysis which would be applied in the case of a formal 
>legal opinion and does not constitute a representation of the opinions of 
>the CT Green Party. The responsibility for any messages posted herein is 
>solely that of the person who sent the message, and the CT Green Party 
>hereby leaves this responsibility in the hands of it's members.
>
>NOTE: This is an inherently insecure forum, please do not post confidential 
>messages and always realize that your address can be faked, and although a 
>message may appear to be from a certain individual, it is always possible 
>that it is fakemail. This is mail sent by a third party under an illegally 
>assumed identity for purposes of coercion, misdirection, or general 
>mischief.
>
>CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: If you have received this e-mail in error, please 
>immediately notify the sender by e-mail at the address shown.  This e-mail 
>transmission may contain confidential information.  This information is 
>intended only for the use of the individual(s) or entity to whom it is 
>intended even if addressed incorrectly.  Please delete it from your files 
>if you are not the intended recipient.  Thank you for your compliance.
>
>To be removed please mailto://ctgp-news-unsubscribe at ml.greens.org




From greenpartyct at yahoo.com  Fri Nov 17 10:26:04 2006
From: greenpartyct at yahoo.com (Green Party-CT)
Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2006 07:26:04 -0800 (PST)
Subject: {news} Ct Greens nexy big fight? Censoring CT politcial races?
Message-ID: <20061117152604.19927.qmail@web81405.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

Dear Greens,

Today I spoke directly with Sen Williams on the morning show AM1080-
His plan is to have a 3 person committee make a decision on whether a politcal as go "too far". I called and aked him since they have penality for third parties in the new Cam Fin. ref. that makes us get hundreds of thousands of signatures, why should we trust them NOW? 

I asked if our candidate had an ad saying Jodi Rell should have known about the corruption in the Rowland office but we could not "Sight a source" of fact, (as he is purposing), would we be penalized by attacking any popular candidate?


Williams countered that the new CFR laws was VERY FAIR to 3 rd parties and "FAIRER than the Presidential laws which ONLY give to third parties AFETER the race". This is B.S. spin!! In fact, its easier to get money in a Presidentail race,  and almost all 3rd parties do get it! Not a full amount like the D and R, but some money. Spin, spin!!

Please read the article and note:

Who decides what a false ad is?
Will WE have a voice?
Will we a VOTE in any committee that could punish candidates?


Please join the FORUM to discuss this       >ctgp-forum at ml.greens.org<

ttp://www.courant.com/news/local/hc-cttruth1117.artnov17,0,7197618.story?coll=hc-headlines-local                 

     A Call For Action On Political Ads    

     

          ADVERTISERS          
---------------------------------
  Advertise on ctnow 
       -->               By MARK PAZNIOKAS
                 Courant Staff Writer
       
      November 17 2006
    
 After a raucous and caustic campaign season, the leader of the state Senate wants the legislature to set standards for political advertising.

Senate President Pro Tem Donald E. Williams Jr., D-Brooklyn, said Thursday that one of the most negative seasons in history shows the need for a truth-in-advertising code.

 "I'd like to say up front this is not a Republican problem. It is not a Democratic problem," Williams said. "We need to fix this problem together."

States have had difficulty regulating political advertising without running afoul of free-speech rights, but Williams said Connecticut's new public financing law gives the state leverage.

Just as the new law imposes limits on campaign spending for candidates who accept public funding, a further condition could require candidates to abide by an advertising code, he said.

The voluntary campaign finance law takes effect next month and will apply for the first time to the 2008 legislative campaigns.

Williams would create a citizens review panel to consider complaints of unfair advertising and determine if candidates were in compliance with the code of conduct.

In cases involving candidates participating in public financing, the panel could withhold funding from offenders or allow extra funding for those victimized.

The panel could pressure candidates not involved in public financing by offering a public, nonpartisan judgment on the accuracy or fairness of advertising, he said.

"Campaigns should be opportunities to inform, not mislead," Williams said. "Voters are interested in issues, not insults."

He declined to identify any campaign that he found offensive, but he said the recently concluded season was the most negative in state history.

Williams won bipartisan applause for his concept, at least.

"I think he is on the right track," said George Gallo, the Republican state chairman. "It makes perfect sense, what he is trying to do."

Nancy DiNardo, the Democratic state chairwoman, said she liked the concept but questioned how it might work. Few negative ads have outright falsehoods; the problem often is portraying a vote or a position in a misleading way.

"I'm not sure there is a way of regulating if someone is putting a misleading spin on a record," DiNardo said. But she added, "It certainly is a noble challenge to try."

Contact Mark Pazniokas at mpazniokas at courant.com.          Copyright 2006, Hartford Courant    
    
   
---------------------------------
  
                            

       
  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Tim McKee cell (860) 778-1304 or (860) 643-2282
   National Committee Member of the Green Party(Connecticut)
    Cliff Thornton for Governor- Campaign Manager


  Paid for by Thornton For Governor, Max Wentworth, Treasurer-   www.VoteThornton.com
   



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist10.pair.net/mailman/private/ctgp-news/attachments/20061117/29261570/attachment.html>

From apbrison at hotmail.com  Fri Nov 17 11:53:25 2006
From: apbrison at hotmail.com (allan brison)
Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2006 11:53:25 -0500
Subject: {news} RE: {forum} Ct Greens nexy big fight? Censoring CT politcial
	races?
In-Reply-To: <20061117152604.19927.qmail@web81405.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <BAY115-F94E4A4A0B8062B40E2A93D5E80@phx.gbl>

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist10.pair.net/mailman/private/ctgp-news/attachments/20061117/4f5a7b0f/attachment.html>

From chapillsbury at igc.org  Sun Nov 19 12:51:39 2006
From: chapillsbury at igc.org (Charlie Pillsbury)
Date: Sun, 19 Nov 2006 12:51:39 -0500
Subject: {news} Fw: Holy Hell They've Gone Nuts - $160 billion More for Iraq!
Message-ID: <000e01c70c03$5e1ef1f0$6500a8c0@S0031616584>


----- Original Message ----- 
From: Global Network 
To: Global Network 
Sent: Saturday, November 18, 2006 9:22 PM
Subject: Holy Hell They've Gone Nuts - $160 billion More for Iraq!


http://www.fcnl.org/issues/item.php?item_id=2171&issue_id=35

Fiscal 2007 War Supplemental Expected to Be Largest Yet: 
Pentagon Prepares $160 Billion Request for Iraq War
11/12/2006
CQ TODAY
Nov. 7, 2006 

by George Cahlink

The Pentagon is preparing a fiscal 2007 emergency supplemental request to cover the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan that would eclipse any such request to date - at a time when many lawmakers and voters would prefer to see the U.S. commitment in Iraq diminishing.

Industry and defense experts confirmed that the military services have sent a $160 billion request to Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld for review. The spending request likely will be sent to Congress in early February, along with the fiscal 2008 defense budget proposal.

Coupled with $70 billion in emergency money already in the fiscal 2007 Defense spending measure (PL 109-289), the military would spend about $230 billion on the war in that fiscal year. To date, the United States has spent about $507 billion on the wars in and Afghanistan.

"This really is an enormous supplemental. This is clearly beyond increased costs for fighting the war," said Steve Kosiak, director of budget studies at the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments.

Kosiak said a $160 billion request would top any annual emergency spending bill approved by Congress during the Vietnam War, when far more troops were deployed in Southeast Asia.

"Its quiet clear that nobody is saying no to anybody on defense budgets," said Winslow Wheeler, a former congressional staffer who now works for the Center for Defense Information.

Sources said the Army has sought $80 billion, the Air Force $50 billion, and the Navy and Marine Corps $30 billion. Those sources cautioned they were only preliminary proposals that Rumsfeld could scale back.

The Defense secretary and other senior Pentagon leaders will make a decision on the supplemental by Nov. 15. It then would be sent to the Office of Management and Budget for further review.

In an Oct. 25 memorandum that expanded the emergency spending to costs associated with the global war on terrorism, Deputy Defense Secretary Gordon England encouraged the services to seek large supplemental requests. In the past, the Pentagon has used supplementals only to seek money for fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan.

"Estimates are to include incremental costs related to the longer war against terror," England wrote, specifically saying those costs could include repairing and replacing equipment as well as changing force structures.

Clark Murdock, a defense expert with the Center for Strategic and International Studies, said Congress might back $160 billion. He noted the Army and Marine Corps face huge bills for replacing equipment.

He did, however, question the Air Force's request for $50 billion. "Nobody has been shooting up Air Force fighters," he noted.

One defense industry lawyer said he expected the final request to come in closer to $120 billion.

Source: CQ Today. Reprinted with permission. This article was originally published in CQ Today on November 7, 2006. 

? 2006 Congressional Quarterly Inc. All Rights Reserved 



Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space
PO Box 652
Brunswick, ME 04011
(207) 729-0517
http://www.space4peace.org
globalnet at mindspring.com
http://space4peace.blogspot.com (our blog)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist10.pair.net/mailman/private/ctgp-news/attachments/20061119/6652aa39/attachment.html>

From roseberry3 at cox.net  Sun Nov 19 18:30:26 2006
From: roseberry3 at cox.net (B Barry)
Date: Sun, 19 Nov 2006 18:30:26 -0500
Subject: {news} 11-20-06 EC Meeting at Luna's Pizza in Glastonbury
Message-ID: <20061119233036.IFVN4133.eastrmmtao06.cox.net@eastrmimpo01.cox.net>

Agenda for  11-20-06 EC meeting of CTGP in Glastonbury, CT.

Luna's Pizza,  88 Hebron Avenue, Glastonbury, CT  06033,  p: 860-659-2136
Time: 7pm to 9pm 

 

1.	Review of the results of our CTGP campaigns.

 

2.	CT Green Times newspaper status: Theme for the newspaper articles;
are more articles needed from chapters about their positions? 

Estimated date it will be going to publisher and availability for
distribution. Review distribution process for possible fine tuning with
Albert Marceau.

 

3.	Treasurer's report from Christopher Reilly. 

 

4.	ACLU lawsuit regarding the 2005 CT  "campaign finance reform"  law. 

 

5.	GPUS proposal 247/ GPUS: proposals that have been voted upon,
upcoming proposals and allocations to the states.

 

6.	CTGP website.

 

7.	Political issues the CTGP wants to address.

 

8.	Place and agenda for 11-28-06 SCC meeting. 

 

9.	Place of next EC meeting scheduled for 12-11-06. 

 

10.	Date and place for next SCC meeting.   The last Tuesday in December
is 12-26-06.

 

11.	Any proposals. 

 

******EC meeting delayed due to the 11-7-06 election and vacations.

 

 

www.google.com

 

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist10.pair.net/mailman/private/ctgp-news/attachments/20061119/bd1d50b5/attachment.html>

From greenpartyct at yahoo.com  Tue Nov 21 15:02:03 2006
From: greenpartyct at yahoo.com (Green Party-CT)
Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2006 12:02:03 -0800 (PST)
Subject: {news} CALL for NOMINATIONS for the GPUS COORDINATED CAMPAIGN
	COMMITTEE
Message-ID: <20061121200204.87940.qmail@web81406.mail.mud.yahoo.com>



hhart at blue.weeg.uiowa.edu wrote: Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2006 13:43:57 -0600
From: hhart at blue.weeg.uiowa.edu
To: natlcomvotes at green.gpus.org
Subject: [usgp-coo] CALL for NOMINATIONS for teh GPUS COORDINATED CAMPAIGN
 COMMITTEE

 CALL for NOMINATIONS for the COORDINATED CAMPAIGN COMMITTEE!!

On September 24, 2006, the National Committee approved a change in the  
way CCC members are elected.  Per Proposal #243 (below), a call is to  
go out each year two weeks after the date of the general election,  
with a two week nomination period.  (Those members currently serving  
on the CCC will keep their seats until the next election.)

The nomination period runs today through December 5, 2006.   *CCC  
candidates must be formally nominated, in writing, by their respective  
state party or caucus.*  Please send nominations to the Secretary, at  


Seats are open for 4 men and 2 women.  Currently serving CCC members  
are from RI, GA, NY and IN; therefore, members of those states are not  
eligible to serve on the CCC this year.  Members from all other states  
or accredited caucuses are eligible.


Holly HAart
Secretary, GPUS


*****
from Proposal #243, 9/24/06:
The Coordinated Campaign Committee shall consist of 10 voting members
Drawn from the affiliated state parties and caucuses. The National
Committee shall elect 5 members of the CCC and replacements for recently
opened vacancies with an on line election to be held each year. Nominations
will be called for by the Secretary of the GPUS each year two weeks after
Election Day. A two week nominating period shall be opened, followed by
one week of discussion and an on line STV vote using the GPUS voting page
and following the procedures and protocols the GPUS uses to elect the
Steering Committee. The 5 people elected each year via the regular election
shall serve two year terms while those elected or selected to fill vacancies
will serve out the term of the member they are replacing. In between annual
December elections for the CCC the GPUS Steering Committee shall
appoint Greens to fill vacancies.

Committee members elected or selected in 2006 prior to an on line
Election authorized by the passage of this proposal shall be able to
maintain their seats until the election held in 2007. The Committee will
continue to recruit and have members selected by the GPUS SC prior to  
November 2006 and then hold an election based on this rule change  
beginning in November
2006 to fill the rest of the seats that have not yet been filled. The
Committee shall in January 2007 hold a lottery to determine which of the
newly elected committee members shall have their terms conclude in December
2007 and which 5 shall Serve until the election in 2008.

The committee shall always have an equal number of males and females on
Its roster except when it has an odd number of members. Then its makeup can
Be +1 for any gender. The exception to this rule is that no member of the
committee shall be asked or forced to resign from the committee in order to
reestablish the gender balance. The balance will be re established by
Adding members to the committee. Each year the election to fill seats on
the CCC shall actually be two elections, one to elect males to the  
committee, one to elect females to the committee. The number of men  
and women elected in any given year shall be determined by nature of  
the vacancies in that year with
the goal of having 5 men and 5 women on the committee.

No State Green Party or GPUS Caucus may have more than one member serving on
the CCC at any time. State Parties and Caucuses must formally, in  
writing, nominate one of their members to serve on the CCC. No State  
Party or Caucus can nominate more than one person in any given year,  
nor can they nominate if a member of their state party or caucus will  
continue to serve on the committee after the filling of whatever seats  
are being filled. Nominations from State Party or Caucus officers are  
to be sent to the Secretary of the GPUS during the
post November Election Nominating Period and when a vacancy is being filled,
and the Secretary shall publish them on the votes email list.


_______________________________________________
Natlcomvotes mailing list
To send a message to the list, write to:
Natlcomvotes at green.gpus.org
To unsubscribe or change your list options, go to:
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/natlcomvotes

If your state delegation changes, please see:
http://gp.org/committees/nc/documents/delegate_change.html

For other information about the Coordinating Committee, see:
http://gp.org/committees/nc/



       
  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Tim McKee cell (860) 778-1304 or (860) 643-2282
   National Committee Member of the Green Party(Connecticut)





-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist10.pair.net/mailman/private/ctgp-news/attachments/20061121/3ffb1f31/attachment.html>

From roseberry3 at cox.net  Wed Nov 22 00:26:54 2006
From: roseberry3 at cox.net (B Barry)
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2006 00:26:54 -0500
Subject: {news} agenda for the 11-28-06 SCC meeting at Portland Senior Center
	at 7pm
Message-ID: <20061122052703.MTUE5894.centrmmtao05.cox.net@eastrmimpo01.cox.net>

Agenda for 11-28-06 SCC Meeting    

Place:********* Portland      Senior     Center,    7  Waverly Avenue,
Portland,  CT (a block east of Portland Public Library)

Phone: 860-342-6760           ********     Time: 7PM to 9PM

 

Facilitator: To Be Determined

 

A.	Preliminaries: 

1.       (1 minute): Introductions of attendees and chapters. Recruit
timekeeper. 

2.       (1 minute): Identify attendees who are NOT voting representatives. 

3.       (1 minute): Adopt ground rules. 

4.       (3 minutes): Approval of tonight's proposed agenda, additions and
deletions. 

5.       (3 minutes): Comments and approval of 8-29-06, 9-26-06 and 10-31-06
SCC minutes. 

6.       (3 minutes):  9-11-06, 10-17-06 and 11-20-06 EC meetings
presentation  and approval. 

7.       (3 minutes):  Treasurer's report by Christopher Reilly .

. 

    

 

Reports:

1.	(20 minutes): Discussion  about CTGP campaigns. 
2.	(15 minutes): U.S. Green Party report by CTGP representatives: Tim
McKee and Charlie Pillsbury:

nominees for GPUS Coordinating Committee.

3.	(2 minutes, each for): Chapter reports. 
4.	(15 minutes): Issues for CTGP legislative agenda for 12-06: campaign
finance reform; universal health care; drug

reform, patriot's act, living wage, re-structuring energy laws. 

5.	(5 minutes): Chapter study groups about political issues of concern.
6.	(5 minutes): Green Days: GP issues and coalitions.
7.	(5 minutes): CTGP website needs volunteers to write about 10 Key
Values on the website.
8.	(2 minutes): V.O.T.E.R. update: ACLU lawsuit regarding 2005 CT
"campaign finance reform" law. 

   9.(5 minutes): Articles for and deadline for "CT Green Times" newspaper,
whether 

   it will be mailed or hand delivered to chapters and/or drop off
locations.

9.	(3 minutes): National Security agency 8-30-06 response to CTGP
freedom of information

request.

 

10. Next EC meeting is 12-11-06: 7PM to 9PM at El Palenque Restaurant, 1172
Main ST., Willimantic, CT   06226 

 

11. Next SCC meeting will be 1-2-07 (not 12-26-06) at Portland Senior
Center.

       

 

www.mapquest.com <http://www.mapquest.com/>
www.google.com <http://www.google.com/> 

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist10.pair.net/mailman/private/ctgp-news/attachments/20061122/b3ca4094/attachment.html>

From chapillsbury at igc.org  Wed Nov 22 22:52:29 2006
From: chapillsbury at igc.org (Charlie Pillsbury)
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2006 22:52:29 -0500
Subject: {news} GPUS Proposal 251
References: <20061119233036.IFVN4133.eastrmmtao06.cox.net@eastrmimpo01.cox.net>
Message-ID: <002501c70eb2$ccb91e40$6500a8c0@S0031616584>

Does anybody disagree with my analysis?  Happy Thanksgiving, Charlie


I agree with Paul, who points to our first key value: 1. GRASSROOTS DEMOCRACY
Every human being deserves a say in the decisions that affect their lives and not be subject to the will of another. Therefore, we will work to increase public participation at every level of government and to ensure that our public representatives are fully accountable to the people who elect them. We will also work to create new types of political organizations which expand the process of participatory democracy by directly including citizens in the decision-making process. 

I don't think this proposal passes what I call the "smell" test.  It stinks.  I think we should be using open and transparent processes when discussing public matters and public officials.  It's one thing to handle a sensitive personnel matter behind closed doors, but our candidates and elected officials are public officials.  If you are not willing to express your opinions or make your remarks about these folks public, don't make them at all.  Moreover, when these types of discussions are private, the individuals who are being discussed behind closed doors have no opportunity to defend themselves.  This doesn't strike me as participatory democracy. 

I am willing to listen, however, to those who support this proposal.  The rationale given is:  Since there are times when the Steering Committee needs to have sensitive conversations concerning potential electoral candidates or elected officials, this situation is being added to appropriate circumstances for Executive Session. 

Can supporters give us examples of "times" when such closed meetings would be appropriate?  Can you explain how this proposal promotes any one of our key values? Thanks for your help understanding this proposal. 

Meanwhile, Happy Thanksgiving to you all.  I'm thankful that I'm a member of the Green Party; and that all of you are, too.

Charlie Pillsbury
Connecticut

On 11/21/06, Paul Dumouchelle wrote: 
  The proposal to allow secret discussions of electoral candidates by the Steering Committee strays too far from Grassroots Democracy for my tastes. 

  Paul Dumouchelle
  Ohio
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist10.pair.net/mailman/private/ctgp-news/attachments/20061122/7b13540f/attachment.html>

From chapillsbury at igc.org  Thu Nov 23 11:03:23 2006
From: chapillsbury at igc.org (Charlie Pillsbury)
Date: Thu, 23 Nov 2006 11:03:23 -0500
Subject: {news} Fw: Be Green - Buy Green for the Holidays
Message-ID: <000801c70f18$e76d4c00$6500a8c0@S0031616584>

Green Party of the United StatesOn the day after Thanksgiving, don't shop Red or Blue, shop Green!  

Meanwhile, Happy Thanksgiving, Charlie

----- Original Message ----- 
From: Green Party of the United States 
To: chapillsbury at igc.org 
Sent: Thursday, November 23, 2006 2:35 AM
Subject: Be Green - Buy Green for the Holidays



                 

           
            Back to GP.org
           

           

          Instead of dealing with traffic, crowded malls, stifling holiday music, and stores full of sweatshop made merchandise. Enjoy your time off, go for a stroll, spend more time with your loved ones; and check out our on-line store! 

           
          We are pleased to debut our new on-line bookstore. We have lots of great titles by and about Greens. Including books by Malachy McCourt, 2006 Green Gov. Candidate; Green Mayor Jason West, and more!

          We also have some new items in the Green Party store. Check out our new tote bags and sweatshirts. All of our items are union made and sweatshop free. 

          New! Green Pages Gift Subscriptions! Resist the corporate media "green out" and send a quarterly gift subscription of Green Pages to your friends, family or congressperson. 
           
           Help Spread the word: 
            Give your friends and family gift subscriptions to the Green Party 
            newspaper, Green Pages order here. 
            Support Green values and the Green Party. Buy Green! here. 
            Please give generously to the Green Party of the United States today. You can donate on-line by clicking on the donate button. 



             

           

           Email: office at gp.org
            Office: PO Box 57065 Washington, D.C. 20037 202-319-7191 or toll-free (US): 866-41GREEN
           
     
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist10.pair.net/mailman/private/ctgp-news/attachments/20061123/23ea1145/attachment.html>

From greenpartyct at yahoo.com  Thu Nov  9 10:42:41 2006
From: greenpartyct at yahoo.com (Green Party-CT)
Date: Thu, 09 Nov 2006 15:42:41 -0000
Subject: {news} (National GP News Release)Critcal Advances for Greens,
	Lay Foundation for 2008
Message-ID: <20061109154239.45665.qmail@web81401.mail.mud.yahoo.com>


GREEN PARTY OF THE UNITED STATES
http://www.gp.org

For Immediate Release:
Thursday, November 9, 2006

Contacts:
Scott McLarty, Media Coordinator, 202-518-5624,
mclarty at greens.org
Starlene Rankin, Media Coordinator, 916-995-3805,
starlene at greens.org


Critical advances for Greens on Election Day 2006
lay foundation for 2008

? Greens win ballot status in Illinois, with
gubernatorial candidate Rich Whitney's 11%,
overcoming prohibitive ballot access rules, and
in Nevada

? Strong antiwar vote in favor of warhawk
Democrats shows a disconnect in U.S. politics;
only Greens offered an antiwar platform; Greens
warn that Democrats in Congress will do little to
reverse Bush's foreign policy

? 2006 Green Party election news and results:
http://www.gp.org/2006elections


WASHINGTON, D.C. -- Green Party leaders called
the 2006 midterm election a small but important
step forward for the party, preparing Greens for
the 2008 presidential campaign.

According to initial returns, Greens won at least
35 races nationwide, with 18 wins in California,
on November 7.  Among the California victories is
Gayle McLaughlin, who defeated the incumbent for
Mayor of Richmond, the first city with more than
100,000 residents to have a Green mayor

"The number of votes gained and the increased
percentages in significant races show the party's
steady growth," said Rebecca Rotzler, co-chair of
the Green Party of the United States and Deputy
Mayor of New Paltz, New York.  "We maintained
ballot access in most states where we already had
it, and gained a key state, Illinois, thanks to
Rich Whitney, who received 11% in his run for
Governor."

Greens warned that antiwar voters may find
themselves frustrated by Democrats in Congress
during the next two years, especially on the war
front.

"Some Green candidates running for Congress
probably contributed to the defeat of
Republicans," said Jim Coplen, co-chair of the
national party.  "While Democratic candidates
offered weak criticism of Republicans on issues
like the war in Iraq, Green candidates sharply
criticized the war and other Bush policies. 
Ironically, outspoken Green criticism may have
translated into votes for Democrats among voters
who decided it was time to end Republican rule in
Congress.  Unfortunately, many of the winning
Democrats, like Hillary Clinton [N.Y.] and Howard
Berman [Calif.], support the war.  They will only
call for changes in military strategy in Iraq,
they'll support President Bush's threats of an
attack against Iran, and they'll maintain
uncritical endorsement of Israel's murderous and
illegal policies in regard to the Palestinian
people."


Thumbnail reports on Green campaigns across the
U.S.:

? Green candidate Rich Whitney drew 11% (325,598
votes) for Governor in Illinois, achieving ballot
status for the Green Party in preparation for the
2008 election.  This is the first time a national
third party has achieved ballot status in
Illinois since 1920; Illinois has difficult
ballot access rules and Gov. Rod Blagojevich
spent $800,000 in taxpayers' money trying to keep
Greens off the state ballot.
http://www.whitneyforgov.org http://www.ilgp.org

? Pat LaMarche, running on a strong universal
health care platform, drew nearly 10% in her
campaign for Governor of Maine.  Ms. LaMarche,
who qualified as a 'clean elections' candidate,
competed with the incumbent Democrat and a former
Democrat who had reregistered as an independent
in order to run, as well as a Republican.

Also in Maine, the Green Independent Party won
two seats on Portland City Council and maintained
four seats on the city's School Committee,
according to preliminary results.  Maine Greens
were disappointed in the defeat of John Eder, two
term member of the Maine statehouse.
http://pressherald.mainetoday.com/news/local/061108portland.html

? DC Statehood Greens won eight Advisory
Neighborhood Commission races and easily kept its
ballot line.  The Statehood Green Party has
replaced the Republican Party as Washington,
D.C.'s second party in terms of electoral
participation.

Joyce Robinson-Paul finished second out of two,
receiving 14,109 votes for 14.7% in her race for
D.C.'s U.S. Senate seat ('Shadow Senator'). 
Keith Ware finished second out of three in his
race for U.S. Representative, beating the
Republican. He received 12,533 votes for 12.7%.

? Green candidate Tom Kelly, running for the U.S.
House in Colorado's District 1, has received
25,096 votes for 21%. This is the highest
percentage for a Green running for Congress this
year.

? Green candidate Malachy McCourt, running for
Governor of New York, received 40,485 votes,
missing the state's requirement of 50,000 votes
in a presidential or gubernatorial race for
ballot status.  However, several other statewide
candidates received over 50,000 votes, and New
York Greens, led by senatorial candidate Howie
Hawkins <http://www.hawkinsforsenate.org>, are
calling for a legal challenge asking for the
state to recognize these votes as qualification
for Green Party ballot status in 2008:

Malachy McCourt for Governor/Alison Duncan for
Lt. Governor: 40,351 votes (0.97%)
Rachel Treichler for Attorney General: 57,564
votes (1.43%)
Julia Willebrand for Comptroller: 108,030 votes
(2.82%)
Howie Hawkins for U.S. Senate: 51,538 votes
(1.22%)

? Green candidate Gayle McLaughlin
<http://www.gaylemclaughlin.net> appears to have
won her race against an incumbent for Mayor of
Richmond, California, a few miles from Oakland
and San Francisco.  Ms. McLaughlin, who refused
corporate donations and raised about $14,000, was
outspent by the incumbent, who raised more than
$110,000 from contributors, the biggest of which
was Chevron.  Gayle first won office two years
ago when she ran for Richmond City Council. 
Richmond, with a population of 103,000, is now
the largest city with a Green mayor.

Also in California, incumbent City Council member
Larry Robinson was reelected in Sebastopol,
retaining the Council's Green majority, in place
since 2000

? In U.S. Senate races, Todd Chretien
(California) drew over 110,000 votes (some
precincts still haven't reported), more than any
other Green senatorial candidate.  In
Pennsylvania's 15th District, Greta Brown drew
31,443 votes, the most of any Green candidate for
the U.S. House.  14 Greens ran for the Senate, 42
for the House.

? The Massachusetts Green-Rainbow Party needed 3%
in a statewide vote to maintain ballot status. 
Dr. Jill Stein, running for Secretary of the
Commonwealth, accomplished this by receiving
351,495 votes (the most votes for any Green
candidate on November 7) for 18% in a two way
race.  Jamie O'Keefe, running for State Treasure,
also had a high enough vote percentage to
accomplish this. He received 16% (322,493 votes).

? The following state Green Parties appear to
have lost ballot status in the 2006 election:
Alaska, Connecticut, and Maryland.  However,
these parties have sufficient infrastructure to
collect petition signatures and place candidates
on the ballot in 2008 and are likely to regain
ballot status.

? 8.7 million voters across the U.S. voted for
withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq and for
impeachment resolutions on local and state
ballots that were promoted or supported by
Greens.  Troop withdrawal initiatives won in all
ten localities in Wisconsin, including Milwaukee,
and all 11 communities in Illinois, including
Chicago.  Of 139 cities and towns in
Massachusetts voting on the troop withdrawal
measures, only a handful voted nay on initiatives
demanding that Congress and the White House end
the war immediately.  In California, San
Francisco voters supported a local impeachment
measure by 59.41%. In Berkeley, a similar
resolution won the support of 68.56% of the
electorate.  Greens supported and led the
initiative campaigns; in April, 24 of 32
communities voted in support of the 'Troops Home
Now' resolutions that were promoted by Greens.
(More information:
<http://www.LibertyTreeFDR.org>)

"Tuesday's vote represents more of a defeat for
Republicans and the Bush agenda than a victory
for Americans who oppose the war on Iraq," said
Liz Arnone, co-chair of the Green Party of the
United States.  "Only the Green Party offered a
real antiwar platform, calling for immediate
withdrawal of U.S. forces from Iraq.  The danger
now is that Democrats in Congress will ignore the
will of the American people, according to
numerous polls and voters' initiatives, and keep
U.S. troops in Iraq while only criticizing the
Bush Administration on strategic grounds.  A lot
of antiwar votes may prove to have been wasted on
November 7."


MORE INFORMATION

Green Party of the United States
http://www.gp.org
1700 Connecticut Avenue NW, Suite 404
Washington, DC 20009.
202-319-7191, 866-41GREEN
Fax 202-319-7193

Green campaign listings, news, photos, and web
sites http://www.gp.org/2006elections
Database of 2006 Green candidates
http://www.greens.org/elections
Video clips of Green candidates
http://www.gp.org/2006elections/media.shtml
Green Party News Center
http://www.gp.org/newscenter.shtml


~ END ~


       
  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Tim McKee cell (860) 778-1304 or (860) 643-2282
   National Committee Member of the Green Party(Connecticut)
    Cliff Thornton for Governor- Campaign Manager


  Paid for by Thornton For Governor, Max Wentworth, Treasurer-   www.VoteThornton.com
   



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist10.pair.net/mailman/private/ctgp-news/attachments/20061109/071b4e97/attachment.html>

From chapillsbury at gmail.com  Wed Nov 22 22:11:47 2006
From: chapillsbury at gmail.com (Charlie Pillsbury)
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2006 22:11:47 -0500
Subject: {news} Fwd:GP-US Proposal Results: ID 248 - Establishment of the
	Outreach Committee and approval of the Committee PPs
In-Reply-To: <20061120080501.73232.qmail@qs614.pair.com>
References: <20061120080501.73232.qmail@qs614.pair.com>
Message-ID: <10859a090611221911v7d9b4ea3g18a20b28c4125925@mail.gmail.com>

FYI, Charlie

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: voting at gpus.org <voting at gpus.org>
Date: 20 Nov 2006 08:05:01 -0000
Subject: [usgp-coo] GP-US Proposal Results: ID 248 - Establishment of the
Outreach Committee and approval of the Committee PPs
To: natlcomvotes at green.gpus.org

Voting for the following proposal is now closed. Here are the results:

Proposal ID: 248
Proposal: Establishment of the Outreach Committee and approval of the
Committee PPs
Floor Manager: Jody Grage, jody at gp.org
Discussion: 10/16/2006 - 11/12/2006
Voting: 11/13/2006 - 11/19/2006

Result: Adopted

73 Total Votes Received from 38 States/Caucuses
Presens Quorum: 32 0.6666 of 48 Accredited States/Caucuses
Consens Quorum: 34 A Majority of 66 Yes and No Votes

Yes: 48
No: 18
Abstain: 7

Yes: Gene Hunter - Alabama
Yes: Claudia Ellquist - Arizona
Yes: Andrew Spencer - Arizona
Yes: Donna Werley - Arkansas
Yes: Anita Wessling - Arkansas
Yes: Leslie Bonett - California
Yes: Budd Dickinson - California
No: Marilyn Ditmanson - California
Yes: Sanda Everette - California
Yes: Forrest Hill - California
Abstain: Fred Hosea - California
No: Jared Laiti - California
Abstain: Steve Loebs - California
Yes: Kent Mesplay - California
Yes: Donna Warren - California
No: Cat Woods - California
Yes: Tim McKee - Connecticut
Yes: Charlie Pillsbury - Connecticut
Yes: David McCorquodale - Delaware
Yes: Nikolas Schiller - District of Columbia
No: Julia Aires - Florida
Yes: Henry Lawrence III - Florida
Abstain: Barbara Rodgers-Hendricks - Florida
Yes: Al Herman - Georgia
Yes: Frank Jeffers - Georgia
Yes: Robert McMinn - Idaho
No: Phil Huckelberry - Illinois
Abstain: Susan Rodgers - Illinois
Abstain: Marc Sanson - Illinois
Yes: Sarah Dillon - Indiana
Yes: Jeff Sutter - Indiana
Yes: Daryl Northrop - Iowa
Yes: Larry Orr - Iowa
Yes: Starlene Rankin - Lavender Caucus
Yes: Jacqui Deveneau - Maine
Yes: Karen Jennings - Maryland
Yes: Steve Kramer - Maryland
Abstain: Jamie McLaughlin - Massachusetts
Yes: Elie Yarden - Massachusetts
No: Linda Manning Myatt - Michigan
Yes: Louis Novak - Michigan
No: Fred Vitale - Michigan
Yes: Dee Berry - Missouri
No: Paul Steven Juntunen - Nevada
No: Elizabeth Arnone - New Jersey
No: Mike Spector - New Jersey
No: Mato Ska - New Mexico
Yes: Sally Kim - New York
No: Doug McComb - New York
Yes: Jason Nabewaniec - New York
No: Roger Snyder - New York
Yes: Jan Martell - North Carolina
Yes: Laura Hampton - Ohio
Yes: Gwen Marshall - Ohio
Yes: Joni LeViness - Oklahoma
Yes: Marnie Glickman - Oregon
No: Mike Rosenberg - Pennsylvania
No: Diane White - Pennsylvania
Yes: Greg Gerritt - Rhode Island
Yes: David Whiteman - South Carolina
Yes: John Miglietta - Tennessee
Yes: Esther Choi - Texas
Yes: Bill Holloway - Texas
Yes: Alfred Molison - Texas
Yes: Thomas King - Utah
No: Eileen Olsen - Utah
Abstain: Steve Ekberg - Vermont
No: Audrey Clement - Virginia
No: Aram Falsafi - Washington
Yes: Mike Gillis - Washington
Yes: Jill Bussiere - Wisconsin
Yes: Jeff Peterson - Wisconsin
Yes: Holly Hart - Women's Caucus

Thank you and have a wonderful day!
--The GP-US Voting Admin
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist10.pair.net/mailman/private/ctgp-news/attachments/20061122/2c360bf3/attachment.html>

From dmitridal at yahoo.com  Fri Nov 24 16:07:14 2006
From: dmitridal at yahoo.com (dmitri)
Date: Fri, 24 Nov 2006 13:07:14 -0800 (PST)
Subject: {news} new list moderator needed!
Message-ID: <20061124210714.57030.qmail@web81809.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

HI everyone,
I've been the list mom now for the ctgp primary listservs and I simply have
gotten worse and worse at it over time for a variety of reasons. anyway, I can
not do it anymore, and we need to find a new person to take this
responsibility. it consists of checking a few emails a day max and approving
valid messages. it's pretty easy to do and I am willing to spend time with
whomever can take over this job to get them familiarized with the process.
thanks!
dmitri

Dmitri D'Alessandro
office : 860.344.9021
Public Relations Director
Friends of the River



 
____________________________________________________________________________________
The all-new Yahoo! Mail beta
Fire up a more powerful email and get things done faster. 
http://new.mail.yahoo.com



From amyvasnunes at hotmail.com  Fri Nov 24 21:32:21 2006
From: amyvasnunes at hotmail.com (Amy Vas Nunes)
Date: Fri, 24 Nov 2006 21:32:21 -0500
Subject: {news} Fwd:GP-US Proposal Results: ID 248 - Establishment of
	theOutreach Committee and approval of the Committee PPs
In-Reply-To: <10859a090611221911v7d9b4ea3g18a20b28c4125925@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <BAY112-F3633A9BE81AB9347FB4D04BDE00@phx.gbl>

So do we know the criteria for secret sessions? Who and how is it defined 
are minutes taken and posted? Remember th abuse that happened when old EX 
did this in CTGP with out notes!!! This will haunt GPUS how can candidates 
be picked transparently, whats " on the record and off'? What has happened 
to the BASIC botoms up way a GP should be run?      Amy    Reminds me too 
much of Bush and the Neocons!


>From: "Charlie Pillsbury" <chapillsbury at gmail.com>
>To: "ctgp-news at ml.greens.org" <ctgp-news at ml.greens.org>
>Subject: {news} Fwd:GP-US Proposal Results: ID 248 - Establishment of 
>theOutreach Committee and approval of the Committee PPs
>Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2006 22:11:47 -0500
>
>Connecticut Green Party - Part of the GPUS
>http://www.ctgreens.org/ - http://www.greenpartyus.org/
>
>to unsubscribe click here
>mailto://ctgp-news-unsubscribe at ml.greens.org


>FYI, Charlie
>
>---------- Forwarded message ----------
>From: voting at gpus.org <voting at gpus.org>
>Date: 20 Nov 2006 08:05:01 -0000
>Subject: [usgp-coo] GP-US Proposal Results: ID 248 - Establishment of the
>Outreach Committee and approval of the Committee PPs
>To: natlcomvotes at green.gpus.org
>
>Voting for the following proposal is now closed. Here are the results:
>
>Proposal ID: 248
>Proposal: Establishment of the Outreach Committee and approval of the
>Committee PPs
>Floor Manager: Jody Grage, jody at gp.org
>Discussion: 10/16/2006 - 11/12/2006
>Voting: 11/13/2006 - 11/19/2006
>
>Result: Adopted
>
>73 Total Votes Received from 38 States/Caucuses
>Presens Quorum: 32 0.6666 of 48 Accredited States/Caucuses
>Consens Quorum: 34 A Majority of 66 Yes and No Votes
>
>Yes: 48
>No: 18
>Abstain: 7
>
>Yes: Gene Hunter - Alabama
>Yes: Claudia Ellquist - Arizona
>Yes: Andrew Spencer - Arizona
>Yes: Donna Werley - Arkansas
>Yes: Anita Wessling - Arkansas
>Yes: Leslie Bonett - California
>Yes: Budd Dickinson - California
>No: Marilyn Ditmanson - California
>Yes: Sanda Everette - California
>Yes: Forrest Hill - California
>Abstain: Fred Hosea - California
>No: Jared Laiti - California
>Abstain: Steve Loebs - California
>Yes: Kent Mesplay - California
>Yes: Donna Warren - California
>No: Cat Woods - California
>Yes: Tim McKee - Connecticut
>Yes: Charlie Pillsbury - Connecticut
>Yes: David McCorquodale - Delaware
>Yes: Nikolas Schiller - District of Columbia
>No: Julia Aires - Florida
>Yes: Henry Lawrence III - Florida
>Abstain: Barbara Rodgers-Hendricks - Florida
>Yes: Al Herman - Georgia
>Yes: Frank Jeffers - Georgia
>Yes: Robert McMinn - Idaho
>No: Phil Huckelberry - Illinois
>Abstain: Susan Rodgers - Illinois
>Abstain: Marc Sanson - Illinois
>Yes: Sarah Dillon - Indiana
>Yes: Jeff Sutter - Indiana
>Yes: Daryl Northrop - Iowa
>Yes: Larry Orr - Iowa
>Yes: Starlene Rankin - Lavender Caucus
>Yes: Jacqui Deveneau - Maine
>Yes: Karen Jennings - Maryland
>Yes: Steve Kramer - Maryland
>Abstain: Jamie McLaughlin - Massachusetts
>Yes: Elie Yarden - Massachusetts
>No: Linda Manning Myatt - Michigan
>Yes: Louis Novak - Michigan
>No: Fred Vitale - Michigan
>Yes: Dee Berry - Missouri
>No: Paul Steven Juntunen - Nevada
>No: Elizabeth Arnone - New Jersey
>No: Mike Spector - New Jersey
>No: Mato Ska - New Mexico
>Yes: Sally Kim - New York
>No: Doug McComb - New York
>Yes: Jason Nabewaniec - New York
>No: Roger Snyder - New York
>Yes: Jan Martell - North Carolina
>Yes: Laura Hampton - Ohio
>Yes: Gwen Marshall - Ohio
>Yes: Joni LeViness - Oklahoma
>Yes: Marnie Glickman - Oregon
>No: Mike Rosenberg - Pennsylvania
>No: Diane White - Pennsylvania
>Yes: Greg Gerritt - Rhode Island
>Yes: David Whiteman - South Carolina
>Yes: John Miglietta - Tennessee
>Yes: Esther Choi - Texas
>Yes: Bill Holloway - Texas
>Yes: Alfred Molison - Texas
>Yes: Thomas King - Utah
>No: Eileen Olsen - Utah
>Abstain: Steve Ekberg - Vermont
>No: Audrey Clement - Virginia
>No: Aram Falsafi - Washington
>Yes: Mike Gillis - Washington
>Yes: Jill Bussiere - Wisconsin
>Yes: Jeff Peterson - Wisconsin
>Yes: Holly Hart - Women's Caucus
>
>Thank you and have a wonderful day!
>--The GP-US Voting Admin


>To be removed please mailto://ctgp-news-unsubscribe at ml.greens.org
>_______________________________________________
>CTGP-news mailing list
>CTGP-news at ml.greens.org
>http://ml.greens.org/mailman/listinfo/ctgp-news
>
>ATTENTION!
>The information in this transmission is privileged and confidential and 
>intended only for the recipient listed above.  If you have received this 
>transmission in error, please notify us immediately by email and delete the 
>original message.  The text of this email is similar to ordinary or 
>face-to-face conversations and does not reflect the level of factual or 
>legal inquiry or analysis which would be applied in the case of a formal 
>legal opinion and does not constitute a representation of the opinions of 
>the CT Green Party. The responsibility for any messages posted herein is 
>solely that of the person who sent the message, and the CT Green Party 
>hereby leaves this responsibility in the hands of it's members.
>
>NOTE: This is an inherently insecure forum, please do not post confidential 
>messages and always realize that your address can be faked, and although a 
>message may appear to be from a certain individual, it is always possible 
>that it is fakemail. This is mail sent by a third party under an illegally 
>assumed identity for purposes of coercion, misdirection, or general 
>mischief.
>
>CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: If you have received this e-mail in error, please 
>immediately notify the sender by e-mail at the address shown.  This e-mail 
>transmission may contain confidential information.  This information is 
>intended only for the use of the individual(s) or entity to whom it is 
>intended even if addressed incorrectly.  Please delete it from your files 
>if you are not the intended recipient.  Thank you for your compliance.
>
>To be removed please mailto://ctgp-news-unsubscribe at ml.greens.org




From amyvasnunes at hotmail.com  Fri Nov 24 21:34:22 2006
From: amyvasnunes at hotmail.com (Amy Vas Nunes)
Date: Fri, 24 Nov 2006 21:34:22 -0500
Subject: {news} new list moderator needed!
In-Reply-To: <20061124210714.57030.qmail@web81809.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <BAY112-F9B7FD880CDAA2D7B5FD63BDE00@phx.gbl>

This needs to be voted on by chapters and SCC volunteers can be dangerous    
  Amy


>From: dmitri <dmitridal at yahoo.com>
>To: ctgp-news at ml.greens.org
>Subject: {news} new list moderator needed!
>Date: Fri, 24 Nov 2006 13:07:14 -0800 (PST)
>
>Connecticut Green Party - Part of the GPUS
>http://www.ctgreens.org/ - http://www.greenpartyus.org/
>
>to unsubscribe click here
>mailto://ctgp-news-unsubscribe at ml.greens.org
>HI everyone,
>I've been the list mom now for the ctgp primary listservs and I simply have
>gotten worse and worse at it over time for a variety of reasons. anyway, I 
>can
>not do it anymore, and we need to find a new person to take this
>responsibility. it consists of checking a few emails a day max and 
>approving
>valid messages. it's pretty easy to do and I am willing to spend time with
>whomever can take over this job to get them familiarized with the process.
>thanks!
>dmitri
>
>Dmitri D'Alessandro
>office : 860.344.9021
>Public Relations Director
>Friends of the River
>
>
>
>
>____________________________________________________________________________________
>The all-new Yahoo! Mail beta
>Fire up a more powerful email and get things done faster.
>http://new.mail.yahoo.com
>
>To be removed please mailto://ctgp-news-unsubscribe at ml.greens.org
>_______________________________________________
>CTGP-news mailing list
>CTGP-news at ml.greens.org
>http://ml.greens.org/mailman/listinfo/ctgp-news
>
>ATTENTION!
>The information in this transmission is privileged and confidential and 
>intended only for the recipient listed above.  If you have received this 
>transmission in error, please notify us immediately by email and delete the 
>original message.  The text of this email is similar to ordinary or 
>face-to-face conversations and does not reflect the level of factual or 
>legal inquiry or analysis which would be applied in the case of a formal 
>legal opinion and does not constitute a representation of the opinions of 
>the CT Green Party. The responsibility for any messages posted herein is 
>solely that of the person who sent the message, and the CT Green Party 
>hereby leaves this responsibility in the hands of it's members.
>
>NOTE: This is an inherently insecure forum, please do not post confidential 
>messages and always realize that your address can be faked, and although a 
>message may appear to be from a certain individual, it is always possible 
>that it is fakemail. This is mail sent by a third party under an illegally 
>assumed identity for purposes of coercion, misdirection, or general 
>mischief.
>
>CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: If you have received this e-mail in error, please 
>immediately notify the sender by e-mail at the address shown.  This e-mail 
>transmission may contain confidential information.  This information is 
>intended only for the use of the individual(s) or entity to whom it is 
>intended even if addressed incorrectly.  Please delete it from your files 
>if you are not the intended recipient.  Thank you for your compliance.
>
>To be removed please mailto://ctgp-news-unsubscribe at ml.greens.org




From edubrule at sbcglobal.net  Sat Nov 25 15:19:24 2006
From: edubrule at sbcglobal.net (edubrule)
Date: Sat, 25 Nov 2006 15:19:24 -0500
Subject: {news} invitation to join listserve on issues faced by Green Parties
Message-ID: <01e101c710d6$13fb98d0$9a804c0c@edgn2b574u14bi>

Hi Connecticut Greens:

The invitation below was sent to the CT Green Party website.  I e-mailed Tim and he agreed that I should post it on the News listerve.  Anyone interested in joining this listserve should e-mail me at edubrule at sbcglobal.net and I will forward your e-mail to Tim;  Tim will then add you to the GPstates listserve.

--Ed DuBrule

---------------------------

  Tim Willard has invited you to join the GPstates group [a Yahoo Group listserve].



  Hello fellow Greens!

       I have been a co-chair of the Maryland Green Party for the last half a year.  I have been trying to deal with all the issues a state party faces:  outreach, membership recruitment, fund raising, candidate support, ballot access laws, and so on.

       We are a bottom up party which leaves the states to figure out these problems on their own.  It seems to me that more communication between state party leaders would help us all, especially those state parties that are new.

       I am inviting all state party leaders or former leaders to join this list as a place to ask questions, share tips, and offer mutual support.  Hopefully this will be a useful tool for all of us.

       Peace,

       Tim Willard

       Maryland Green Party co-chair


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist10.pair.net/mailman/private/ctgp-news/attachments/20061125/4a6bd4f8/attachment.html>

From edubrule at sbcglobal.net  Sat Nov 25 15:49:37 2006
From: edubrule at sbcglobal.net (edubrule)
Date: Sat, 25 Nov 2006 15:49:37 -0500
Subject: {news} Fw: [ctgp] Greenpeace Organizing Term Application
Message-ID: <01e201c710d6$14b32900$9a804c0c@edgn2b574u14bi>

This was sent to the the riseup listserve on November 7.  (I think of the riseup listserve as the predecessor to the News listserve, but this may not be accurate.)
--Ed
----- Original Message ----- 
From: [Erik] 
To: ctgp at lists.riseup.net 
Sent: Tuesday, November 07, 2006 4:57 PM
Subject: [ctgp] Greenpeace Organizing Term Application


APPLICATION DEADLINE EXTENDED! Apply for the Greenpeace Organizing Term, a semester of ACTION, TRAINING, and TRAVEL

It's been a crazy month for activists what with the midterms and all, so we decided to extend the application deadline for the Greenpeace Organizing Term. Apply now and get the skills to protect the planet  www.greenpeaceusa.org/got

The Greenpeace Organizing Term is an action-filled semester and the best hands-on training for students to become environmental leaders. You'll be making an investment in your leadership skills, getting trainings in grassroots organizing, media, direct action, and campaign strategy. You'll travel abroad with Greenpeace and join a team of incredible activists working to protect the planet. Many students are also able to receive class credit for the semester.  

"I now understand what it means to be an organizer.  I can now use all the amazing things I've learned to actually make a difference." - Charis Barnes, University of North Carolina-Asheville, Fall '04

ACTION

We give you hands-on experience with a real Greenpeace campaign. We have the best trainers come and give you trainings here in our DC headquarters or our new San Francisco office and then you hit the ground to work with a Greenpeace campaign to implement what you've learned.  You'll put your organizing skills into action, play a critical role in organizing on-the-ground Greenpeace events, and make a real impact fighting to protect America's last remaining forests, promoting clean energy and saving our world's oceans. You'll learn how to climb, drive Greenpeace boats, use advanced communication equipment and practice peaceful direct action.  

TRAVEL 

We travel abroad for a week to meet with international Greenpeace activists.  During past trips, students have traveled to Greenpeace headquarters in Amsterdam, to Paris to take part in a 500-person peace symbol, and to Germany where they joined a 6,000-person march in to protest of nuclear waste shipments. We give people a few days to just relax and explore Europe as well.

TRAINING

We provide over 50 cutting-edge trainings in grassroots organizing, campaign skills, media strategy, and direct action. America's top environmental leaders will train you in everything from recruiting volunteers and developing leaders to creating a campaign plan. You'll learn how to climb, drive Greenpeace boats, hold press events and plan national campaigns.  

APPLY NOW

If you are passionate, bold, smart, visionary, strategic, savvy and ready to stand up for the environment, join us!  We are currently accepting applications for the Spring 2007 semester in Washington DC and San Francisco. To learn more and to apply, visit www.greenpeaceusa.org/got

To contact program staff with questions, e-mail got at wdc.greenpeace.org or call Samantha Corbin 202-319-2468.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist10.pair.net/mailman/private/ctgp-news/attachments/20061125/164ef604/attachment.html>

From edubrule at sbcglobal.net  Sun Nov 26 00:12:08 2006
From: edubrule at sbcglobal.net (edubrule)
Date: Sun, 26 Nov 2006 00:12:08 -0500
Subject: {news} seeking guest lecturer(s) on economics and Iraq war
Message-ID: <007701c71119$9223e8f0$3e844c0c@edgn2b574u14bi>

I received the following inquiry to the Connecticut Green Party website.  Can anyone suggest guest lecturer(s)?  Please send suggestions to me and I'll forward them to the person who inquired.  (I suggested to him already the Economy Connection speakers' bureau of the Union for Radical Political Economics, www.urpe.org.)
--Ed
------------------------------------------
Looking for Guest Lecturer on the political economy of globalization and or neo-liberal theory and Iraq War.  I teach at WCSU in Danbury M&W 330-445pm
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist10.pair.net/mailman/private/ctgp-news/attachments/20061126/3f2846fb/attachment.html>

From efficacy at msn.com  Sun Nov 26 06:14:24 2006
From: efficacy at msn.com (clifford thornton)
Date: Sun, 26 Nov 2006 06:14:24 -0500
Subject: {news} RE: [newhavengreens] Re: [VoteThornton] "Pot" shots atG.P.
	& Thornton-GOGOLA STRIKES AGAIN!
References: <BAY115-F75E6C8D37D9E2572E60DED5BB0@phx.gbl><59107c80604211244g3a352f2cyacdc8a5aa22cae17@mail.gmail.com>
	<59107c80604211245o64fb3cddjd155c2a6b67c0de7@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <BAY102-DAV1376E3B3BC7D68425B2A0ED1E70@phx.gbl>

I don't know why this is repeating but I am sure my letter was printed in response to this article.  Tom, I do believe has moved on to Stamford.  Anyway he is a friend and somewhat a confidant.

Cliff
Efficacy
PO Box 1234
860 657 8438
Hartford, CT 06143
efficacy at msn.com<mailto:efficacy at msn.com>
www.Efficacy-online.org<http://www.efficacy-online.org/>
 
Working to end race and class drug war injustice, Efficacy is a non profit
501 (c) 3 organization founded in 1997. Your gifts and donations are tax
deductible
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Jesse Pearlman Karlsberg<mailto:jesse.karlsberg at gmail.com> 
  To: ctgp-news at ml.greens.org<mailto:ctgp-news at ml.greens.org> 
  Sent: Friday, April 21, 2006 2:45 PM
  Subject: Fwd: {news} RE: [newhavengreens] Re: [VoteThornton] "Pot" shots atG.P. & Thornton-GOGOLA STRIKES AGAIN!


  Connecticut Green Party - Part of the GPUS
  http://www.ctgreens.org/<http://www.ctgreens.org/> - http://www.greenpartyus.org/<http://www.greenpartyus.org/>

  to unsubscribe click here
  mailto://ctgp-news-unsubscribe at ml.greens.org<mailto:ctgp-news-unsubscribe at ml.greens.org> Sorry to chime in from out of nowhere, even though I don't live in CT anymore, and thus haven't been active in Green Politics for a few years, but I'd urge you all to take advantage of this press rather than respond by taking offense, or choose not to respond at all. 


  The last part of the article, where Gogola speaks about Tim McKee, is actually quite favorable, and indicates that Gogola, even though he finds the notion of an elected slate of CT Greens laughable, thinks that the issues our candidates raise are important and deserve to be brought to voters' attention. 

  I would suggest (pretending) that we get the joke, and laughing along with it, and using the article as an opportunity to write letters about the issues that our candidates are promoting. If we can leverage this article as a way to get a little more press for the party and the issues, then we will be making the best of a mixed review. 


  Jesse Pearlman Karlsberg
  Troy, NY (formerly of Middletown, CT)



  On 4/21/06, allan brison <apbrison at hotmail.com <mailto:apbrison at hotmail.com>> wrote: 
    Connecticut Green Party - Part of the GPUS
    http://www.ctgreens.org/<http://www.ctgreens.org/> - http://www.greenpartyus.org/<http://www.greenpartyus.org/>

    to unsubscribe click here
    mailto://ctgp-news-unsubscribe at ml.greens.org <mailto:mailto://ctgp-news-unsubscribe at ml.greens.org>


    I disagree (with Ralph). I think this article should be responded to,
    honoring Cliff's call to avoid disparaging remarks. The Advocate should not
    be printing such ad hominem attacks on our candidates, or anybody else's for 
    that matter.

    As always the main purpose of such letters is more print space, more
    publicity. A second purpose might be to curtail the left-bashing that is
    Gogola's trademark.

    But Gogola himself is not the target audience of our letters. He is not 
    likely to reform, certainly not as a result of our criticisms. Rather the
    target audience in the reading public, first, and, perhaps, other Advocate
    staff, second. In other words it is how the reading public responds to our 
    letters that matters, not whether or not Tom gives a shit.

    Allan
    ----------------------------------------------------
    From:  ralph ferrucci
    Reply-To:   newhavengreens at yahoogroups.com <mailto:newhavengreens at yahoogroups.com>
    To:  VoteThornton at yahoogroups.com<mailto:VoteThornton at yahoogroups.com>, voteferrucci at yahoogroups.com<mailto:voteferrucci at yahoogroups.com>,
    newhavengreens at yahoogroups.com<mailto:newhavengreens at yahoogroups.com>, CTGP-candidates at yahoogroups.com<mailto:CTGP-candidates at yahoogroups.com>
    Subject:  [newhavengreens] Re: [VoteThornton] "Pot" shots at G.P. &
    Thornton-GOGOLA STRIKES AGAIN! 
    Date:  Thu, 20 Apr 2006 23:50:30 -0400
    I know Tom. He would get off on the .criticism. I think what all the
    candidates need to do is write on letter to the advocate thanking them of
    the article and tell them how funny they think it was. It would actually 
    hurt Tom more if no one was offended by the story.
    Ralph


    On Thursday, April 20, 2006, at 08:26 PM, daniel sumrall wrote:
    >For what it's worth--
    >
    >The banality of Gogola's humor and the utter lack of creativity in his 
    >'satire' warrant a response no better than disdain. In this case, ignorance
    >deserves to be ignored if for no other reason than all of the Green Party's
    >candidates have earned the respect and votes of more citizens of 
    >Connecticut than this 3rd rate Hunter S. Thompson devotee could ever
    >muster.
    >
    >Any outrageous complaints will only provide him with another 'story' idea.
    >That said, everyone should write the Advocate and express disappointment in 
    >the paper's journalistic stupidity.
    >
    >just thoughts daniel sumrall
    >
    >Green Party-CT wrote:
    >
    >I SHOULD HAVE KNOWN BETTER -THIS SOMETIMES COMIC WRITER DID QUITES A JOB ON
    >US. HOW DO YOU RESPOND TO THIS WEIRD ARTICLE? WE HAVE A SENSE OF 
    >HUMOUR,,RIGHT?
    >
    >I URGE YOU TO ALL WRITE TO THE PAPER,,WITH YOUR VIEWS.
    >letters at newhavenadvocate.com <mailto:letters at newhavenadvocate.com>
    >
    >Tim McKee
    >------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 
    >
    >
    >A Green Machine The Green Party is poised to name a slate of candidates for
    >statewide office. Tree-huggers of the Nutmeg, unite!
    >
    >by Tom Gogola- April 20, 2006
    >
      Imagine yourself living in a Green state. Imagine that by this time next 
    year, a full slate of Green Party candidates has been elected to statewide
    office. Imagine a world of Green, where naught but Earth-friendly policies
    are foisted upon Connecticut voters. . .
    >Imagine what an interesting and off-beat government we'd have if the 
    >handful of candidates on the Green ticket were actually to win the higher
    >offices they're seeking. . . Ladies and gentlemen, we're here with
    >drug-policy reformer and governor Clifford Thornton, who is just now 
    >meeting in the governor's mansion with a quarter pound of marijuana and a
    >coalition of pot-puffing cancer patients. They're gathering to test the
    >state's first bumper crop of the kind medical bud. One is heard to say, 
    >"That's good stuff, guv'nor!" to which Thornton responds, "Don't Rowland
    >that joint!"
    >
    >Down the hallway, Attorney General Nancy Burton is explaining to a reporter
    >how her being disbarred by a vengeful judge from practicing law in 
    >Connecticut for five years was actually a good thing for Connecticut
    >residents. "It's my badge of honor," she had previously told the reporter.
    >Burton's ban on practicing law in the state ended just a few days before 
    >the election, and she's now applying to be readmitted to the Connecticut
    >bar. It's a peculiar scenario, to be sure: an AG who can't even argue a
    >case in state court. (She's good to go in federal court and in New York, 
    >however.) For now, the longtime anti-nuclear activist is poised to chain
    >herself to the Millstone power plant, she says. Proudly litigious lawyer
    >that she is, Burton declares that she'll sue you if you don't report that 
    >she'll sue you if you don't say nice things about her suing you. The
    >reporter decides it's a good thing to have an attorney general who likes to
    >sue, disbarment be damned, so long as he doesn't get sued by her for having 
    >some harmless fun with her rich and litigious history. Plus, Burton once
    >successfully sued to save millionsand maybe billionsof winter-flounder
    >larvae from getting sucked into the Millstone intake pipes. A friend of the 
    >flounder is a friend to all, the reporter concludes.
    >
    >Senator Ralph Ferrucci, meanwhile, is hosting the first annual senatorial
    >grammar class at his Hartford office. The senator is using as a teaching 
    >tool one of the mangled-syntax press releases he unloosed on the public
    >during his campaignthat's very Mao of Ralph, in the "speaking bitterness"
    >sense of the expression. He's reading from the gibberish sheet he released 
    >in opposition to the notorious Dubai ports deal: We must make it our own
    >responsibility to keep the terrorists out without the friends of our allies
    >, he reads, adding, "though even I have no idea what the hell that means 
    >and I wrote the thing! Discuss! " Even though he's now a United States
    >senator, Ferrucci hasn't quit his day job as a deliveryman for Pepperidge
    >Farm products. His reasons are as strategic as they are savory: He's got 
    >some baked goodies from the truck for Thornton's stoned cancer pals. For
    >his part, Ferrucci needs the governor's support if he's to declare Rudy's a
    >national historic landmark, his signature legislative initiative to date, 
    >besides his call to, you know, end the war.
    >
    >Secretary of the State Mike DeRosa, meanwhile, has not stopped talking for
    >317 straight days. The logorrheic voting-reform specialist and Connecticut 
    >Green Party founder ignores Gov. Thornton's entreaties to "have a couple of
    >puffs and shut up already," and DeRosa has just repeated himself for the
    >17th time in 16 minutes to an Advocate reporter about the evils of the 
    >two-party system. He's just getting warmed up to tell a story about the
    >campaign-finance-reform miracle currently unfolding in Moodus. Dude, you
    >won , the reporter cries, but to no avail. DeRosa just keeps on reforming, 
    >and reforming, and reforming. He's the Energizer Bunny of reform.
    >
    >Finally, State Treasurer David Bue, pitched to voters as a "socially
    >responsible investment adviser," is meeting with a cabal of unrepentant 
    >Socialists. "How does one square social responsibility with sound
    >investment strategies?" he is asked. "All I can tell you" responds Bue,
    >with a cryptic glimmer in his eye, "is that the only color that matters is 
    >green ." Heads bob. Bue's made the case. Whether it's cash, pot or
    >politics, green is good.
    >
    >It would be thrilling were the above scenario to play out. Sign me right
    >up: Executive bongs, maverick AGs, workingman bloopers, et al. But the 
    >purpose of this year's big statewide Green Party push isn't actually to get
    >these people electedit's to grow the state party into a viable alternative
    >in future elections. It's to ramp up the debate on controversial issues 
    >like decriminalizing marijuana (Thornton) and mothballing Millstone
    >(Burton). And for that the party must be cheered; this is the first time it
    >has fielded a full slate of candidates for statewide office. You can grouse 
    >over what might be perceived as a preference for quantity over quality, but
    >the heck with thatfor good or ill, the Green Party isn't a top-down
    >organization, at least not yet. Migosh, it's downright democratic! And this 
    >Saturday, the party convenes at the AFL-CIO Labor Hall in New Haven to
    >formally announce its platform and nominate its slate of candidates. (See 7
    >Days, page 22, for details.)
    >
    >Tim McKee, the state's Green Party national committee member and Thornton's 
    >campaign manager, is blunt about the upcoming election. There is no spoiler
    >role for the Greens to play, he says, because "Rell is going to win very
    >strongly." Since 1992, McKee says, he has been almost continuously asking 
    >people to run on the Green Party ticket; he says about 500 people have been
    >approached during that time, including the Ralphs, Nader and Ferrucci. "A
    >lot of people have only known us as the Nader party, and vice versa," he 
    >says. "Some people have only seen us at the local but not the statewide
    >level."
    >
    >McKee is quick to point out as well that "each candidacy is still an
    >independent entity, and what we are doing now is not going to be the 
    >finished product."
    >
    >The Green Party must now collect 7,500 signatures so that its candidates
    >can be on the ballot come November. So far, says McKee, they've got about
    >1,000, and he's angling to collect 12,000, just to be on the safe side. The 
    >deadline for submitting the signatures is Aug. 5. That leaves plenty of
    >time to hire a copy editor for Ralph Ferrucci. A couple boxes of Mint
    >Milano cookies ought to do the trick.
    >
    >Use our contact form to write to Tom Gogola. 
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >New Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. Call regular phones from your PC and save
    >big.
    >
    >YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
    >
    >+  Visit your group "VoteThornton" on the web. 
    >
    >+  To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    >VoteThornton-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com <mailto:VoteThornton-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com>
    >
    >+  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. 
    >
    >
    >


    To be removed please mailto://ctgp-news-unsubscribe at ml.greens.org <mailto:mailto://ctgp-news-unsubscribe at ml.greens.org>
    _______________________________________________
    CTGP-news mailing list
    CTGP-news at ml.greens.org<mailto:CTGP-news at ml.greens.org>
    http://ml.greens.org/mailman/listinfo/ctgp-news<http://ml.greens.org/mailman/listinfo/ctgp-news>

    ATTENTION! 
    The information in this transmission is privileged and confidential and intended only for the recipient listed above.  If you have received this transmission in error, please notify us immediately by email and delete the original message.  The text of this email is similar to ordinary or face-to-face conversations and does not reflect the level of factual or legal inquiry or analysis which would be applied in the case of a formal legal opinion and does not constitute a representation of the opinions of the CT Green Party. The responsibility for any messages posted herein is solely that of the person who sent the message, and the CT Green Party hereby leaves this responsibility in the hands of it's members. 

    NOTE: This is an inherently insecure forum, please do not post confidential messages and always realize that your address can be faked, and although a message may appear to be from a certain individual, it is always possible that it is fakemail. This is mail sent by a third party under an illegally assumed identity for purposes of coercion, misdirection, or general mischief. 

    CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: If you have received this e-mail in error, please immediately notify the sender by e-mail at the address shown.  This e-mail transmission may contain confidential information.  This information is intended only for the use of the individual(s) or entity to whom it is intended even if addressed incorrectly.  Please delete it from your files if you are not the intended recipient.  Thank you for your compliance. 

    To be removed please mailto://ctgp-news-unsubscribe at ml.greens.org<mailto:mailto://ctgp-news-unsubscribe at ml.greens.org>



  To be removed please mailto://ctgp-news-unsubscribe at ml.greens.org
  _______________________________________________
  CTGP-news mailing list
  CTGP-news at ml.greens.org
  http://ml.greens.org/mailman/listinfo/ctgp-news

  ATTENTION!
  The information in this transmission is privileged and confidential and intended only for the recipient listed above.  If you have received this transmission in error, please notify us immediately by email and delete the original message.  The text of this email is similar to ordinary or face-to-face conversations and does not reflect the level of factual or legal inquiry or analysis which would be applied in the case of a formal legal opinion and does not constitute a representation of the opinions of the CT Green Party. The responsibility for any messages posted herein is solely that of the person who sent the message, and the CT Green Party hereby leaves this responsibility in the hands of it's members.

  NOTE: This is an inherently insecure forum, please do not post confidential messages and always realize that your address can be faked, and although a message may appear to be from a certain individual, it is always possible that it is fakemail. This is mail sent by a third party under an illegally assumed identity for purposes of coercion, misdirection, or general mischief.

  CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: If you have received this e-mail in error, please immediately notify the sender by e-mail at the address shown.  This e-mail transmission may contain confidential information.  This information is intended only for the use of the individual(s) or entity to whom it is intended even if addressed incorrectly.  Please delete it from your files if you are not the intended recipient.  Thank you for your compliance.

  To be removed please mailto://ctgp-news-unsubscribe at ml.greens.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist10.pair.net/mailman/private/ctgp-news/attachments/20061126/88917a9f/attachment.html>

From efficacy at msn.com  Sun Nov 26 06:24:43 2006
From: efficacy at msn.com (clifford thornton)
Date: Sun, 26 Nov 2006 06:24:43 -0500
Subject: {news} seeking guest lecturer(s) on economics and Iraq war
References: <007701c71119$9223e8f0$3e844c0c@edgn2b574u14bi>
Message-ID: <BAY102-DAV8B0DFC520926D35250363D1E70@phx.gbl>

I would love to be a guest lecturer.  Would there be an honoriaum???

Cliff
Efficacy
PO Box 1234
860 657 8438
Hartford, CT 06143
efficacy at msn.com<mailto:efficacy at msn.com>
www.Efficacy-online.org<http://www.efficacy-online.org/>
 
Working to end race and class drug war injustice, Efficacy is a non profit
501 (c) 3 organization founded in 1997. Your gifts and donations are tax
deductible
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: edubrule<mailto:edubrule at sbcglobal.net> 
  To: ctgp-news at ml.greens.org<mailto:ctgp-news at ml.greens.org> 
  Sent: Sunday, November 26, 2006 12:12 AM
  Subject: {news} seeking guest lecturer(s) on economics and Iraq war


  Connecticut Green Party - Part of the GPUS
  http://www.ctgreens.org/<http://www.ctgreens.org/> - http://www.greenpartyus.org/<http://www.greenpartyus.org/>

  to unsubscribe click here
  mailto://ctgp-news-unsubscribe at ml.greens.org<mailto:ctgp-news-unsubscribe at ml.greens.org> 
  I received the following inquiry to the Connecticut Green Party website.  Can anyone suggest guest lecturer(s)?  Please send suggestions to me and I'll forward them to the person who inquired.  (I suggested to him already the Economy Connection speakers' bureau of the Union for Radical Political Economics, www.urpe.org<http://www.urpe.org/>.)
  --Ed
  ------------------------------------------
  Looking for Guest Lecturer on the political economy of globalization and or neo-liberal theory and Iraq War.  I teach at WCSU in Danbury M&W 330-445pm
  To be removed please mailto://ctgp-news-unsubscribe at ml.greens.org
  _______________________________________________
  CTGP-news mailing list
  CTGP-news at ml.greens.org
  http://ml.greens.org/mailman/listinfo/ctgp-news

  ATTENTION!
  The information in this transmission is privileged and confidential and intended only for the recipient listed above.  If you have received this transmission in error, please notify us immediately by email and delete the original message.  The text of this email is similar to ordinary or face-to-face conversations and does not reflect the level of factual or legal inquiry or analysis which would be applied in the case of a formal legal opinion and does not constitute a representation of the opinions of the CT Green Party. The responsibility for any messages posted herein is solely that of the person who sent the message, and the CT Green Party hereby leaves this responsibility in the hands of it's members.

  NOTE: This is an inherently insecure forum, please do not post confidential messages and always realize that your address can be faked, and although a message may appear to be from a certain individual, it is always possible that it is fakemail. This is mail sent by a third party under an illegally assumed identity for purposes of coercion, misdirection, or general mischief.

  CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: If you have received this e-mail in error, please immediately notify the sender by e-mail at the address shown.  This e-mail transmission may contain confidential information.  This information is intended only for the use of the individual(s) or entity to whom it is intended even if addressed incorrectly.  Please delete it from your files if you are not the intended recipient.  Thank you for your compliance.

  To be removed please mailto://ctgp-news-unsubscribe at ml.greens.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist10.pair.net/mailman/private/ctgp-news/attachments/20061126/512c775f/attachment.html>

From edubrule at sbcglobal.net  Sun Nov 26 11:13:57 2006
From: edubrule at sbcglobal.net (edubrule)
Date: Sun, 26 Nov 2006 11:13:57 -0500
Subject: {news} more info on guest lecture inquiry
Message-ID: <001301c7117b$58757210$1a824c0c@edgn2b574u14bi>

Yesterday I posted that a guest lecturer was sought.  Here is more information as to what is being sought.  As I said in yesterday's post, if you can supply ideas for a guest lecturer, please forward that information to me and I will forward your e-mail to the inquirer.  (I've apologized to the inquirer for a long delay in my response to him;  I should have done this work a long time ago.)
--Ed
----- Original Message ----- 
...
The course I teach at WCSU (as an Adjunct) is entitled: "World Government, Cultures & Economies".

Three of the books we're using are: The Culture Struggle by Michael Parenti
                                                         The Clash of Civilizations by Samuel Huntington
                                                         Globalization and its Discontents by Joseph Stiglitz

It is an introductory political science course wherein we have to cover a lot of subjects, primarily international relations and international economics within our ever corporate driven globalized world. 

So in an effort to spice up the subject matter and make it relevant to our current lives, I was looking for a Guest Lecturer who could comfortably discuss the relationship between international economics and the Iraq war.  

... know some one in or near the Danbury, CT area who would be interested then have them contact me ...

Our class meets M&W 330-445pm in Room ... on the WCSU White Street campus near downtown Danbury...a block and a half away from the MetroNorth Danbury station and about a half mile from the I-84 highway (take Exit 5).   Best time to guest lecture would be this week or next week. 
...
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist10.pair.net/mailman/private/ctgp-news/attachments/20061126/6b0a1d5a/attachment.html>

From dbedellgreen at hotmail.com  Mon Nov 27 19:48:46 2006
From: dbedellgreen at hotmail.com (David Bedell)
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2006 00:48:46 +0000
Subject: {news} CT is one of just 3 states where the cut-off for juvenile
	court is 16
In-Reply-To: <1164668586.a518e33d2e70ed5d.3b320f75@persist.google.com>
Message-ID: <BAY112-F33038EBF5AC99488CF31D2D6E50@phx.gbl>

This is appalling if true.  (The other 2 states, I think, are New York and 
North Carolina.)

http://www.newhavenindependent.org/archives/2006/11/juvy_justice.php

Juvy Justice Crew Tries Again To "Raise The Age"

by Melinda Tuhus | November 20, 2006 09:14 AM


A year after failing to bring Connecticut in line with most other states in 
how treats teen-agers in trouble, lawmakers and advocates are promising to 
try again this coming year to keep kids out of adult jails.

That vow came Friday at a gathering at Gateway Community College, a forum 
similar to one held before the last state legislative session. It brought 
together legislators (like Mike Lawlor, on the left), grassroots activists 
(like Sally Joughin, on the right), educators, and other youth-serving 
organizations.

The room was packed for the breakfast meeting sponsored by the Connecticut 
Juvenile Justice Alliance. Legislative sponsors included State Rep. Toni 
Walker and State Rep. Mike Lawlor, vice chair of the General Assembly?s 
Judiciary Committee. They pushed last year to raise the age to 18 from 16 at 
which youth in Connecticut are treated as adults in the criminal justice 
system. The bill passed the Judiciary Committee but went no further.

Connecticut is one of just three states where the cut-off for juvenile 
status is 16, and, according to data from the federal Bureau of Justice 
Statistics, our little state leads the nation in the number of children 
under 18 in adult prisons and jails ? 383 in 2005 ? 71 percent of any other 
state. (Connecticut is the only state among the top six that lumps local 
jail inmates under 18 together with prison inmates, so it?s a little like 
comparing apples and oranges, but even then the numbers are shockingly 
high.)

The Alliance?s legislative agenda for next year is two-fold: raise the age 
for criminal status for juveniles, and keep children who have committed no 
crimes out of the juvenile justice system.

While the philosophy of the juvy system focuses on treatment and 
rehabilitation (at least in theory), the adult system focuses on punishment. 
But even the juvenile system is not where most of the kids currently in it 
should be, according to advocates. That?s because most of them have not 
committed any crime, but rather have exhibited behavior that is only illegal 
because of their age ? things like skipping school, running away, being 
?beyond control? or defying school rules.

?We did those things as kids ourselves,? said Barbara Fair of People Against 
Injustice, a grassroots reform group. ?Imagine if they locked us all up if 
we didn?t go to school or ran away from home.?

Last year the legislature did pass a law taking 16- and 17-year olds out of 
the criminal justice system who have been determined to come from a Family 
With Service Needs (FWSN). It goes into effect in October 2007, and is 
supposed to provide services to the youth and his/her family to resolve the 
underlying problems that led to the unacceptable behavior.

Critics of treating middle teens as juveniles say building new separate 
facilities and providing treatment will cost more; advocates counter that in 
the long run it will cost less, since more effective treatment will reduce 
recidivism, thus lowering the number of people in the system.

State Rep. Richard Roy (pictured, behind New Haven Assistant Police Chief 
Herman Badger) said that with the explosion of deadly youth violence this 
past summer, that the proposed changes could give the impression of coddling 
wrong-doers.

?How do we address the perception that the youth are running amuck and we?re 
saying, ?Let?s not send them to jail,? when a good number of my constituents 
say, ?Put ?em away and keep ?em away. Don?t put ?em back on the street.???

Abby Anderson (pictured), senior policy fellow with the alliance, answered 
that last year in the state, 10,000 16- and 17-year-olds were arrested, 95 
percent for nonviolent, minor offenses. Yet all went to the adult criminal 
court; studies show that youth treated as adults are more likely to 
re-offend and more likely to turn to more serious crime than young people 
handled through the juvenile system. The goal of the alliance is to move the 
vast majority out of the criminal system while keeping that small minority 
of violent offenders in the adult criminal system.

But that didn?t sit well with Sally Joughin, also of People Against 
Injustice. She said if advocates of the reforms argue that children?s brains 
are different from those of adults, that also applies to the violent 
youthful offenders.

?Just because a youth does a violent crime, they don?t become an adult 
either, so is it just a tactic on the part of the alliance to exclude those 
who do more serious crimes from the legislation so you can get something 
done for the majority of people? Because I don?t feel like violent youthful 
offenders should be in with adult criminals either.?

Hector Glynn, executive director of the alliance, answered, ?If we?re 
successful with the 16- and 17-year olds who aren?t violent, then I think 
the argument can be made [about violent offenders], but I don?t think the 
state?s ready and I don?t think most people are ready to do things blindly. 
We want to make sure we?re doing things for kids and the entire community.?

_________________________________________________________________
MSN Shopping has everything on your holiday list. Get expert picks by style, 
age, and price. Try it! 
http://shopping.msn.com/content/shp/?ctId=8000,ptnrid=176,ptnrdata=200601&tcode=wlmtagline



From roseberry3 at cox.net  Mon Nov 27 20:51:09 2006
From: roseberry3 at cox.net (B Barry)
Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2006 20:51:09 -0500
Subject: {news}
	Agenda for 11-28-06 SCC 7pm Meeting at Portland Senior Center,
Message-ID: <20061128015121.QIHX27551.centrmmtao01.cox.net@eastrmimpo01.cox.net>

Agenda for 11-28-06 SCC Meeting    

Place:********* Portland      Senior     Center,    7  Waverly Avenue,
Portland,  CT (a block east of Portland Public Library)

Phone: 860-342-6760           ********     Time: 7PM to 9PM

 

Facilitator: To Be Determined

 

A.	Preliminaries: 

1.       (1 minute): Introductions of attendees and chapters. Recruit
timekeeper. 

2.       (1 minute): Identify attendees who are NOT voting representatives. 

3.       (1 minute): Adopt ground rules. 

4.       (3 minutes): Approval of tonight's proposed agenda, additions and
deletions. 

5.       (3 minutes): Comments and approval of 8-29-06, 9-26-06 and 10-31-06
SCC minutes. 

6.       (3 minutes):  9-11-06, 10-17-06 and 11-20-06 EC meetings
presentation  and approval. 

7.       (3 minutes):  Treasurer's report by Christopher Reilly .

. 

    

 

Reports:

1.	(20 minutes): Discussion  about CTGP campaigns. 
2.	(15 minutes): U.S. Green Party report by CTGP representatives: Tim
McKee and Charlie Pillsbury:

nominees for GPUS Coordinating Committee; Proposal 248 and grassroots
democracy at GPUS.

3.	(2 minutes, each for): Chapter reports. 
4.	(15 minutes): Issues for CTGP legislative agenda for 12-06: campaign
finance reform; universal health care; drug

reform, patriot's act, living wage, re-structuring energy laws. 

5.	(5 minutes): Chapter study groups about political issues of concern.
6.	(5 minutes): Green Days: GP issues and coalitions.
7.	(5 minutes): CTGP website needs volunteers to write about 10 Key
Values on the website; new moderator.
8.	(2 minutes): V.O.T.E.R. update: ACLU lawsuit regarding 2005 CT
"campaign finance reform" law. 

   9.(5 minutes): Articles for and deadline for "CT Green Times" newspaper,
whether 

   it will be mailed or hand delivered to chapters and/or drop off
locations.

9.	(3 minutes): National Security agency 8-30-06 response to CTGP
freedom of information

request.

 

10.  The New Haven GP would like to bring up to the SCC on 11-28-06:

 a) We would like an update on the plan to change state party rules to allow
for a more workable quorum requirement.   I believe that the definition of
what an active chapter is has also been a part of this planning.

 b) A rule change that would clarify the grounds under which a duly
nominated candidate can be asked by the party to withdraw.

 3) Plans for making on-line contributions available on the CTGP web site
similar to the method used by the Thornton campaign.

 

       11. CTGP spokesperson needed to be a guest speaker at a class at
WCSC. 

The course I teach at WCSU (as an Adjunct) is entitled: "World Government,
Cultures & Economies".  Three of the books we're using are: The Culture
Struggle by Michael Parenti, The Clash of Civilizations by Samuel Huntington
& Globalization and its Discontents by Joseph Stiglitz.   It is an
introductory political science course wherein we have to cover a lot of
subjects, primarily international relations and international economics
within our ever corporate driven globalized world. So in an effort to spice
up the subject matter and make it relevant to our current lives, I was
looking for a Guest Lecturer who could comfortably discuss the relationship
between international economics and the Iraq war. Our class meets M&W
330-445pm in Room ... on the WCSU White Street campus near downtown
Danbury...a block and a half away from the MetroNorth Danbury station and
about a half mile from the I-84 highway (take Exit 5).   Best time to guest
lecture would be this week or next week. 

 

   www.google.com <http://www.google.com/>                www.mapquest.com







-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist10.pair.net/mailman/private/ctgp-news/attachments/20061127/f6c8edbf/attachment.html>

From dbedellgreen at hotmail.com  Tue Nov 28 00:18:48 2006
From: dbedellgreen at hotmail.com (David Bedell)
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2006 05:18:48 +0000
Subject: {news} Fw: Be Green - Buy Green for the Holidays
In-Reply-To: <20061123200007.2622C89C102@gandhi.greens.org>
Message-ID: <BAY112-F17A6FA7FD0AA0C72424AAFD6E50@phx.gbl>

This is a good time to put in a plug for Coop America's "Green Pages"--no 
party affiliation, but full of natural, organic, and fair trade products and 
services, all searchable online:

http://www.coopamerica.org/pubs/greenpages
The National Green Pages? is a directory listing nearly 3,000 businesses 
that have made firm commitments to sustainable, socially just principles, 
including the support of sweatshop-free labor, organic farms, fair trade, 
and cruelty-free products.



David Bedell

_________________________________________________________________
View Athlete?s Collections with Live Search 
http://sportmaps.live.com/index.html?source=hmemailtaglinenov06&FORM=MGAC01



From efficacy at msn.com  Tue Nov 28 09:46:26 2006
From: efficacy at msn.com (clifford thornton)
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2006 09:46:26 -0500
Subject: {news} Initial Reflections on Running for Governor: The Challenges
	and Opportunities
Message-ID: <BAY102-DAV129F7464C3AECE6AE659CD1E50@phx.gbl>

Comments are welcome as this continues to be a work in progress that I 
hope will help future candidates be more effective and help those 
involved with independent politics figure out next steps. 

You are welcome to share this with those who you think will be interested.

Thanks everyone for their work on the campaign.


*Initial Reflections on Running for Governor
The Challenges and Opportunities*

"I saw youth and young adults in the room standing, cheering, and 
excited about Cliff Thornton.  Why does he excite us?  Because we feel like 
someone is finally listening and courageous enough to build his campaign 
around the will of the people with no influence from the corporations." 
Derek Maxwell--Professor, Capitol Community Colloge 

"If elections were decided on personality, Cliff Thornton -- the Green Party candidate for governor in Connecticut -- would win by a landslide. Why? Because he's got one. A personality, that is. He has a backbone to match."

"Perhaps because Thornton has nothing to lose and everything to gain, he can "afford" to tell the truth. But perhaps, in these deeply troubled times, telling the truth is no longer a political liability. Who knows? Maybe Americans really have had enough. Maybe they want to be adults again, maybe they're sick of the sheer wimpiness of the candidates (Republican and Democrat)."

This was from the Hartford Advocate entitled "Memo to all candidates of America: Grow a spine!
By Alan Bisbort."

These were the kind of comments made during my run for Governor in 
Connecticut which made for a great experience. To be honest, I had fun. 

There were many moments I will never forget -- the first ever commercial,
Students meeting us in Greenwich with a bag of money--then escorting
us to the gym where there were over three hundred people waiting, winning the
Griswold poll, continuous coverage on CTN every week for four months, etc, etc.
I met a lot of committed people who I am sure will be allies for many years.  
My hope is that we can find a way to build an effective 
independent political movement that will give real hope in the future -- 
by winning elections!

There were a lot of key lessons that I want to share so that future 
candidates will have them before they run for office. 

*Debates:* The lesson learned is that getting into the debates is only a first step, 
making sure they are televised is equally important./  And, they must be 
televised from gavel to gavel.

If the debate is not on TV the third party candidate's role is likely to 
be ignored by the media.  At least, that was my experience.(Storrs debate)  It was 
amazing to watch how blatant most of the corporate media was  
excluding me from their coverage.  The Hartford Courant may have been the 
most aggressive -- headlines only mentioned my opponents, 
photographs only showed my opponents and no substance of my positions 
was given in most of their coverage.  There were two major articles, one in
January and the most recent with Ralph N. It was a bold rewriting of reality.

A major challenge was the New London Day.  They refused to include me in the 
debates and as a result redefined the race as a two candidate race late 
in the campaign.  The New London Day applied the criteria of the Commission 
on Presidential Debates to their determination.  This criteria was 
developed by the two status quo parties that created the Commission to 
keep out alternative voices. The criteria is almost unreachable except 
for celebrity or billionaire candidates -- 15% in five polls, and, 
because the New London Day debate was televised and widely covered it 
totally ruined any chance of turning this into a three-way race.

So our challenge is to keep the door open -- indeed open it wider -- and 
get the debates of qualified candidates who have ballot access covered 
fully on television.

*Media Coverage:*  The role of the corporate media in the outcome of 
elections is of utmost importance.  We need to realize that when we 
challenge the corporate parties they will have the corporate media as an 
ally.  This is a very big obstacle because third party candidates will 
almost never have enough money to buy enough media time. They depend on the 
media to do its job fairly to let the public know that we are running 
and what we stand for.  While we were able to get more coverage than most 
third party candidates it was still very unbalanced in comparison to my 
opponents, incomplete and unfair.

There are many examples, but once again the Hartford Courant stands out 
as the worst among the worst!   The Connecticut Post did five, six articles on the impact 
of the Drug War and education on Connecticut politics.  These included an A section front 
page story and two B section front page stories. 

When the New Haven Register covered my candidacy 
they wrote about my key issues as early as January.  The Register
even had the Dems and Repubs answering questions posed in
earlier articles by Greens. There were editorials and for the
most part the Register was fair in its coverage.

An example of television media was WFSB-TV in Hartford and channel 30.  They did a 
series of stories on various issues -- e.g., the environment, economy, 
energy, Iraq -- comparing the Senate candidates. But, they decided to 
only cover the two status quo party candidates.  Their rationale -- they 
applied the 15 percent standard that was used by The New London Day for inclusion in 
debates.  If we get WFSB, WCNH and Channel 30 to change it may have a broader effect on other 
electronic media.  I might mention that Channel 30 had me on twice, WFSB once, nothing for channel
8--only during the protest and a couple of other times.

I did pretty well regarding radio coverage.  But even here there were 
bias problems.  WNPR -- the public radio station in Hartford -- did a 
lot of stories on the Senate campaign.  Sometimes they covered me but 
too many times they didn't -- repeatedly defining the race as a two 
candidate race.  Complaints by my supporters definitely seemed to make a 
difference. The Dankosky show did have me on twice, once during the 
primary and once during the general election.

Candidates should not shy away from being very aggressive with the media 
when they fail to cover you.  They need to hear from you when they are 
prejudiced as one thing about prejudice is that those who act based on 
it are often unaware of it as it is deeply ingrained.  They are part of 
a corporate culture that has an attitude that they have adopted.  
Further, it is important to meet face-to-face with the key people in the 
media -- and come dressed for the job you want.  This made a tremendous 
difference in my campaign. After meeting with some key people I at least 
got mentioned in the media. 

Independent media is very important.  It reaches key groups of people 
and is growing in its reach.  Further, it provides an opportunity to 
show your views and activities on your website.  We need to encourage 
independent media, help expand it and add to its credibility.  Every 
year independent media is catching up to the shrinking circulation and 
viewership of the corporate media.  Soon the tipping point will be 
reached and it will become an equal factor in communication.  My hat
is off to the independent media of Connecticut.  They continuously had
us in the news, TV, radio and print.

*Campaign management:* One of the big weaknesses of the third party 
movement is the lack of experience in managing campaigns.  This includes 
a lack of campaign managers, fundraisers, press secretaries, volunteer 
coordinators and other campaign staff.  The third party movement 
desperately needs an organization that trains people in these areas as 
well as provides support to campaigns.  In my case I had three dedicated 
staff members who did excellent work but who each had very little 
campaign experience.  I'm sure they would agree that if we had one 
experienced campaign manager to direct them we would have achieved much 
greater levels of success as each of us (me and my staff) would have 
done better with aggressive direction. This improvement also would have 
positively affected the work of volunteers.

*Fundraising:* The biggest failure of my campaign -- out of things I 
could control (I could not completely control the debates or media 
coverage) was fundraising.  I have worked in three significant movements 
-- drug policy reform, the anti-war movement and democracy reform -- but 
these movements (like most others) are infected with the two party 
virus.  They have no confidence in third parties and therefore most of 
their participants do not fund them.

I was particularly disappointed in the drug policy reform movement where 
I have had a fifteen year career. Although there were a few exceptions my 
career-long allies, who I have no doubt respect my work, did not provide 
major funding for this campaign. Many did not even make token 
contributions as a sign of respect or friendship.  Similarly the peace 
and democracy movements provided insignificant funding. 

Frankly, this is one reason that all these movements (and the union, 
environmental and women's rights movements) are weaker than they should 
be.  They cow-tow to the Democratic Party even though the Democrats do 
very little for them -- indeed often hurt their agenda.  They give 
support no matter what the Democratic candidate stands for, thus, they 
are taken for granted. I'm not sure how to convince them that this is a 
failed strategy but we need to keep trying.  They will not make progress 
on their issues until they get serious about electoral politics -- 
putting their agenda far ahead of loyalty to any political party.

Many in the Green Party that nominated me do not understand the 
importance of money.  While I did receive support from some members of 
each party, generally speaking I was disappointed. The Greens in 
particular seem very uncomfortable with money as they see it as a 
corrupting influence no matter what the circumstances.  We need to find 
ways to convince members of party that funding their candidates 
is THE top priority.  There were times I went to Green Party meetings 
and did not even leave with enough money to pay the gas bill!  Sadly, 
the media measures potential for success by how much money we raise, 
more than by the strength of our ideas or the number of volunteers we 
have.  Money is critical and must be made the top priority.  It should 
not be feared but welcomed!

*Viability of Third Parties:* There are a lot of people who are 
disgusted with the Democrats and Republicans but they do not see 
anywhere else to go.  For those of us who want to see peace, justice, 
environmental transformation as well as a populist economic policy, we 
have two choices (1) change either of the two established parties, or 
(2) create an effective alternative to them. 

Neither choice is easy.  The established parties are very good at 
absorbing insurgents who want to change their party from the inside.  
They let them speak but the primary system is an excellent way to kill 
off any insurgency.  The primary is focused on the people committed to 
the party and therefore the voters are more likely to support the choice 
of the party leadership.  I am not sure what exactly went on in Duffey's
bid for office so I can not make a clear consice comment or evaluation.
I am not sure if we had insurgents or not as I was concentrating on
my campaign and in particular our media thrust.

The third party option is also very challenging.  The reasons above -- 
money, media, lack of campaign experience -- are all hurdles to 
overcome.  But, the biggest hurdle is the dedication of voters 
associated with their own established party.  In my race, The Democrats 
did not want to risk getting the mayor elected so most who said they
would have voted for me did not. I would estimate that I got as many
Republican votes as Dems. 


The "returning to their party" phenomenon is common in the last month of 
almost every election with third party candidates unless they are 
showing a chance of winning.  Traditionally, half the vote for third 
party candidates is lost in the last month.  Polling showing a close 
race is one of the factors, but my sense is that the more powerful 
factor is the sense that "we can't win" is the overwhelming factor.
People want to be represented in government.  They 
feel like they are better represented when they vote for someone who 
wins even if they don't agree with what s/he stands for than to vote for 
someone they agree with. That leads me to (2) educating voters on the 
power of voting for what you want.  They need to see that they can 
change the course of the government better by voting for what they want, 
rather than voting for a winner who they disagree with.  U.S. history is 
replete with examples of such impact but Americans don't know this history.

I see two good signs in Connecticut. First, the African American community, 
a key voting bloc making up 12% of the voting population, is tired of 
being taken for granted by the Democrats and distrustful of the 
Republicans even when they run an African American candidate.  We need 
to show them that joining with an independent alternative that includes 
disenchanted blacks and whites, anti-war voters and independents is the 
way for them to have the most electoral power.  Three-way races will 
increase minority power because we can win with as little as 34%.  I 
want to find ways to reach out to the African American community and 
keep building among the other communities.

Secondly, support among independents is rising for the Green Party. We are 
becoming the alternative for independents.  My guess is this has nothing 
to do with "Green" (in fact that may even be a detriment) but has more 
to do with being tired of the two established parties, seeing their 
corruption and their inability to be effective in response to the 
peoples needs. There are going to be opportunities for the Greens
(or other third parties) to become the second party in some areas of the state.
Indeed, this seems to already be occurring in Willimantic.

Pulling people from the two parties requires a bridge.  Calab Kleppner, 
Green Party, New Haven has been raising the possibility of an 
independent non-partisan voters league that would function as a way to 
educate voters tired of the two parties and unite them behind 
candidates.  This could include supporting an independent candidate or a 
candidate of a third party, or a real insurgent inside either of the two 
parties.  This kind of flexibility will make it easier for those not 
quite ready to put the two parties behind them to consider the 
possibility and perhaps show them that there is a viable third 
alternative.  
This is also consistent with a viewpoint expressed to me 
by Libertarians, who expressed the view that we should 
all find ways to keep working together but it is important that people 
be able to keep their own independent identity with whomever political 
party they prefer. If an independent non-partisan voter league was 
developed in Connecticut successfully then the support of that league may 
provide more credibility of candidates they got behind.  This could also 
have a very positive effect on media coverage and fundraising.

Clifford Wallace Thornton, Jr.

Efficacy
PO Box 1234
860 657 8438
Hartford, CT 06143
efficacy at msn.com<mailto:efficacy at msn.com>
www.Efficacy-online.org<http://www.efficacy-online.org/>
 
Working to end race and class drug war injustice, Efficacy is a non profit
501 (c) 3 organization founded in 1997. Your gifts and donations are tax
deductible


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist10.pair.net/mailman/private/ctgp-news/attachments/20061128/1030eea1/attachment.html>

From efficacy at msn.com  Tue Nov 28 10:03:35 2006
From: efficacy at msn.com (clifford thornton)
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2006 10:03:35 -0500
Subject: {news}Agenda for 11-28-06 SCC 7pm Meeting at Portland Senior
	Center, 
References: <20061128015121.QIHX27551.centrmmtao01.cox.net@eastrmimpo01.cox.net>
Message-ID: <BAY102-DAV13ADC9E3ADE879A0AEA41AD1E50@phx.gbl>



This is in response to item 11 on the agenda.

Owen Sullivan <owensullivan at ireland.com<mailto:owensullivan at ireland.com>> wrote;


Hi Mr. Thornton,

Per our earlier phone conversation, my political science class meets M & W 330-445 pm in Room 303 of Warner Hall on the WCSU campus on White Street (Route 6) near downtown Danbury.
Warner Hall is next door to the University's Haas Library. 

The name of the class is "World Government, Cultures and Economies".  It is an introductory course really to International Relations and International Political Economy. Most of my students are business majors and they have read and are reading "The Culture Struggle" by Michael Parenti, "The Clash of Civilizations" by Samuel Huntington, and "Globalization and its Discontents" by Joseph Stiglitz. 

If you could guest lecture on next Monday December 4th, 2006 starting at 330 pm that would be great.  And if you would be willing to guest lecture on your area of expertise, international drug policy as a manifestation of geo-political strategy and or corporate globaliztion then that would be TERRIFIC!  

Western Conn. State University is located off of Exit 5 on I-84...if you need directions then just let me know.  You can reach me at this email address or at my phone number 
203-264-0192.

I would be happy to buy you late lunch or an early dinner at the Brazilian Cafe next door to the campus. 

I look forward to meeting you and if I can be of any further assistance then please let me know.

Sincerely,

Owen Sullivan. 





Efficacy
PO Box 1234
860 657 8438
Hartford, CT 06143
efficacy at msn.com<mailto:efficacy at msn.com>
www.Efficacy-online.org<http://www.efficacy-online.org/>
 
Working to end race and class drug war injustice, Efficacy is a non profit
501 (c) 3 organization founded in 1997. Your gifts and donations are tax
deductible
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: B Barry<mailto:roseberry3 at cox.net> 
  To: ctgp-news at ml.greens.org<mailto:ctgp-news at ml.greens.org> 
  Sent: Monday, November 27, 2006 8:51 PM
  Subject: {news}Agenda for 11-28-06 SCC 7pm Meeting at Portland Senior Center,


  Connecticut Green Party - Part of the GPUS
  http://www.ctgreens.org/<http://www.ctgreens.org/> - http://www.greenpartyus.org/<http://www.greenpartyus.org/>

  to unsubscribe click here
  mailto:ctgp-news-unsubscribe at ml.greens.org<mailto:ctgp-news-unsubscribe at ml.greens.org> 
  Agenda for 11-28-06 SCC Meeting    

  Place:********* Portland      Senior     Center,    7  Waverly Avenue, Portland,  CT (a block east of Portland Public Library)

  Phone: 860-342-6760           ********     Time: 7PM to 9PM

   

  Facilitator: To Be Determined

   

    1.. Preliminaries: 
  1.       (1 minute): Introductions of attendees and chapters. Recruit timekeeper. 

  2.       (1 minute): Identify attendees who are NOT voting representatives. 

  3.       (1 minute): Adopt ground rules. 

  4.       (3 minutes): Approval of tonight's proposed agenda, additions and deletions. 

  5.       (3 minutes): Comments and approval of 8-29-06, 9-26-06 and 10-31-06 SCC minutes. 

  6.       (3 minutes):  9-11-06, 10-17-06 and 11-20-06 EC meetings presentation  and approval. 

  7.       (3 minutes):  Treasurer's report by Christopher Reilly .

  . 

      

   

  Reports:

    1.. (20 minutes): Discussion  about CTGP campaigns. 
    2.. (15 minutes): U.S. Green Party report by CTGP representatives: Tim McKee and Charlie Pillsbury: 
  nominees for GPUS Coordinating Committee; Proposal 248 and grassroots democracy at GPUS.

    3.. (2 minutes, each for): Chapter reports. 
    4.. (15 minutes): Issues for CTGP legislative agenda for 12-06: campaign finance reform; universal health care; drug 
  reform, patriot's act, living wage, re-structuring energy laws. 

    5.. (5 minutes): Chapter study groups about political issues of concern. 
    6.. (5 minutes): Green Days: GP issues and coalitions. 
    7.. (5 minutes): CTGP website needs volunteers to write about 10 Key Values on the website; new moderator. 
    8.. (2 minutes): V.O.T.E.R. update: ACLU lawsuit regarding 2005 CT "campaign finance reform" law. 
     9.(5 minutes): Articles for and deadline for "CT Green Times" newspaper, whether 

     it will be mailed or hand delivered to chapters and/or drop off locations.

    9.. (3 minutes): National Security agency 8-30-06 response to CTGP freedom of information 
  request.

   

  10.  The New Haven GP would like to bring up to the SCC on 11-28-06:

   a) We would like an update on the plan to change state party rules to allow for a more workable quorum requirement.   I believe that the definition of what an active chapter is has also been a part of this planning.

   b) A rule change that would clarify the grounds under which a duly nominated candidate can be asked by the party to withdraw.

   3) Plans for making on-line contributions available on the CTGP web site similar to the method used by the Thornton campaign.

   

         11. CTGP spokesperson needed to be a guest speaker at a class at  WCSC. 

  The course I teach at WCSU (as an Adjunct) is entitled: "World Government, Cultures & Economies".  Three of the books we're using are: The Culture Struggle by Michael Parenti, The Clash of Civilizations by Samuel Huntington & Globalization and its Discontents by Joseph Stiglitz.   It is an introductory political science course wherein we have to cover a lot of subjects, primarily international relations and international economics within our ever corporate driven globalized world. So in an effort to spice up the subject matter and make it relevant to our current lives, I was looking for a Guest Lecturer who could comfortably discuss the relationship between international economics and the Iraq war. Our class meets M&W 330-445pm in Room ... on the WCSU White Street campus near downtown Danbury...a block and a half away from the MetroNorth Danbury station and about a half mile from the I-84 highway (take Exit 5).   Best time to guest lecture would be this week or next week. 

   

     www.google.com<http://www.google.com/>               www.mapquest.com







  To be removed please mailto:ctgp-news-unsubscribe at ml.greens.org
  _______________________________________________
  CTGP-news mailing list
  CTGP-news at ml.greens.org
  http://ml.greens.org/mailman/listinfo/ctgp-news

  ATTENTION!
  The information in this transmission is privileged and confidential and intended only for the recipient listed above.  If you have received this transmission in error, please notify us immediately by email and delete the original message.  The text of this email is similar to ordinary or face-to-face conversations and does not reflect the level of factual or legal inquiry or analysis which would be applied in the case of a formal legal opinion and does not constitute a representation of the opinions of the CT Green Party. The responsibility for any messages posted herein is solely that of the person who sent the message, and the CT Green Party hereby leaves this responsibility in the hands of it's members.

  NOTE: This is an inherently insecure forum, please do not post confidential messages and always realize that your address can be faked, and although a message may appear to be from a certain individual, it is always possible that it is fakemail. This is mail sent by a third party under an illegally assumed identity for purposes of coercion, misdirection, or general mischief.

  CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: If you have received this e-mail in error, please immediately notify the sender by e-mail at the address shown.  This e-mail transmission may contain confidential information.  This information is intended only for the use of the individual(s) or entity to whom it is intended even if addressed incorrectly.  Please delete it from your files if you are not the intended recipient.  Thank you for your compliance.

  To be removed please mailto://ctgp-news-unsubscribe at ml.greens.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist10.pair.net/mailman/private/ctgp-news/attachments/20061128/5bc91909/attachment.html>

From demac at galaxyinternet.net  Tue Nov 28 14:50:30 2006
From: demac at galaxyinternet.net (demac)
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2006 14:50:30 -0500
Subject: {news} Initial Reflections on Running for Governor: The
	Challengesand Opportunities
Message-ID: <001601c71326$798d5920$38b2d942@jean1oa1rgr0ov>

Good piece, Cliff.  

 

Here's what I learned this season:  The "returning to their party"
phenomenon is common in the last month of almost every election with third
party candidates unless they are showing a chance of winning.
Traditionally, half the vote for third party candidates is lost in the last
month.  Polling showing a close race is one of the factors, but my sense is
that the more powerful factor is the sense that "we can't win" is the
overwhelming factor. People want to be represented in government.  They feel
like they are better represented when they vote for someone who
wins even if they don't agree with what s/he stands for than to vote for
someone they agree with. That leads me to (2) educating voters on the power
of voting for what you want.  They need to see that they can change the
course of the government better by voting for what they want, rather than
voting for a winner who they disagree with.  U.S. history is replete with
examples of such impact but Americans don't know this history.

My own sister (who lives in Mass) articulated "wasted vote" thoughts, and
the line about wanting to vote for someone who will win.  The illogic of it
has always made me ignore those sentiments:  elections aren't a "bet" to
vote on who is going to win (or are they?).  But this is a much more serious
hurdle than I realized, and we will have to deal with it, somehow.  Not with
logic, obviously :-). 

 

There is a definite psychology to voting and momentum gathering.  I saw it
even with Lamont.  As soon as he began to slip, it became a freefall that he
didn't know how to stop.  It may have just taken one photo op, or a great
phrase-whatever it was, he didn't provide it.  And voters actually began to
make up their minds based on the fact that he wasn't going to win-strange,
but true.  Is it because people want to be able to say, "I voted for him
(the winner)"?  

 

In Willi, I often sensed a certain reluctance from people to talk about the
campaign afterwards, even avoidance (like someone died).  But this time,
after an overwhelming loss, people have been totally friendly--shaking my
hand, good run, etc.  Is that because of no guilty consciences that their
vote against me cost me the election?  Or no feeling of "I voted for you,
and you lost."?   How much does the disappointment hurt them?

 

Anyway, those who encourage me to continue running frequently say it doesn't
matter if I ever win, they just want someone to vote for.  So the "protest
vote" has a definite appeal to a certain minority.  But how do we get those
others?  Issues (and all of the things that we think are most important)
don't work.  Winning elections is all smoke, mirrors, psychology.  Yech.

 

We need to talk with other states to see what got votes.  

 

Jean

 

-----Original Message-----
From: ctgp-news-bounces at ml.greens.org
[mailto:ctgp-news-bounces at ml.greens.org] On Behalf Of clifford thornton
Sent: Tuesday, November 28, 2006 9:46 AM
To: ctgp-news
Subject: {news} Initial Reflections on Running for Governor: The
Challengesand Opportunities

 

Comments are welcome as this continues to be a work in progress that I 
hope will help future candidates be more effective and help those 
involved with independent politics figure out next steps. 

You are welcome to share this with those who you think will be interested.

Thanks everyone for their work on the campaign.


*Initial Reflections on Running for Governor
The Challenges and Opportunities*

"I saw youth and young adults in the room standing, cheering, and 
excited about Cliff Thornton.  Why does he excite us?  Because we feel like 
someone is finally listening and courageous enough to build his campaign 
around the will of the people with no influence from the corporations." 

Derek Maxwell--Professor, Capitol Community Colloge 

"If elections were decided on personality, Cliff Thornton -- the Green Party
candidate for governor in Connecticut -- would win by a landslide. Why?
Because he's got one. A personality, that is. He has a backbone to match."

 

"Perhaps because Thornton has nothing to lose and everything to gain, he can
"afford" to tell the truth. But perhaps, in these deeply troubled times,
telling the truth is no longer a political liability. Who knows? Maybe
Americans really have had enough. Maybe they want to be adults again, maybe
they're sick of the sheer wimpiness of the candidates (Republican and
Democrat)."

 

This was from the Hartford Advocate entitled "Memo to all candidates of
America: Grow a spine!

By Alan Bisbort."


These were the kind of comments made during my run for Governor in 
Connecticut which made for a great experience. To be honest, I had fun. 

There were many moments I will never forget -- the first ever commercial,

Students meeting us in Greenwich with a bag of money--then escorting

us to the gym where there were over three hundred people waiting, winning
the

Griswold poll, continuous coverage on CTN every week for four months, etc,
etc.

I met a lot of committed people who I am sure will be allies for many years.


My hope is that we can find a way to build an effective 
independent political movement that will give real hope in the future -- 
by winning elections!

There were a lot of key lessons that I want to share so that future 
candidates will have them before they run for office. 

*Debates:* The lesson learned is that getting into the debates is only a
first step, 
making sure they are televised is equally important./  And, they must be 
televised from gavel to gavel.

If the debate is not on TV the third party candidate's role is likely to 
be ignored by the media.  At least, that was my experience.(Storrs debate)
It was 
amazing to watch how blatant most of the corporate media was  
excluding me from their coverage.  The Hartford Courant may have been the 
most aggressive -- headlines only mentioned my opponents, 
photographs only showed my opponents and no substance of my positions 
was given in most of their coverage.  There were two major articles, one in

January and the most recent with Ralph N. It was a bold rewriting of
reality.

A major challenge was the New London Day.  They refused to include me in the

debates and as a result redefined the race as a two candidate race late 
in the campaign.  The New London Day applied the criteria of the Commission 
on Presidential Debates to their determination.  This criteria was 
developed by the two status quo parties that created the Commission to 
keep out alternative voices. The criteria is almost unreachable except 
for celebrity or billionaire candidates -- 15% in five polls, and, 
because the New London Day debate was televised and widely covered it 
totally ruined any chance of turning this into a three-way race.

So our challenge is to keep the door open -- indeed open it wider -- and 
get the debates of qualified candidates who have ballot access covered 

fully on television.

*Media Coverage:*  The role of the corporate media in the outcome of 
elections is of utmost importance.  We need to realize that when we 
challenge the corporate parties they will have the corporate media as an 
ally.  This is a very big obstacle because third party candidates will 
almost never have enough money to buy enough media time. They depend on the 
media to do its job fairly to let the public know that we are running 
and what we stand for.  While we were able to get more coverage than most 
third party candidates it was still very unbalanced in comparison to my 
opponents, incomplete and unfair.

There are many examples, but once again the Hartford Courant stands out 
as the worst among the worst!   The Connecticut Post did five, six articles
on the impact 
of the Drug War and education on Connecticut politics.  These included an A
section front 
page story and two B section front page stories. 

When the New Haven Register covered my candidacy 

they wrote about my key issues as early as January.  The Register

even had the Dems and Repubs answering questions posed in

earlier articles by Greens. There were editorials and for the

most part the Register was fair in its coverage.

An example of television media was WFSB-TV in Hartford and channel 30.  They
did a 
series of stories on various issues -- e.g., the environment, economy, 
energy, Iraq -- comparing the Senate candidates. But, they decided to 
only cover the two status quo party candidates.  Their rationale -- they 
applied the 15 percent standard that was used by The New London Day for
inclusion in 
debates.  If we get WFSB, WCNH and Channel 30 to change it may have a
broader effect on other 
electronic media.  I might mention that Channel 30 had me on twice, WFSB
once, nothing for channel

8--only during the protest and a couple of other times.

I did pretty well regarding radio coverage.  But even here there were 
bias problems.  WNPR -- the public radio station in Hartford -- did a 
lot of stories on the Senate campaign.  Sometimes they covered me but 
too many times they didn't -- repeatedly defining the race as a two 
candidate race.  Complaints by my supporters definitely seemed to make a 
difference. The Dankosky show did have me on twice, once during the 
primary and once during the general election.

Candidates should not shy away from being very aggressive with the media 
when they fail to cover you.  They need to hear from you when they are 
prejudiced as one thing about prejudice is that those who act based on 
it are often unaware of it as it is deeply ingrained.  They are part of 
a corporate culture that has an attitude that they have adopted.  
Further, it is important to meet face-to-face with the key people in the 
media -- and come dressed for the job you want.  This made a tremendous 
difference in my campaign. After meeting with some key people I at least 
got mentioned in the media. 

Independent media is very important.  It reaches key groups of people 
and is growing in its reach.  Further, it provides an opportunity to 
show your views and activities on your website.  We need to encourage 
independent media, help expand it and add to its credibility.  Every 
year independent media is catching up to the shrinking circulation and 
viewership of the corporate media.  Soon the tipping point will be 
reached and it will become an equal factor in communication.  My hat

is off to the independent media of Connecticut.  They continuously had

us in the news, TV, radio and print.

*Campaign management:* One of the big weaknesses of the third party 
movement is the lack of experience in managing campaigns.  This includes 
a lack of campaign managers, fundraisers, press secretaries, volunteer 
coordinators and other campaign staff.  The third party movement 
desperately needs an organization that trains people in these areas as 
well as provides support to campaigns.  In my case I had three dedicated 
staff members who did excellent work but who each had very little 
campaign experience.  I'm sure they would agree that if we had one 
experienced campaign manager to direct them we would have achieved much 
greater levels of success as each of us (me and my staff) would have 
done better with aggressive direction. This improvement also would have 
positively affected the work of volunteers.

*Fundraising:* The biggest failure of my campaign -- out of things I 
could control (I could not completely control the debates or media 
coverage) was fundraising.  I have worked in three significant movements 
-- drug policy reform, the anti-war movement and democracy reform -- but 
these movements (like most others) are infected with the two party 
virus.  They have no confidence in third parties and therefore most of 
their participants do not fund them.

I was particularly disappointed in the drug policy reform movement where 
I have had a fifteen year career. Although there were a few exceptions my 
career-long allies, who I have no doubt respect my work, did not provide 
major funding for this campaign. Many did not even make token 
contributions as a sign of respect or friendship.  Similarly the peace 
and democracy movements provided insignificant funding. 

Frankly, this is one reason that all these movements (and the union, 
environmental and women's rights movements) are weaker than they should 
be.  They cow-tow to the Democratic Party even though the Democrats do 
very little for them -- indeed often hurt their agenda.  They give 
support no matter what the Democratic candidate stands for, thus, they 
are taken for granted. I'm not sure how to convince them that this is a 
failed strategy but we need to keep trying.  They will not make progress 
on their issues until they get serious about electoral politics -- 
putting their agenda far ahead of loyalty to any political party.

Many in the Green Party that nominated me do not understand the 
importance of money.  While I did receive support from some members of 
each party, generally speaking I was disappointed. The Greens in 
particular seem very uncomfortable with money as they see it as a 
corrupting influence no matter what the circumstances.  We need to find 
ways to convince members of party that funding their candidates 
is THE top priority.  There were times I went to Green Party meetings 
and did not even leave with enough money to pay the gas bill!  Sadly, 
the media measures potential for success by how much money we raise, 
more than by the strength of our ideas or the number of volunteers we 
have.  Money is critical and must be made the top priority.  It should 
not be feared but welcomed!

*Viability of Third Parties:* There are a lot of people who are 
disgusted with the Democrats and Republicans but they do not see 
anywhere else to go.  For those of us who want to see peace, justice, 
environmental transformation as well as a populist economic policy, we 
have two choices (1) change either of the two established parties, or 
(2) create an effective alternative to them. 

Neither choice is easy.  The established parties are very good at 
absorbing insurgents who want to change their party from the inside.  
They let them speak but the primary system is an excellent way to kill 
off any insurgency.  The primary is focused on the people committed to 
the party and therefore the voters are more likely to support the choice 
of the party leadership.  I am not sure what exactly went on in Duffey's

bid for office so I can not make a clear consice comment or evaluation.

I am not sure if we had insurgents or not as I was concentrating on

my campaign and in particular our media thrust.

The third party option is also very challenging.  The reasons above -- 
money, media, lack of campaign experience -- are all hurdles to 
overcome.  But, the biggest hurdle is the dedication of voters 
associated with their own established party.  In my race, The Democrats 
did not want to risk getting the mayor elected so most who said they

would have voted for me did not. I would estimate that I got as many

Republican votes as Dems. 



The "returning to their party" phenomenon is common in the last month of 
almost every election with third party candidates unless they are 
showing a chance of winning.  Traditionally, half the vote for third 
party candidates is lost in the last month.  Polling showing a close 
race is one of the factors, but my sense is that the more powerful 
factor is the sense that "we can't win" is the overwhelming factor.

People want to be represented in government.  They 
feel like they are better represented when they vote for someone who 
wins even if they don't agree with what s/he stands for than to vote for 
someone they agree with. That leads me to (2) educating voters on the 
power of voting for what you want.  They need to see that they can 
change the course of the government better by voting for what they want, 
rather than voting for a winner who they disagree with.  U.S. history is 
replete with examples of such impact but Americans don't know this history.

I see two good signs in Connecticut. First, the African American community, 
a key voting bloc making up 12% of the voting population, is tired of 
being taken for granted by the Democrats and distrustful of the 
Republicans even when they run an African American candidate.  We need 
to show them that joining with an independent alternative that includes 
disenchanted blacks and whites, anti-war voters and independents is the 
way for them to have the most electoral power.  Three-way races will 
increase minority power because we can win with as little as 34%.  I 
want to find ways to reach out to the African American community and 
keep building among the other communities.

Secondly, support among independents is rising for the Green Party. We are 
becoming the alternative for independents.  My guess is this has nothing 
to do with "Green" (in fact that may even be a detriment) but has more 
to do with being tired of the two established parties, seeing their 
corruption and their inability to be effective in response to the 
peoples needs. There are going to be opportunities for the Greens

(or other third parties) to become the second party in some areas of the
state.

Indeed, this seems to already be occurring in Willimantic.

Pulling people from the two parties requires a bridge.  Calab Kleppner, 
Green Party, New Haven has been raising the possibility of an 
independent non-partisan voters league that would function as a way to 
educate voters tired of the two parties and unite them behind 
candidates.  This could include supporting an independent candidate or a 
candidate of a third party, or a real insurgent inside either of the two 
parties.  This kind of flexibility will make it easier for those not 
quite ready to put the two parties behind them to consider the 
possibility and perhaps show them that there is a viable third 
alternative.  

This is also consistent with a viewpoint expressed to me 
by Libertarians, who expressed the view that we should 
all find ways to keep working together but it is important that people 
be able to keep their own independent identity with whomever political 
party they prefer. If an independent non-partisan voter league was 
developed in Connecticut successfully then the support of that league may 
provide more credibility of candidates they got behind.  This could also 
have a very positive effect on media coverage and fundraising.

 

Clifford Wallace Thornton, Jr.

 

Efficacy
PO Box 1234
860 657 8438
Hartford, CT 06143
efficacy at msn.com
www.Efficacy-online.org
 
Working to end race and class drug war injustice, Efficacy is a non profit
501 (c) 3 organization founded in 1997. Your gifts and donations are tax
deductible

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist10.pair.net/mailman/private/ctgp-news/attachments/20061128/dae68a7e/attachment.html>

From efficacy at msn.com  Thu Nov 30 11:26:36 2006
From: efficacy at msn.com (clifford thornton)
Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2006 11:26:36 -0500
Subject: Fw: Fw: {news} Initial Reflections on Running for Governor: The
	Challengesand Opportunities
Message-ID: <BAY102-DAV11612765C44FAB2D3C5BCFD1DB0@phx.gbl>

Keep the comments coming.  I am hoping that as a groups we can come  up with some good suggestions.

Cliff
Efficacy
PO Box 1234
860 657 8438
Hartford, CT 06143
efficacy at msn.com<mailto:efficacy at msn.com>
www.Efficacy-online.org<http://www.efficacy-online.org/>
 
Working to end race and class drug war injustice, Efficacy is a non profit
501 (c) 3 organization founded in 1997. Your gifts and donations are tax
deductible
----- Original Message ----- 
From: ken krayeske<mailto:ken at votethornton.com> 
To: Patricia Kane<mailto:law_office_kane at yahoo.com> 
Cc: clifford thornton<mailto:efficacy at msn.com> 
Sent: Thursday, November 30, 2006 10:59 AM
Subject: Re: Fw: {news} Initial Reflections on Running for Governor: The Challengesand Opportunities


Pat

your comments well taken, as are cliff's

at some point, once i get through this week, i will issue a similar look 
back at where we succeeded and failed. I met with allan brison yesterday 
to discuss his potential run for city council, and it doesn't look 
promising. he can't identify a single individual who could be his 
campaign manager or his treasurer.  ugh.

any discussion of what we are doing should consider this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duverger's_law<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duverger's_law>

potential direction:
short term: 1. close out cliff's campaign - eliminate campaign debt
2. finding a slate - a treasurer and secretary to run with cliff and 
jean for gp co chairs and determining a strategy that doesn;'t alienate 
current gp leadership where they will try to sabotage and sue us for 
what we want to do.
mid term: electing people in three or four city races in fall 2007.
long term: we should consider pressing all of our efforts into electing 
a secretary of state in 2010 who will work to change the electoral 
system in CT - it seems like we could have the most impact that way. we 
have the ballot line, and we could start running that person in 2008 - 
get people to think about this.

we should all meet at some point in the next few weeks - with caleb and 
mike hatchell as well - to discuss.

peace,
kk
 

Patricia Kane wrote:
> cliff:
>    thanks for sending this.
>    See my comments below.
>             pat
>
> */clifford thornton <efficacy at msn.com>/<mailto:efficacy at msn.com%3E/>* wrote:
>
>      
>     ----- Original Message -----
>     *From:* clifford thornton <mailto:efficacy at msn.com<mailto:efficacy at msn.com>>
>     *To:* ctgp-news <mailto:ctgp-news at ml.greens.org<mailto:ctgp-news at ml.greens.org>>
>     *Sent:* Tuesday, November 28, 2006 9:46 AM
>     *Subject:* {news} Initial Reflections on Running for Governor: The
>     Challengesand Opportunities
>
>     Connecticut Green Party - Part of the GPUS
>     http://www.ctgreens.org/<http://www.ctgreens.org/> - http://www.greenpartyus.org/<http://www.greenpartyus.org/>
>
>     to unsubscribe click here
>     mailto:ctgp-news-unsubscribe at ml.greens.org<mailto:ctgp-news-unsubscribe at ml.greens.org>
>     Comments are welcome as this continues to be a work in progress
>     that I
>     hope will help future candidates be more effective and help those
>     involved with independent politics figure out next steps.
>
>     You are welcome to share this with those who you think will be
>     interested.
>
>     Thanks everyone for their work on the campaign.
>
>
>     *Initial Reflections on Running for Governor
>     The Challenges and Opportunities*
>
>     "I saw youth and young adults in the room standing, cheering, and
>     excited about Cliff Thornton.  Why does he excite us?  Because we
>     feel like
>     someone is finally listening and courageous enough to build his
>     campaign
>     around the will of the people with no influence from the
>     corporations."
>     Derek Maxwell--Professor, Capitol Community Colloge 
>     "If elections were decided on personality, Cliff Thornton -- the
>     Green Party candidate for governor in Connecticut -- would win by
>     a landslide. Why? Because he's got one. A personality, that is. He
>     has a backbone to match."
>      
>     "Perhaps because Thornton has nothing to lose and everything to
>     gain, he can "afford" to tell the truth. But perhaps, in these
>     deeply troubled times, telling the truth is no longer a political
>     liability. Who knows? Maybe Americans really have had enough.
>     Maybe they want to be adults again, maybe they're sick of the
>     sheer wimpiness of the candidates (Republican and Democrat)."
>      
>     This was from the Hartford Advocate entitled "Memo to all
>     candidates of America: Grow a spine!
>     By Alan Bisbort."
>
>     These were the kind of comments made during my run for Governor in 
>     Connecticut which made for a great experience. To be honest, I had
>     fun. 
>
>     There were many moments I will never forget -- the first ever
>     commercial,
>     Students meeting us in Greenwich with a bag of money--then escorting
>     us to the gym where there were over three hundred people waiting,
>     winning the
>     Griswold poll, continuous coverage on CTN every week for four
>     months, etc, etc.
>     I met a lot of committed people who I am sure will be allies for
>     many years. 
>     My hope is that we can find a way to build an effective
>     independent political movement that will give real hope in the
>     future --
>     by winning elections!
>
>     There were a lot of key lessons that I want to share so that future
>     candidates will have them before they run for office.
>
>     *Debates:* The lesson learned is that getting into the debates is
>     only a first step,
>     making sure they are televised is equally important./  And, they
>     must be
>     televised from gavel to gavel.
>
>     If the debate is not on TV the third party candidate's role is
>     likely to
>     be ignored by the media.  At least, that was my experience.(Storrs
>     debate)  It was
>     amazing to watch how blatant most of the corporate media was 
>     excluding me from their coverage.  The Hartford Courant may have
>     been the
>     most aggressive -- headlines only mentioned my opponents,
>     photographs only showed my opponents and no substance of my positions
>     was given in most of their coverage.  There were two major
>     articles, one in
>     January and the most recent with Ralph N. It was a bold rewriting
>     of reality.
>
>     A major challenge was the New London Day.  They refused to include
>     me in the
>     debates and as a result redefined the race as a two candidate race
>     late
>     in the campaign.  The New London Day applied the criteria of the
>     Commission
>     on Presidential Debates to their determination.  This criteria was
>     developed by the two status quo parties that created the
>     Commission to
>     keep out alternative voices. The criteria is almost unreachable
>     except
>     for celebrity or billionaire candidates -- 15% in five polls, and,
>     because the New London Day debate was televised and widely covered it
>     totally ruined any chance of turning this into a three-way race.
>
>     So our challenge is to keep the door open -- indeed open it wider
>     -- and
>     get the debates of qualified candidates who have ballot
>     access covered
>     fully on television.
>
>     *Media Coverage:*  The role of the corporate media in the outcome of
>     elections is of utmost importance.  We need to realize that when we
>     challenge the corporate parties they will have the corporate media
>     as an
>     ally.  This is a very big obstacle because third party candidates
>     will
>     almost never have enough money to buy enough media time. They
>     depend on the
>     media to do its job fairly to let the public know that we are running
>     and what we stand for.  While we were able to get more coverage
>     than most
>     third party candidates it was still very unbalanced in comparison
>     to my
>     opponents, incomplete and unfair.
>
>     There are many examples, but once again the Hartford Courant
>     stands out
>     as the worst among the worst!   The Connecticut Post did five,
>     six articles on the impact
>     of the Drug War and education on Connecticut politics.  These
>     included an A section front
>     page story and two B section front page stories.
>
>     When the New Haven Register covered my candidacy
>     they wrote about my key issues as early as January.  The Register
>     even had the Dems and Repubs answering questions posed in
>     earlier articles by Greens. There were editorials and for the
>     most part the Register was fair in its coverage.
>
>     An example of television media was WFSB-TV in Hartford and channel
>     30.  They did a
>     series of stories on various issues -- e.g., the environment,
>     economy,
>     energy, Iraq -- comparing the Senate candidates. But, they decided to
>     only cover the two status quo party candidates.  Their rationale
>     -- they
>     applied the 15 percent standard that was used by The New London
>     Day for inclusion in
>     debates.  If we get WFSB, WCNH and Channel 30 to change it may
>     have a broader effect on other
>     electronic media.  I might mention that Channel 30 had me on
>     twice, WFSB once, nothing for channel
>     8--only during the protest and a couple of other times.
>
>     I did pretty well regarding radio coverage.  But even here there were
>     bias problems.  WNPR -- the public radio station in Hartford -- did a
>     lot of stories on the Senate campaign.  Sometimes they covered me but
>     too many times they didn't -- repeatedly defining the race as a two
>     candidate race.  Complaints by my supporters definitely seemed to
>     make a
>     difference. The Dankosky show did have me on twice, once during the
>     primary and once during the general election.
>
>     Candidates should not shy away from being very aggressive with the
>     media
>     when they fail to cover you.  They need to hear from you when they
>     are
>     prejudiced as one thing about prejudice is that those who act
>     based on
>     it are often unaware of it as it is deeply ingrained.  They are
>     part of
>     a corporate culture that has an attitude that they have adopted. 
>     Further, it is important to meet face-to-face with the key people
>     in the
>     media -- and come dressed for the job you want.  This made a
>     tremendous
>     difference in my campaign. After meeting with some key people I at
>     least
>     got mentioned in the media.
>
>     Independent media is very important.  It reaches key groups of people
>     and is growing in its reach.  Further, it provides an opportunity to
>     show your views and activities on your website.  We need to encourage
>     independent media, help expand it and add to its credibility.  Every
>     year independent media is catching up to the shrinking circulation
>     and
>     viewership of the corporate media.  Soon the tipping point will be
>     reached and it will become an equal factor in communication.  My hat
>     is off to the independent media of Connecticut.  They continuously had
>     us in the news, TV, radio and print.
>
>     The LWV, media and corporate sponsors all conspired to bar new
>     party candidates from participating in debates unless they met
>     THEIR criteria. We should have an ongoing campaign of protest to
>     these organizations and an appeal to the general public to boycott
>     organizations that bar legitimate (approved by the Sec. of State)
>     candidates.
>
>     *Campaign management:* One of the big weaknesses of the third party
>     movement is the lack of experience in managing campaigns.  This
>     includes
>     a lack of campaign managers, fundraisers, press secretaries,
>     volunteer
>     coordinators and other campaign staff.  The third party movement
>     desperately needs an organization that trains people in these
>     areas as
>     well as provides support to campaigns.  In my case I had three
>     dedicated
>     staff members who did excellent work but who each had very little
>     campaign experience.  I'm sure they would agree that if we had one
>     experienced campaign manager to direct them we would have achieved
>     much
>     greater levels of success as each of us (me and my staff) would have
>     done better with aggressive direction. This improvement also would
>     have
>     positively affected the work of volunteers.
>
>     The major parties all have training programs for candidates.
>     Staffers and potential candidates need training in advance of the
>     election. On the job training is too painful. We need to locate
>     training programs for our candidates because we cannot provide the
>     prof'l level of training in=house right now.
>
>     *Fundraising:* The biggest failure of my campaign -- out of things I
>     could control (I could not completely control the debates or media
>     coverage) was fundraising.  I have worked in three significant
>     movements
>     -- drug policy reform, the anti-war movement and democracy reform
>     -- but
>     these movements (like most others) are infected with the two party
>     virus.  They have no confidence in third parties and therefore
>     most of
>     their participants do not fund them.
>
>     We all hate the pay to play system, but we should not run
>     candidates who do not have a strategy that included fund-raising,
>     plus a commitment of resources from the GP. There are inactive
>     members who can write big checks, but they don't. Let's identify
>     someone who will commit to this ongoing task. Let's also think
>     about some blockbuster event for fund raising.
>
>     I was particularly disappointed in the drug policy reform movement
>     where
>     I have had a fifteen year career. Although there were a few
>     exceptions my
>     career-long allies, who I have no doubt respect my work, did not
>     provide 
>     major funding for this campaign. Many did not even make token
>     contributions as a sign of respect or friendship.  Similarly the
>     peace
>     and democracy movements provided insignificant funding.
>
>     Frankly, this is one reason that all these movements (and the union,
>     environmental and women's rights movements) are weaker than they
>     should
>     be.  They cow-tow to the Democratic Party even though the
>     Democrats do
>     very little for them -- indeed often hurt their agenda.  They give
>     support no matter what the Democratic candidate stands for, thus,
>     they
>     are taken for granted. As a lifelong feminist and activist, I was
>     disappointed to lose out on endorsements by these groups to the
>     Dems (males) with no history in the cause. They are all
>     Dem-leaning organizations and do nothing for independents. So now
>     I just don't contribute to them. And I let them know why.  I'm not
>     sure how to convince them that this is a failed strategy but we
>     need to keep trying.  They will not make progress
>     on their issues until they get serious about electoral politics --
>     putting their agenda far ahead of loyalty to any political party.
>     Don't waste your time. Once we start succeeding, they'll knock on
>     our doors.
>
>     Many in the Green Party that nominated me do not understand the
>     importance of money.  While I did receive support from some
>     members of each party, generally speaking I was disappointed. The
>     Greens in
>     particular seem very uncomfortable with money as they see it as a
>     corrupting influence no matter what the circumstances.  We need to
>     find ways to convince members of party that funding their
>     candidates is THE top priority.  There were times I went to Green
>     Party meetings and did not even leave with enough money to pay the
>     gas bill!  Sadly, the media measures potential for success by how
>     much money we raise, more than by the strength of our ideas or the
>     number of volunteers we
>     have.  Money is critical and must be made the top priority.  It
>     should not be feared but welcomed! It is a necessary evil until we
>     have equal access to media and public funding. People should
>     contribute time or money if they are committed.
>
>     *Viability of Third Parties:* There are a lot of people who are
>     disgusted with the Democrats and Republicans but they do not see
>     anywhere else to go.  For those of us who want to see peace,
>     justice, environmental transformation as well as a populist
>     economic policy, we have two choices (1) change either of the two
>     established parties, or
>     (2) create an effective alternative to them.
>
>     Neither choice is easy.  The established parties are very good at
>     absorbing insurgents who want to change their party from the inside. 
>     They let them speak but the primary system is an excellent way to
>     kill off any insurgency.  The primary is focused on the people
>     committed to the party and therefore the voters are more likely to
>     support the choice
>     of the party leadership.  I am not sure what exactly went on in
>     Duffey's bid for office so I can not make a clear consice comment
>     or evaluation. People showed up at the nominating convention who
>     did not know Duffee or his priorities - which were not necessarily
>     GP priorities - and they were eligible to vote under our
>     "generous" criteria. They were more concerned with Farrell than
>     the GP. Since Duffee was such a terrible candidate, I could only
>     withdraw my support, both in terms of work and money and vote
>     against him. There are too many marginal type people who can act
>     impulsively on those rare occasions when they participate. The
>     structure of the GP allows for this in the name of grassroots
>     democracy and consensus.
>     I am not sure if we had insurgents or not as I was concentrating
>     onmy campaign and in particular our media thrust. Nope, just our
>     own weakness being revealed.
>
>     The third party option is also very challenging.  The reasons
>     above --
>     money, media, lack of campaign experience -- are all hurdles to
>     overcome.  But, the biggest hurdle is the dedication of voters
>     associated with their own established party.  In my race, The
>     Democrats
>     did not want to risk getting the mayor elected so most who said they
>     would have voted for me did not. I would estimate that I got as many
>     Republican votes as Dems. 
>
>     The "returning to their party" phenomenon is common in the last
>     month of
>     almost every election with third party candidates unless they are
>     showing a chance of winning.  Traditionally, half the vote for third
>     party candidates is lost in the last month.  Polling showing a
>     close race is one of the factors, but my sense is that the more
>     powerful factor is the sense that "we can't win" is the
>     overwhelming factor.
>     People want to be represented in government.  They feel like they
>     are better represented when they vote for someone who wins even if
>     they don't agree with what s/he stands for than to vote for
>     someone they agree with. That leads me to (2) educating voters on
>     the power of voting for what you want.  They need to see that they
>     can change the course of the government better by voting for what
>     they want, rather than voting for a winner who they disagree with.
>     As Caleb said, we should also run races we can actually win and
>     that will energize people. U.S. history is
>     replete with examples of such impact but Americans don't know this
>     history.
>
>     I see two good signs in Connecticut. First, the African American
>     community, a key voting bloc making up 12% of the voting
>     population, is tired of being taken for granted by the Democrats
>     and distrustful of the Republicans even when they run an African
>     American candidate.  We need to show them that joining with an
>     independent alternative that includes
>     disenchanted blacks and whites, anti-war voters and independents
>     is the way for them to have the most electoral power.  Three-way
>     races will increase minority power because we can win with as
>     little as 34%.  I want to find ways to reach out to the African
>     American community and keep building among the other communities.
>     I sent an email to Sheila Barney to follow up on your meeting with
>     her. I think there is an opportunity to do more with the
>     African-American and Latin community here. The Dems have bought
>     off some community leaders who have sold out their constituents'
>     interests. Some of the people "get it" and are ripe for being wooed.
>
>     Secondly, support among independents is rising for the Green
>     Party. We are becoming the alternative for independents.  My guess
>     is this has nothing to do with "Green" (in fact that may even be a
>     detriment) but has more
>     to do with being tired of the two established parties, seeing
>     their corruption and their inability to be effective in response
>     to the
>     peoples needs. There are going to be opportunities for the
>     Greens(or other third parties) to become the second party in some
>     areas of the state.Indeed, this seems to already be occurring in
>     Willimantic.
>
>     We missed an opportunity to lead on the issue of Eminent Domain
>     abuse. Drug law reform is certainly a biggy, but ED was THE topic
>     and no one ran with the ball on that one.
>
>     Pulling people from the two parties requires a bridge.  Calab
>     Kleppner, Green Party, New Haven has been raising the possibility
>     of an
>     independent non-partisan voters league that would function as a
>     way to educate voters tired of the two parties and unite them behind
>     candidates.  This could include supporting an independent
>     candidate or a candidate of a third party, or a real insurgent
>     inside either of the two parties.  This kind of flexibility will
>     make it easier for those not quite ready to put the two parties
>     behind them to consider the
>     possibility and perhaps show them that there is a viable third
>     alternative.
>     We have so much internal work to do that I can't even deal with
>     this at the moment.
>     This is also consistent with a viewpoint expressed to me by
>     Libertarians, who expressed the view that we should all find ways
>     to keep working together but it is important that people be able
>     to keep their own independent identity with whomever political
>     party they prefer. If an independent non-partisan voter league was
>     developed in Connecticut successfully then the support of that
>     league may provide more credibility of candidates they got
>     behind.  This could also
>     have a very positive effect on media coverage and fundraising. My
>     priority is strengthening the GP. You asked if we are a political
>     party? I think the answer is not yet. We don't have the structure,
>     the strategy or the membership and funding to achieve much. I
>     suggest focusing on by-law revision (part 1 - re-organizing the
>     info), electing new leadership, by-law revision (part 2 - new
>     structure to remedy the weaknesses in process, eg. what
>     constitutes membership and eligibility to vote), setting goals
>     (1-5 year plans) and reviewing committees and Chapters for
>     effectiveness.
>
>      
>     Clifford Wallace Thornton, Jr.
>      
>     Efficacy
>     PO Box 1234
>     860 657 8438
>     Hartford, CT 06143
>     efficacy at msn.com<mailto:efficacy at msn.com> <mailto:efficacy at msn.com<mailto:efficacy at msn.com>>
>     www.Efficacy-online.org<http://www.efficacy-online.org/> <http://www.Efficacy-online.org<http://www.efficacy-online.org/>>
>      
>     Working to end race and class drug war injustice, Efficacy is a
>     non profit
>     501 (c) 3 organization founded in 1997. Your gifts and donations
>     are tax
>     deductible
>
>
>     To be removed please mailto:ctgp-news-unsubscribe at ml.greens.org<mailto:ctgp-news-unsubscribe at ml.greens.org>
>     _______________________________________________
>     CTGP-news mailing list
>     CTGP-news at ml.greens.org<mailto:CTGP-news at ml.greens.org>
>     http://ml.greens.org/mailman/listinfo/ctgp-news<http://ml.greens.org/mailman/listinfo/ctgp-news>
>
>     ATTENTION!
>     The information in this transmission is privileged and
>     confidential and intended only for the recipient listed above.  If
>     you have received this transmission in error, please notify us
>     immediately by email and delete the original message.  The text of
>     this email is similar to ordinary or face-to-face conversations
>     and does not reflect the level of factual or legal inquiry or
>     analysis which would be applied in the case of a formal legal
>     opinion and does not constitute a representation of the opinions
>     of the CT Green Party. The responsibility for any messages posted
>     herein is solely that of the person who sent the message, and the
>     CT Green Party hereby leaves this responsibility in the hands of
>     it's members.
>
>     NOTE: This is an inherently insecure forum, please do not post
>     confidential messages and always realize that your address can be
>     faked, and although a message may appear to be from a certain
>     individual, it is always possible that it is fakemail. This is
>     mail sent by a third party under an illegally assumed identity for
>     purposes of coercion, misdirection, or general mischief.
>
>     CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: If you have received this e-mail in error,
>     please immediately notify the sender by e-mail at the address
>     shown.  This e-mail transmission may contain confidential
>     information.  This information is intended only for the use of the
>     individual(s) or entity to whom it is intended even if addressed
>     incorrectly.  Please delete it from your files if you are not the
>     intended recipient.  Thank you for your compliance.
>
>     To be removed please mailto://ctgp-news-unsubscribe at ml.greens.org<mailto:ctgp-news-unsubscribe at ml.greens.org>
>
>
>
>
> Patricia Kane, Esq.
> The Kane Legal Group LLC
> 230 High Ridge Road
> Stamford, CT 06905
> (203 324-3316
> (203) 351-0818 Fax


-- 

Peace,


Ken Krayeske

Campaign Manager

Thornton for Governor

P.O. Box 1971

Manchester, CT 06045

www.votethornton.com<http://www.votethornton.com/>

860-995-5842


*This message is paid for and approved by Thornton for Governor, Max 
Wentworth, Treasurer*

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist10.pair.net/mailman/private/ctgp-news/attachments/20061130/df01dd84/attachment.html>

From greenpartyct at yahoo.com  Thu Nov 30 19:35:05 2006
From: greenpartyct at yahoo.com (Green Party-CT)
Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2006 16:35:05 -0800 (PST)
Subject: {news} time for a protest? Rell to have Parade,
	Ball with Inauguration - can you say Marie Antoinettte?
Message-ID: <20061201003506.33978.qmail@web81411.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

Committees Formed To Plan Inaugural Ball    Inaugural Parade, Ball First Since 1999    POSTED: 2:54 pm EST November 30, 2006
  
          E-mail this story | Print this story
  HARTFORD, Conn. -- Plans are underway for the first inaugural parade and ball since 1999.   
Gov. M. Jodi Rell said there are three committees working on her Jan. 3 inauguration. One is working on the parade, one on the inauguration ceremony and one on the ball.   
Rell first took office in 2004 after former Gov. John Rowland resigned amid scandal. She decided to skip the pomp and circumstance at the time and held a simple inaugural ceremony outside the state Capitol. Rowland skipped the traditional inaugural parade and ball back in 2003 when the state was in the middle of a budget crisis.                      // Set DC ad position if(typeof dcadposition == 'undefined')dcadposition = 1; else dcadposition++; if (typeof segQS == 'undefined')segQS=''; if (typeof adid == 'undefined')adid='false';  document.write("");          if ((!document.images & navigator.userAgent.indexOf("Mozilla/2.") >= 0)  || navigator.userAgent.indexOf("WebTV")>= 0) { document.write(""); document.write(""); }    
  
Rell said her office is waiting for some guidance from the Office of State Ethics on how best to fund the inaugural ball.   
New laws taking effect ban contributions from lobbyists and contractors. In past years, both helped to foot the bill.




       
  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Tim McKee cell (860) 778-1304 or (860) 643-2282
   National Committee Member of the Green Party(Connecticut)





-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist10.pair.net/mailman/private/ctgp-news/attachments/20061130/669456a5/attachment.html>

From greenpartyct at yahoo.com  Thu Nov 30 19:57:18 2006
From: greenpartyct at yahoo.com (Green Party-CT)
Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2006 16:57:18 -0800 (PST)
Subject: {news} Analysis of 2006 Election Finds Problems Nationwide
Message-ID: <704400.56882.qm@web81405.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

  electionline Weekly - November 30, 2006 
electionline.org 
  
  I. In Focus This Week
  
  Analysis of 2006 Election Finds Problems Nationwide
Lack of post-vote controversy masks widespread voting difficulties
  
  The nation's leading source for nonpartisan and non-advocacy news and information on election reform released its first comprehensive look at the 2006 election, finding widespread problems but no meltdowns at the nation's polling places.
  
  The 2006 Election, the 15th in a series of policy briefings by electionline.org, found widespread reports of voting system troubles, sporadic incidents of voter intimidation and/or poll worker confusion over voter identification requirements and some breakdowns at polling places because of problems with newly-mandated voter registration systems. 
  
  "The question most frequently asked after the election is whether it was a success," said Doug Chapin, the organization's director. "Success can be measured in a two ways. If success is measured through picking winners, then yes, there were few races in which polling-place problems could have affected the outcome. But, on the other hand, if it is measured through whether every voter who showed up at a polling place had an opportunity to cast their vote without problems or obstacles, then the answer is no."
  
  With more than a third of all voters casting ballots on new voting systems compared with just two years ago, human and machine errors were widespread. In a number of states, including Indiana, Pennsylvania, Alabama, Arkansas, and Illinois, inexperienced poll workers struggled to start, troubleshoot and close electronic voting machines. Voters in a number of states reported "vote flipping,' whereby machines indicated choices other than those made by the voter, either when the screen was touched or when the choices were revealed on a review screen. 
  
  Voting machine breakdowns throughout the day were common as well, slowing voting in parts of California, Idaho, Iowa, Kentucky, New Jersey and other states. 
  
  Precincts in both Massachusetts and New Mexico ran out of ballots, compelling police in the Bay State to race ballots to polling places with sirens blaring and lights flashing. "Overwhelming turnout" at some Boston polling places led some voters to get frustrated and walk away without voting rather than wait for new ballots to arrive. The state has since threatened to strip power from the city's election board for management failures. 
  
  A Congressional race in Florida's Sarasota County was plagued with high numbers of under votes, about 14 percent of all ballots cast recording no preference in a hotly contested race to replace Rep. Katherine Harris in the state's 13th District. 
  
  The post-election survey also found instances where new or recently-altered voter identification rules caused problems in some states where voters were asked to present photo ID when its use was not mandatory (Missouri and Wisconsin), were confused about whether they needed ID at all after a number of court decisions (Georgia) and poll workers had difficulty interpreting verification rules at the polling place (Ohio). Instances of voter intimidation were recorded elsewhere in the country, 
  
  The most serious election-day problems were found in Denver, Colorado, where the county's first use of vote centers and breakdowns in electronic poll books used to sign in voters when they arrived led to hours-long lines, late poll closings and irate citizens. 
  
  There were successes as well. Connecticut saw a smooth transition to optical-scan voting in a number of localities using the system for the first time. Maryland recovered from a chaotic primary to run a relatively trouble-free vote on electronic voting systems. Ohio's Cuyahoga County saw a similar improvement, though long lines persisted, Washington voters and election officials managed to cast ballots despite record rainfall and flooding while Virginia's election administration endured the scrutiny of an extremely close race for the U.S. Senate without any significant post-election controversies. 
  
  "As our only mechanism for ensuring representative government, we need to make voting work for all eligible voters by ensuring the accuracy and convenience of our elections," added Michael Caudell-Feagan, Senior Officer, State Policy Initiatives at The Pew Charitable Trusts, funder of electionline.org. "Building on electionline's valuable contribution to the field, it is time to move from cataloguing problems to rigorously testing and implementing solutions. America's voters deserve nothing less than state-of-the-art elections regardless of the jurisdiction where a vote is cast."
  
  "This is the beginning of the next phase of election reform," Chapin said. "The lesson of the 2006 election going forward is that it will no longer be enough to avoid past mistakes or address old problems; the key will be to prevent new ones and think creatively about how voting works in 2008 and beyond."
  
  The complete report is available at electionline.org.
  
  
  II. Election Reform News This Week 
  
    
   Internetnews.com reported this week that the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) is set to recommend that the 2007 version of the Voluntary Voting Systems Guidelines (VVSG) decertify DRE machines. The Web site obtained a copy of a paper, set to be discussed at NIST meetings on December 4 and 5, that says DRE vote totals cannot be audited because the machines are not software independent and that the machines currently in use are "more vulnerable to undetected programming errors or malicious code.." The paper recommends ".requiring SI [software independent] voting systems in VVSG 2007." According to the Web site, NIST is also going to recommend changes to the design of machines equipped with VVPATs.
  
    
   According to an article published in The Boston Globe, the U.S. Department of Justice has launched an investigation into a possible lack of accessible voting machines for disabled voters at polling places throughout Massachusetts. Brenda Wright, managing attorney at the Boston-based National Voting Rights Institute told the paper one attorney from the department will be investigating the state's failure to comply with the Help America Vote Act and Giovanna Negretti, executive director of the voting advocacy group ?Oiste?, said an attorney also appeared to be interested in other election irregularities. 
  
    
   When Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., takes control of the Senate Rules and Administration Committee in January, she is planning a series of wide-ranging hearings on election reform reports the San Jose Mercury News. "It's imperative that Congress does everything it can to help ensure that votes cast are recorded accurately," she told the paper. "Serious questions have arisen about the accuracy and reliability of new electronic voting machines." In addition to issues about voting machines, the committee might also take up the issue of voter ID and the possibility of barring a state's top election official from participating in a campaign for a federal candidate.
  
    
   While many extol the virtues of vote-by-mail, Lindsey McWilliams, Humboldt County, Calif. Elections Officer detailed what some of the disadvantages are, namely the condition in which some of the ballots arrive in the elections office. Damage to ballots included spills on ballots (31); a hole burnt into a ballot (1); (unscannable) red ink used on ballot (2); and torn ballots (17).
  
    
   As the Monday morning quarterbacking continues in the weeks following the November 7 election, several states are already contemplating major changes to their election systems. In New Mexico, Secretary of State-elect Mary Herrera (D) said she is putting vote-by-mail on her "to look-into list." In Cuyahoga County, Ohio, some county commissioners are proposing the county scrap its $17 million electronic voting system in favor of an optical-scan system. And in Kentucky, Secretary of State Trey Grayson (R) is calling on the state legislature to approve and fund early voting programs and equipment that would create paper trails.
  
  
  IV. Opinion This Week
  
  National: Future of elections, II, national voting system, II, voter ID, electronic voting
Florida: 13th Congressional District, II, III, IV, V, VI, electronic voting
Idaho: Vote-by-mail
Ohio: Fraudulent voting
South Carolina: Recounts
Washington: Instant run-off voting
  
  Some sites require registration
  
  **********
  
  
---------------------------------
    electionline Weekly and electionline.org ALERTS are produced by the staff of electionline.org, a non-partisan, non-advocacy research effort supported by The Pew Charitable Trusts and administered by the University of Richmond . More information about the Project and up-to-the-minute news on election reform throughout the week can be found at electionline.org. 
  

   function rmvScroll( msg ) {  var delta = msg.offsetHeight - msg.clientHeight;  delta = ( isNaN( delta )? 1 : delta + 1 );  if ( msg.scrollHeight > msg.clientHeight ) {   msg.style.height = ( msg.scrollHeight + delta ) + "px";  }  delta = msg.offsetWidth - msg.clientWidth;  delta = ( isNaN( delta )? 1 : delta + 1 );  if ( msg.scrollWidth > msg.clientWidth ) {   msg.style.width = ( msg.scrollWidth + delta ) + "px";  }  msg.style.overflow = "hidden";  msg.style.visibility = "visible"; } var msg = document.getElementById( "message" ); if ( msg & "undefined" != typeof msg ) { rmvScroll( msg ); }        
   
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist10.pair.net/mailman/private/ctgp-news/attachments/20061130/02dc8c76/attachment.html>