Is the new non-partisan, non-denominational "citizens" redistricting process in California, where 14 ordinary folks decide where you vote, who you vote for, who your new fellow voters are, any better than the old "gerrymandering" process of days now gone by?
So far, the maps don't show the benefit. Admittedly it's a tough process, absorbing all the information, from census data, to Federal law, such as the Voting Rights Act, to deciding what constitutes a "Community of interest." Is the fact that the Napa Valley grape growers want to have more influence in congress a good reason to carve out a district for them?
And does that then push the dominoes in a direction that squeezes other districts like icing in a tube, so that the 6th district now snakes along the Coast all the way to the Oregon border? Well, yes, say the maps.
Are the interests of Northern prison town Crescent City the same as those of Bay Area coastal Stinson Beach? And what of the Assembly, the State Senate? Will Marin, with coastal and rural and suburban communities be lumped with the more central and sprawling Solano County to the east?
Does this make it fairer, allowing more diversity perhaps, more chance for others to take a crack at the legislative prizes? Who knows? The Shadow? I don't know, can't say, the new maps are "visualizations" only, a dreamscape of possibilities, suggested by whoever shows up and expresses an opinion, within the legal parameters.
I don't envy the commissioners. I don't envy the public of which I am one. We strive to understand. We hope for the best. More to come.
Saturday, June 04, 2011
Wednesday, June 01, 2011
Candidate Training for the Marin Women's PAC
On May 7th, my partner in all things campaign, Lise Stampfli, and I were part of a presentation for the new Marin Women's Political Action Committee. This group was formed to take the place of the National Women's Political Caucus, Marin Chapter, which had been threatening for months, to throw us out because we refused to tow the line over their complete prohibition on the endorsement or recommendation or even rating, of male candidates.
Our policy in Marin had been from time immemorial, at least as far back as anyone could remember, which means the 70's as that is when the group started, we had been "recommending" men in those races with no viable woman running. Viable means mostly pro-choice and with a grasp of the issues, and willing to help other women who came along afterward with their campaigns.
We thought this was a perfectly logical position, as half the population is male, and we need that half to work with us to get important legislation passed. The goal of NWPC is 50/50 by 2020, which means what it sounds like - by the year 2020, we will have an equal number of women in elected office as we do men.
Our goals are the same, we too want 50/50 by 2020. We too want to see more women in office, and are dedicated to helping them get elected. But we recognize we need the pro-choice men, and so when no viable woman is running, we feel free to :recommend" a pro-choice man.
The new leadership of NWPC took offense, serious offense and with their threats came our resolve to become independent and thrive.
And so we have. Dues do not have to be split with National and we are free to make our own policy and keep all the proceeds from our programs to fund our candidates. One of our main programs is the training of candidates. We usually do this twice a year, once in the months before filing opens and once in the fall, after filing has closed.
This was the before training. Now it is on You Tube and here for all to see. Hope you like it and learn something.
Our policy in Marin had been from time immemorial, at least as far back as anyone could remember, which means the 70's as that is when the group started, we had been "recommending" men in those races with no viable woman running. Viable means mostly pro-choice and with a grasp of the issues, and willing to help other women who came along afterward with their campaigns.
We thought this was a perfectly logical position, as half the population is male, and we need that half to work with us to get important legislation passed. The goal of NWPC is 50/50 by 2020, which means what it sounds like - by the year 2020, we will have an equal number of women in elected office as we do men.
Our goals are the same, we too want 50/50 by 2020. We too want to see more women in office, and are dedicated to helping them get elected. But we recognize we need the pro-choice men, and so when no viable woman is running, we feel free to :recommend" a pro-choice man.
The new leadership of NWPC took offense, serious offense and with their threats came our resolve to become independent and thrive.
And so we have. Dues do not have to be split with National and we are free to make our own policy and keep all the proceeds from our programs to fund our candidates. One of our main programs is the training of candidates. We usually do this twice a year, once in the months before filing opens and once in the fall, after filing has closed.
This was the before training. Now it is on You Tube and here for all to see. Hope you like it and learn something.
Wednesday, January 26, 2011
The Right and the Right to Bear Arms: Follow up to Shooting Rampage in Colorado
This was posted as an Opinion Piece in the Marin IJ, and on my Facebook page. It started quite a long back and forth. Very interesting. Comments welcome:
Whether they listen to Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck or other right wing spewers of vitriol or just pick up the vibes through their fillings or beamed to them by aliens via a tin foil hat, it’s hard to believe “lone nuts” like Jared Loughner have not been at least somewhat influenced by the anti-government rantings of professional hate mongers.
When Sarah Palin puts cross hairs over her opponents districts on a map and talks about reloading, and Glenn Beck calls for “shooting them in the head” about media pundits he claims are calling for revolution and Rush Limbaugh and his compatriots continue to denigrate the president, by calling him a Kenyan born Muslim, not a real American, that rhetoric leads to toxic stew that’s in the very air we breathe. Just like second hand smoke can damage and kill, so can words tossed out into the atmosphere incite and inflame minds already on the bring of madness.
Saying that these toxic messages contribute to the actions of someone like Jared Loughner who made a assassination attempt on the life of Democratic Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords in Tucson is not the same as “blaming free speech” as a January 13 Marin Voice piece by Sally Zelikovsky states.
It’s a statistical fact that gun violence is more common in red states that blue. A recent study published in the Atlantic shows that “Firearm-related deaths were positively associated with states that voted for McCain (.66) and negatively associated with states that voted for Obama (-.66).” (The Geography of Gun Deaths, Atlantic Monthly, January 13, 2011)
That Jared Loughner was anti-government, paranoid and prone to outbursts are all true statements. When pundits on the right, on Fox news and even in the Congress, are telling you the government is out to get you, to kill your granny and to take your job, that cannot be ignored as a factor in the kind of violence at the Tucson Safeway.
It’s a common ploy of the right to try to equate contentious speech on the left with inflammatory rhetoric on the right. “They all do it, don’t blame us” is a common refrain. Zelikovsky does it in her editorial, equating groups such as New Black Panthers, SDS, La Raza and the Ku Klux Klan.
While the New Black Panther Party may spout extreme rhetoric, they have been denounced by other black leaders and never been accused of killing anyone.
SDS thrived in the 60’s to organize students against the Vietnam War and for recognition of civil rights. It never spouted violent rhetoric. A splinter group, the weather Underground, was soundly denounced for their acts of violence, by other left wing activist groups.
La Raza is dedicated to improving civil rights and improve opportunities for Latinos through lobbying and education. It can hardly be equated with either the New Black Panthers or the Ku Klux Klan, who left a trail and of carnage and death in its wake across the south for decades.
Gabrielle Giffords became the symbol and the target of a deranged young man who feared the government. That the right now claims the left, and the so called “liberal media” is exploiting the tragedies of that day, while themselves pointing fingers and taking no responsibility for their part in creating a climate that can only encourage the paranoid and delusional to act, is shameful.
Dotty LeMieux is a political consultant and attorney. She is also vice chair of the Marin Democratic Party. These are her own opinions.
Whether they listen to Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck or other right wing spewers of vitriol or just pick up the vibes through their fillings or beamed to them by aliens via a tin foil hat, it’s hard to believe “lone nuts” like Jared Loughner have not been at least somewhat influenced by the anti-government rantings of professional hate mongers.
When Sarah Palin puts cross hairs over her opponents districts on a map and talks about reloading, and Glenn Beck calls for “shooting them in the head” about media pundits he claims are calling for revolution and Rush Limbaugh and his compatriots continue to denigrate the president, by calling him a Kenyan born Muslim, not a real American, that rhetoric leads to toxic stew that’s in the very air we breathe. Just like second hand smoke can damage and kill, so can words tossed out into the atmosphere incite and inflame minds already on the bring of madness.
Saying that these toxic messages contribute to the actions of someone like Jared Loughner who made a assassination attempt on the life of Democratic Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords in Tucson is not the same as “blaming free speech” as a January 13 Marin Voice piece by Sally Zelikovsky states.
It’s a statistical fact that gun violence is more common in red states that blue. A recent study published in the Atlantic shows that “Firearm-related deaths were positively associated with states that voted for McCain (.66) and negatively associated with states that voted for Obama (-.66).” (The Geography of Gun Deaths, Atlantic Monthly, January 13, 2011)
That Jared Loughner was anti-government, paranoid and prone to outbursts are all true statements. When pundits on the right, on Fox news and even in the Congress, are telling you the government is out to get you, to kill your granny and to take your job, that cannot be ignored as a factor in the kind of violence at the Tucson Safeway.
It’s a common ploy of the right to try to equate contentious speech on the left with inflammatory rhetoric on the right. “They all do it, don’t blame us” is a common refrain. Zelikovsky does it in her editorial, equating groups such as New Black Panthers, SDS, La Raza and the Ku Klux Klan.
While the New Black Panther Party may spout extreme rhetoric, they have been denounced by other black leaders and never been accused of killing anyone.
SDS thrived in the 60’s to organize students against the Vietnam War and for recognition of civil rights. It never spouted violent rhetoric. A splinter group, the weather Underground, was soundly denounced for their acts of violence, by other left wing activist groups.
La Raza is dedicated to improving civil rights and improve opportunities for Latinos through lobbying and education. It can hardly be equated with either the New Black Panthers or the Ku Klux Klan, who left a trail and of carnage and death in its wake across the south for decades.
Gabrielle Giffords became the symbol and the target of a deranged young man who feared the government. That the right now claims the left, and the so called “liberal media” is exploiting the tragedies of that day, while themselves pointing fingers and taking no responsibility for their part in creating a climate that can only encourage the paranoid and delusional to act, is shameful.
Dotty LeMieux is a political consultant and attorney. She is also vice chair of the Marin Democratic Party. These are her own opinions.
Friday, December 03, 2010
The meme practiced and honed to a fine pitch coming from all Republicans everywhere, loudest from those in Congress, is tax cuts for the wealthy means more jobs for everyone else.
Wait a cotton pickin' minute here. Who says this is true? Other than John Orange Man Boehner and his pack of merry prankster Republican sycophants. Let's take a look at the whole story. Rich person Warren Buffet has this to say in an interview with ABC News' Christiane Amanpour: "But that [trickle down economic theory - or give it all to the rich and some will dribble back down onto the poor] has not worked the last 10 years, and I hope the American public is catching on." A 2006 report by United for a Fair Economy found that: "The president's tax-cutting policy is a failure in regard to job creation, and we need to recognize it as such...While there is no evidence that massive tax cuts create jobs, there is considerable evidence that they contribute to economy-choking deficits."
And top economist Alan Blinder said in the Wall Street Journal in July: "We could get some substantial job creation by simply reprogramming the $75 billion that would be saved over the next two years by not extending the upper-bracket Bush tax cuts and spending it instead on unemployment benefits, food stamps, and the like."
Don't Republicans read the reports? Don't they read the Wall Street Journal? Don't they listen to anything but the buzz and buzzwords echoing in their own fevered brains?
Job creation comes about by creating the jobs. Not giving the money away to those who least need it; those who will not use it to create jobs, but stick in an offshore account somewhere. Or if they do create jobs, they are jobs in some other country, some poor island colony of the corporations, where peasants slave away in dismal conditions for pennies a day.
Here's an imaginary conversation between a rich, but well intentioned, CEO and his money manager:
CEO: "I'm taking my tax cut and creating more jobs with it, Bill."
MM:" Sir, you can't do that. That would result in no net benefit to you or the stock holders."
CEO: "But, Bill, I'm sitting on a piles of cash, and think of those poor Americans out of work. We must do something."
MM: "But sir, if you create jobs here in the United States, those people will expect to be paid real American dollars. Your dollars sir. The dollars that the hard working Republican Congress has fought for. It would be a betrayal of that trust."
CEO: "But I thought they wanted me to create jobs. Isn't that what they are always saying? Tax cuts for the wealthy equals jobs."
MM: "Well, sir, there is a way."
CEO: Tell me!"
MM: "Your company doesn't really make anything, just shuffles the money around, so jobs here in the U.S. wouldn't be of mch use anyway."
CEO: "But we could make things. Didn't my great great granddaddy used to make things? Steam pipes or something?"
MM: "Pipefittings for gadgets to bring the outdoor plumbing in the house. Very profitable in 1910."
CEO: "Well?"
MM: "Sir, those are all made in China now. The company is long gone, but the money lives on. That's the beauty of money, it multiplies like bunnies. Only you have to manage it wisely."
CEO: "Hmmm. Do I want to make pipe thingies in China?"
MM: "No need, Sir. All taken care of. But if you are interested in creating jobs, you may need a money counter and a vault overseer for your offshore accounts."
CEO: "Yes, yes, let's put an ad in the New York Times right now."
MM: "No, sir, you don't have to do that. We can get those people right off the streets in that little island, where the money lives."
CEO: Oh, I see. I will be creating jobs where the money is, not here in the U.S."
MM: "That's right. Now you get it."
CEO: "Good plan, Bill. You are a smart man. How much do I pay you?"
MM: "Well sir, I do receive a nice stipend from the profits on those accounts..."
CEO: "Bill, I hate to do this to you; you've been a loyal employee, but I see I can save money if I hire my money manager right there on the island. Thanks for the great advice. And pick up your severance pay on the way out. Wait, you'll have to get it from the offshore account. And Bill, I'm sorry, but it's going to have to be in local currency."
Tuesday, April 28, 2009
Yes, we did have a Clean Sweep with our progressive women takng over three powerful positions: Chair of the Progressive Caucus (which itself has led to many changes in our Party in the last four years); Chair of the Women's Caucus (Whole Progressive slate); and most impressive, Controller of the State Party. I was thrilled to be elected Secretary of the Progressive Caucus by acclimation. Marin's own Ralph Miller took the Treasurer slot also by acclimation and our wonderful Mayme Hubert, who is the inspiration behind much of what gets done, is an Office at Large, with J. Brian Washman and Dr. Bill Honigman. A good group. See the pics up top for the "rest of the story" - First pic: I meet Howard Dean, with Wendy Baker, that's me on the right (Howard's left); next pic: Our three great winners: Karen Weinstein, Women's Caucus chair; Karen Bernal, Progressive Caucus chair and Hilary Crosby, our new State Party Controller.
Women rock!
This was an amazing celebration of a very successful year. Next year will continue the work. We are aiming at adding Democrats to the legislature. More later. Back to work with the new improved GreenDog Campaign team.
Thursday, March 05, 2009
Rush Limbaugh in the Ring
Rush Limbaugh to Star in Remake of the Wrestler
Posted 3/3/2009 9:55 AM PST
Why wait ten years to remake a Hollywood favorite? The Republicans, sensing their base slipping away, today announced that they will finance the remake of last year's surprise hit, The Wrestler.
Starring in the comeback role of the once washed up combatant, is Republican apologist and bombastic talk show host, Rush Limbaugh.
"Rush is perfect for the part," effused his one time rival, Michael Steele, head of the RNC, now chief producer of the Wrestler remake, to be called The Rustler, signifying the rustling up of the base who hunger for real blood and guts, long staples of Republican diets. "I know Rush and I sparred a bit, but I have apologized to him, as we have all agreed this project goes beyond petty internecine bickering.
"Our true enemies are the pinko-commie, socialist, abortion promoting, homosexual loving Democrats. Rush's comeback from his own foray into the dark world of illegal drug use and dropping ratings, not to mention his cholesterol laden gut, make him just right for the part of a down on his luck Republican operative, making one last gasp at bringing home the Party loyalists."
Critics were scratching their heads as they opined on the nightly news about the wisdom of the "last gasp" strategy.
"I don't know," said Ben Mankiewics of ABC's At the Movies "if this is really the image they want to broadcast to the public. In the original movie, the Mickey Rourke character appeared to be suffering a fatal heart attack as he flung himself from the ropes onto his opponent in the ring. I'm not getting the symbolism here."
However, Fox's Bill O'Reilly lauded the project as a sure box office hit, "and in politics, fundraising is everything. So what if Limbaugh expires in the movie; his ratings will soar and the coffers of the Republican Party will swell.
"I think it's a brilliant move. Liberals watch out"
Posted 3/3/2009 9:55 AM PST
Why wait ten years to remake a Hollywood favorite? The Republicans, sensing their base slipping away, today announced that they will finance the remake of last year's surprise hit, The Wrestler.
Starring in the comeback role of the once washed up combatant, is Republican apologist and bombastic talk show host, Rush Limbaugh.
"Rush is perfect for the part," effused his one time rival, Michael Steele, head of the RNC, now chief producer of the Wrestler remake, to be called The Rustler, signifying the rustling up of the base who hunger for real blood and guts, long staples of Republican diets. "I know Rush and I sparred a bit, but I have apologized to him, as we have all agreed this project goes beyond petty internecine bickering.
"Our true enemies are the pinko-commie, socialist, abortion promoting, homosexual loving Democrats. Rush's comeback from his own foray into the dark world of illegal drug use and dropping ratings, not to mention his cholesterol laden gut, make him just right for the part of a down on his luck Republican operative, making one last gasp at bringing home the Party loyalists."
Critics were scratching their heads as they opined on the nightly news about the wisdom of the "last gasp" strategy.
"I don't know," said Ben Mankiewics of ABC's At the Movies "if this is really the image they want to broadcast to the public. In the original movie, the Mickey Rourke character appeared to be suffering a fatal heart attack as he flung himself from the ropes onto his opponent in the ring. I'm not getting the symbolism here."
However, Fox's Bill O'Reilly lauded the project as a sure box office hit, "and in politics, fundraising is everything. So what if Limbaugh expires in the movie; his ratings will soar and the coffers of the Republican Party will swell.
"I think it's a brilliant move. Liberals watch out"
Tuesday, February 17, 2009
Dick Cheney Father of Octuplets
In a surprising revelation today, former VP, Dick "the terrorists are coming" Cheney told shocked news reporters that he is the father of Nadya Suleman's octuplets.
"How else do you think she got eight babies when only six were implanted," growled the proud Papa. "and you thought Dick Cheney was through."
He continued, "We need all the resources we can muster in the country to fight the terrorists, coming to murder us in our beds. Obama won't do it, in fact he's out there passing around condemns to the poor, so I have decided to grow my own domestic army, starting with these little sweeties. I call them my "Battling Babies."
"Of course, most American women are too busy getting manicures and having their feet waxed to breed for America, but I'm pleased to report that another seven are on their way. The mom is in a secure, undisclosed location as we speak."
While reporters struggle to find the words for the many questions swirling through their scrambled brains, Cheney muttered something under his breath, and, in a puff of sulfurous smoke, disappeared.
Veteran White House correspondent Helen Thomas was heard to exclaim, "Damn, I was afraid of something like that," as she joined the throng out the door of the now smoldering press tent.Published at sfgate.com
Monday, January 19, 2009
2008 in Review
Yes, we did!
Yes, we did. Tomorrow is Inauguration Day. I'll be dressed in my finest in San Rafael dancing to oldies and watching Obama boogie on the big screen.
This year Green Dog Campaigns had a most interesting race in Sonoma County. Shirlee Zane, newcomer to electoral politics, faced off against Sharon Wright, veteran campaigner. Shirlee was backed by labor and environmentalists and social service types. Sharon had big business and developers.
Guess who had the most money and endorsements?
Guess who ran the best campaign and won?
Heavy use of i.e.'s in a local campaign
Labor put money behind Shirlee in numerous independent expenditure (ie) pieces, both positive and negative. More than I've ever seen in a local race. These guys are playing on a whole new ballfield.
Sharon' developer funded negative hits came fast furious the last week, including a TV ad. But this time, dirty campaigning failed. The unions were always tasteful and truthful in their negative pieces against Sharon. The developers were not, calling Shirlee a puppet of the unions.
Shirlee used up a lot of shoe leather, walking and knocking on door throughout the large district. Her volunteers were all troopers. On Election Night, she was the victor by 11%! A stunning win.
New strategic partners and an award nomination for Green Dogs
Green Dogs put our all into this race, with lots of targeted mailing; the graphic talents of Lise Stampfli outshone the competition. We even did polling, adding Target Research as a strategic partner. And the dulcet tones of Peter B. Collins on our radio ad didn't hurt either.
That ad, written and produced by Peter, is up for a Reed Award. we are so proud, of Shirlee, of our new strategic partners and of this time in America.
Green Dogs looks forward to a new era, a great 2009 and some fun campaigns in the years ahead. Check our site http://www.greendogcampaigns.com/ for more examples of winning campaigns.
Yes, we did. Tomorrow is Inauguration Day. I'll be dressed in my finest in San Rafael dancing to oldies and watching Obama boogie on the big screen.
This year Green Dog Campaigns had a most interesting race in Sonoma County. Shirlee Zane, newcomer to electoral politics, faced off against Sharon Wright, veteran campaigner. Shirlee was backed by labor and environmentalists and social service types. Sharon had big business and developers.
Guess who had the most money and endorsements?
Guess who ran the best campaign and won?
Yes, we did! Shirlee proved to be an ace campaigner. She came in first in the primary, with three others. Sharon was next. Into a hotly contested general, complete with nasty campaign attacks from Sharon and her developer cronies. They spent a wad trying to defeat Shirlee's fast moving train.
Heavy use of i.e.'s in a local campaign
Labor put money behind Shirlee in numerous independent expenditure (ie) pieces, both positive and negative. More than I've ever seen in a local race. These guys are playing on a whole new ballfield.
Sharon' developer funded negative hits came fast furious the last week, including a TV ad. But this time, dirty campaigning failed. The unions were always tasteful and truthful in their negative pieces against Sharon. The developers were not, calling Shirlee a puppet of the unions.
Shirlee used up a lot of shoe leather, walking and knocking on door throughout the large district. Her volunteers were all troopers. On Election Night, she was the victor by 11%! A stunning win.
New strategic partners and an award nomination for Green Dogs
Green Dogs put our all into this race, with lots of targeted mailing; the graphic talents of Lise Stampfli outshone the competition. We even did polling, adding Target Research as a strategic partner. And the dulcet tones of Peter B. Collins on our radio ad didn't hurt either.
That ad, written and produced by Peter, is up for a Reed Award. we are so proud, of Shirlee, of our new strategic partners and of this time in America.
Green Dogs looks forward to a new era, a great 2009 and some fun campaigns in the years ahead. Check our site http://www.greendogcampaigns.com/ for more examples of winning campaigns.
Thursday, October 16, 2008
I was debate watching last night with the rest of the Country and was heartened by Obama’s steadfastness, his humor and his unflinching responses to McCain’s outrageous and repeated accusations.
I watched the debate at the studios of Green 960, progressive talk radio in San Francisco, invited as a listener guest. After the debate, two of us went into the studio with veteran host Angie Coiro for an on-air discussion of the debate with callers. Joining us were California Democratic Party Chair Art Torres, and San Mateo Republican Party vice chair Deborah Wilder. It made for an interesting discussion, you can imagine.
Small plug here:
If you don’t already listen to Green 960, you are missing a great radio experience. Tune into 960 on the AM dial. Angie Coiro is “live and local” at 3 pm every day and I never miss her show. Check the website for other shows and news of the progressive community in the Bay Area. www.green960.com If you are outside the Bay Area, there are live podcasts and archives of most shows. Check it out!
Who won?
All the major networks except Fox found Obama to be the winner. McGrumpy made some points with his newfound aggressive style, but most agreed it was too little too late. Actually too much is more like it. My co listener guest Kim called it “Kitchen sink politics.” Obama never ducked the flying objects McCain kept tossing at him. He didn’t need to. McCain wore himself out to the point he was having trouble articulating, calling his running mate “a breash of freth air” at one point, but that might just be because he gets all hot and bothered thinking about her. (Did you catch the way his gaze kept sinking to her bottom when he first introduced her as his Veep pick? But maybe he was just falling asleep.)
It’s all about the Supreme Court:
For me the watershed moment was McCain’s declaration of a Culture War. No he didn’t say those words, but he did say we need a change of culture, and he was referring to the issue of choice. Saying Obama was allied with “pro-abortion extremists” because he would make an exception for the health of the woman in opposing late term abortions. (Yes, I was disappointed he opposed them, because they are always either for the health of the woman or because the fetus is so badly deformed it couldn’t survive in any meaningful way outside the womb. Hey, these are women who want to have babies. This is not a last minute change of heart or whimsy on their part, as the anti-choice crowd would have you think.)
McCain was flippant, insulting and grossly ignorant or worse, in his cavalierly dismissing the health of the woman as a consideration.
And Choice:
Make no mistake, under a McCain presidency the cause of choice would be set back if not downright overturned altogether if he gets to pick who sits on the Supreme Court. He says he would not make Roe v. Wade a litmus test, but it is clear he would. It ain’t over yet folks. Stay tuned. And if we win, the Reps are already planning a challenge based on “voter fraud,” about which they know plenty.
I watched the debate at the studios of Green 960, progressive talk radio in San Francisco, invited as a listener guest. After the debate, two of us went into the studio with veteran host Angie Coiro for an on-air discussion of the debate with callers. Joining us were California Democratic Party Chair Art Torres, and San Mateo Republican Party vice chair Deborah Wilder. It made for an interesting discussion, you can imagine.
Small plug here:
If you don’t already listen to Green 960, you are missing a great radio experience. Tune into 960 on the AM dial. Angie Coiro is “live and local” at 3 pm every day and I never miss her show. Check the website for other shows and news of the progressive community in the Bay Area. www.green960.com If you are outside the Bay Area, there are live podcasts and archives of most shows. Check it out!
Who won?
All the major networks except Fox found Obama to be the winner. McGrumpy made some points with his newfound aggressive style, but most agreed it was too little too late. Actually too much is more like it. My co listener guest Kim called it “Kitchen sink politics.” Obama never ducked the flying objects McCain kept tossing at him. He didn’t need to. McCain wore himself out to the point he was having trouble articulating, calling his running mate “a breash of freth air” at one point, but that might just be because he gets all hot and bothered thinking about her. (Did you catch the way his gaze kept sinking to her bottom when he first introduced her as his Veep pick? But maybe he was just falling asleep.)
It’s all about the Supreme Court:
For me the watershed moment was McCain’s declaration of a Culture War. No he didn’t say those words, but he did say we need a change of culture, and he was referring to the issue of choice. Saying Obama was allied with “pro-abortion extremists” because he would make an exception for the health of the woman in opposing late term abortions. (Yes, I was disappointed he opposed them, because they are always either for the health of the woman or because the fetus is so badly deformed it couldn’t survive in any meaningful way outside the womb. Hey, these are women who want to have babies. This is not a last minute change of heart or whimsy on their part, as the anti-choice crowd would have you think.)
McCain was flippant, insulting and grossly ignorant or worse, in his cavalierly dismissing the health of the woman as a consideration.
And Choice:
Make no mistake, under a McCain presidency the cause of choice would be set back if not downright overturned altogether if he gets to pick who sits on the Supreme Court. He says he would not make Roe v. Wade a litmus test, but it is clear he would. It ain’t over yet folks. Stay tuned. And if we win, the Reps are already planning a challenge based on “voter fraud,” about which they know plenty.
Monday, October 13, 2008
Dear Friend, Goodbye. A Satire
Dear Friend,
I won’t embarrass you by using your name, or myself by knowing it, so let me just call you “that one.”
I must say good bye and end our long friendship, that is acquaintance, since I have had my investigators look into your past and have found some pretty troubling information.
Like that time in kindergarten you whacked Suzy Shepard over the head and threatened to “kill you,” if she didn’t give back your favorite dolly she was pulling all the hair out of. Such violence cannot be tolerated.
Or that time in high school when you and your hooligan gang threw toilet paper all over the vice principal’s house on Halloween. Such a blatant lack of respect for authority is beyond the pale in these times of fear and terror.
Worst of all may be the well founded rumor which circulated in the sixties that your anti-Vietnam War sympathizing had actually turned into radical terrorism as you kicked the nice policeman in the shin, while he tightened the handcuffs around your wrists and lifted you oh so gently off the ground to toss you into the paddy wagon with the rest of your terrorist protesting buddies. Non-violent disobedience my tuckas!
And just being an anti-war sympathizer in this time when our brave troops are fighting the terrorists over there so we don’t have to fight them here is something I can no longer overlook.
So I must tender my resignation to the Board of our Homeowners’ Association, although it pains me to do so, since we are so close to working out the landscaping for phase three, and I was so looking forward to overseeing the planting of my beloved semi-double laciniated pompom mums in the common area. But to keep an association with you at this time is to put into jeopardy my future political career as a Republican candidate for Sanitary Commissioner.
I am copying all my fellow Board members as well as the press, as it is my civic duty to let them know what kind of individual they have placed their trust in.
I am sorry I will not be able to attend the ill-advised wedding of our two daughters, as we had planned. Jessica is no longer speaking to me, her own mother, so you can see how far the seeds of your radical past have been sown.
Next time you want to serve on a board of directors, be sure not to omit the pertinent facts outlined in this letter from your resume, so that all may be forewarned and not learn the hard way, as I have,
Your former friend,
Upstanding Citizen and phase two condo neighbor
Wednesday, June 11, 2008
Angry "Older" White Women
I have been an angry white woman a good part of my life. Now as a boomer reaching 60, some might classify me as an "older angry white woman."
I’m angry over the fact that we still don’t have an Equal Rights Amendment. That women still make 77 cents to every dollar earned by a man; that we are losing women in our legislature, that some younger women don’t seem to appreciate all the sacrifices their mothers’ and grandmothers’ generation made to get where they are today. (taking for granted that they too can take their place at the corporate trough), angry that we still have a corporate culture, not the cooperative society we all believed in the 60’s.
One of the things I am NOT angry about is Hillary Clinton. Sure, I’d love to see a woman president and I’m glad to see a viable woman candidate, who was able to rally millions to her cause go as far as she did (even though Hillary herself is a little corporate for my tastes.) A major step in the right direction.
But when I hear the media says Obama will have to work hard to win over older white women, that some of them (us) might actually vote for McCain out of spite, I just don’t believe it. Would I, as a feminist, really want to throw away all I’ve worked for on a bland white Republican, because my candidate didn’t win? Would I want to sell the legacy of future generations to endless war and a Supreme Court stacked against all I hold dear? Would I do this out of anger, bitterness or a sense of if I can’t have it neither can you as the corporate media would have you believe? Not likely.
So who are these angry older white women who might vote for McCain? The Democratic equivalent of the Guns, God and Gays voter?
I don’t think they exist. I think they are a figment of the media imagination. All the older white women I know who were rooting for Hillary have swallowed their disappointment and moved on. To work on uniting the Party, to defeat the right, to defeat the tired old George Bush neo-con agenda, and work for change.
Hillary would have been change. Obama is going to be change. Change for the better. If you were for Hillary, you’re not going to be for McCain. The Peace, Environment and Choice voter is just too smart to vote against her own (and her children’s) self interest, no matter what the Gays, Guns and God voters do (if they even exist either).
Don’t let the talking heads convince you otherwise.
I’m angry over the fact that we still don’t have an Equal Rights Amendment. That women still make 77 cents to every dollar earned by a man; that we are losing women in our legislature, that some younger women don’t seem to appreciate all the sacrifices their mothers’ and grandmothers’ generation made to get where they are today. (taking for granted that they too can take their place at the corporate trough), angry that we still have a corporate culture, not the cooperative society we all believed in the 60’s.
One of the things I am NOT angry about is Hillary Clinton. Sure, I’d love to see a woman president and I’m glad to see a viable woman candidate, who was able to rally millions to her cause go as far as she did (even though Hillary herself is a little corporate for my tastes.) A major step in the right direction.
But when I hear the media says Obama will have to work hard to win over older white women, that some of them (us) might actually vote for McCain out of spite, I just don’t believe it. Would I, as a feminist, really want to throw away all I’ve worked for on a bland white Republican, because my candidate didn’t win? Would I want to sell the legacy of future generations to endless war and a Supreme Court stacked against all I hold dear? Would I do this out of anger, bitterness or a sense of if I can’t have it neither can you as the corporate media would have you believe? Not likely.
So who are these angry older white women who might vote for McCain? The Democratic equivalent of the Guns, God and Gays voter?
I don’t think they exist. I think they are a figment of the media imagination. All the older white women I know who were rooting for Hillary have swallowed their disappointment and moved on. To work on uniting the Party, to defeat the right, to defeat the tired old George Bush neo-con agenda, and work for change.
Hillary would have been change. Obama is going to be change. Change for the better. If you were for Hillary, you’re not going to be for McCain. The Peace, Environment and Choice voter is just too smart to vote against her own (and her children’s) self interest, no matter what the Gays, Guns and God voters do (if they even exist either).
Don’t let the talking heads convince you otherwise.
Wednesday, February 20, 2008
Obama and Language or Much ado about....
Oh, wait, that’s been said before; I mean, there’s a tempest in a teapot brewing… No, that’s off limits too. But in all this rush to accusation over Obama’s use of some well worn phrases to express sentiments that rouse the public, where’s the beef? (Sorry little old lady peddling burgers)
If politicians went out of their way to pen speeches with nary a reference to any concept ever before expressed, and all new speeches, who’d know what the bleep they were talking about?)? In all this bloviating about Obama’s use of words that may have been uttered by others, no one is mentioning it’s the use of the familiar that drives campaigns.
Get a grip (full disclosure, not my line) pundits. We’re not talking about turning in someone else’s homework here.
All this media buzz (not my words either, I stole them from 6 or 7 different news papers and blogs, so sue me) over Obama’s rhetoric expressing in some of the very same words, some of the very same sentiments of other candidates or officials has left my head reeling (commercial for something? TV?)
So now he has the audacity to sound like John Edwards, after months of people begging him to pick up some of Edwards ideas and run with them (football term). I know this from the horse’s mouth (Joyce Cary, title of a novel, that I know darn well he didn’t make up. Did anyone sue him for plagiarism?) I was on a conference call with Obama and former Edwards staffers not two weeks ago who were urging him to do just that.
So is Obama just supposed to express these sentiments in different ways? Like, instead of saying, let’s talk unions, would you rather he say, let’s talk about those guys and gals who you know organize other guys and gals into groups of guys and gals to try to get better working conditions? (Oh, yeah, Guys and Gals, maybe too close to Guys and Dolls? Musical based on book by Damon Runyan.)
Is he supposed to ignore the mass culture of drug companies trying to dupe us into thinking we’ll be happier if we’re doped to the gills (whoops, heard that somewhere before too, stop me before I plagiarize again), by using the same imagery Edwards did of happy people cavorting in a field after ingesting some kind of pharmaceutical or other? Good image that. Why not use it? Better than take this pill and you’ll be able to fit through a keyhole, enter the land of Wonderland. (as in Alice in, novel by Lewis Carroll.)
And now they’re going after him for his “Yes we can” slogan. The Washington Post’s Dana Milbank needs a history lesson. His article in today’s (Feb. 20) Chronicle attributes the “Yes we can” saying to a kiddie show cartoon character called Builder Bob. (The online version of the original article at least gives a nod to its use by Caesar Chavez) That saying, “si se puede” in Spanish, was first coined as a rallying cry by Dolores Huerta of the United Farmworkers Union in 1972. Its use by a kiddie TV character shows just how far language reaches into popular culture.
In the immortal words of Lewis Carroll:
'Twas brillig, and the slithy toves
Did gyre and gimble in the wabe:
All mimsy were the borogoves,
And the mome raths outgrabe.
"Beware the Jabberwock, my son!
The jaws that bite, the claws that catch!
Beware the Jubjub bird, and shun
The frumious Bandersnatch "
from The Jaberwocky
Cutting and running for now (George W. stolen from old nautical term, no attribution or apologies ever offered),
your faithful correspondent Dotty the Green Dog Democrat.
If politicians went out of their way to pen speeches with nary a reference to any concept ever before expressed, and all new speeches, who’d know what the bleep they were talking about?)? In all this bloviating about Obama’s use of words that may have been uttered by others, no one is mentioning it’s the use of the familiar that drives campaigns.
Get a grip (full disclosure, not my line) pundits. We’re not talking about turning in someone else’s homework here.
All this media buzz (not my words either, I stole them from 6 or 7 different news papers and blogs, so sue me) over Obama’s rhetoric expressing in some of the very same words, some of the very same sentiments of other candidates or officials has left my head reeling (commercial for something? TV?)
So now he has the audacity to sound like John Edwards, after months of people begging him to pick up some of Edwards ideas and run with them (football term). I know this from the horse’s mouth (Joyce Cary, title of a novel, that I know darn well he didn’t make up. Did anyone sue him for plagiarism?) I was on a conference call with Obama and former Edwards staffers not two weeks ago who were urging him to do just that.
So is Obama just supposed to express these sentiments in different ways? Like, instead of saying, let’s talk unions, would you rather he say, let’s talk about those guys and gals who you know organize other guys and gals into groups of guys and gals to try to get better working conditions? (Oh, yeah, Guys and Gals, maybe too close to Guys and Dolls? Musical based on book by Damon Runyan.)
Is he supposed to ignore the mass culture of drug companies trying to dupe us into thinking we’ll be happier if we’re doped to the gills (whoops, heard that somewhere before too, stop me before I plagiarize again), by using the same imagery Edwards did of happy people cavorting in a field after ingesting some kind of pharmaceutical or other? Good image that. Why not use it? Better than take this pill and you’ll be able to fit through a keyhole, enter the land of Wonderland. (as in Alice in, novel by Lewis Carroll.)
And now they’re going after him for his “Yes we can” slogan. The Washington Post’s Dana Milbank needs a history lesson. His article in today’s (Feb. 20) Chronicle attributes the “Yes we can” saying to a kiddie show cartoon character called Builder Bob. (The online version of the original article at least gives a nod to its use by Caesar Chavez) That saying, “si se puede” in Spanish, was first coined as a rallying cry by Dolores Huerta of the United Farmworkers Union in 1972. Its use by a kiddie TV character shows just how far language reaches into popular culture.
In the immortal words of Lewis Carroll:
'Twas brillig, and the slithy toves
Did gyre and gimble in the wabe:
All mimsy were the borogoves,
And the mome raths outgrabe.
"Beware the Jabberwock, my son!
The jaws that bite, the claws that catch!
Beware the Jubjub bird, and shun
The frumious Bandersnatch "
from The Jaberwocky
Cutting and running for now (George W. stolen from old nautical term, no attribution or apologies ever offered),
your faithful correspondent Dotty the Green Dog Democrat.
Thursday, May 03, 2007
WHEN COMMUNITY LEADERS RUN FOR OFFICE
(A version of this article first appeared in the Sierra Club Bay Chapter Yodeler in May 2007)
If you’ve worked as a volunteer on practically any conservation concern, you’ve probably had occasion to contact public officials and even to put your volunteer spirit to work helping get environmental candidates elected to office. It’s just a hop, skip, and short hike on Mount Tam to go from volunteering for a candidate to becoming one yourself. I spoke with several local Sierrans who’ve taken that hike to the top of the mountain and discovered several common themes.Sierra Club issues made them into candidates
Volunteer Power
Some people run for office because they want power. Others are frustrated over the lack of response from their elected representatives on an issue of importance to them and decide they can do better. For this article, I talked to Sierra Club leaders whose interest in running for office began with activism on particular issues. But if you are active in any local organization, your child’s school or ad hoc neighborhood committee, the same principles apply.
Take Helen Burke, the first Bay Chapter leader to get elected to public office, who after years of advocating on behalf of the Sierra Club, was urged by her fellow Club leaders and other environmental activists to run for the Board of the East Bay Municipal Utility District. Volunteering 40 - 60 hours a week on the Conservation Committee wasn’t enough for Helen, so she took her friends up on their offer to help her win the seat from the newly created Fourth Ward. She ran on a platform of water conservation and reform and won in a landslide, becoming the first woman and first environmentalist to serve on the EBMUD.
Helen went on to mentor other activists whom she encouraged to take their volunteerism to new levels. Andy Katz, a member of the Northern Alameda Group Executive Committee and newly elected to the EBMUD seat that Helen used to hold, credits her with inspiring him to jump in the race. Andy finds that “Serving in public office is an opportunity to put environmental goals into action.”For some, a single issue sparks the decision to run. A long-time activist on Hayward planning issues as well as chair of Sierra Club California in 1991 - 92, Sherman Lewis was inspired to run for the BART Board to stop a parking structure proposed for the Hayward BART station.
In Marin County, long-time Political Committee member Alex Forman was motivated by his concern about a proposed pipeline to bring water from Sonoma to Marin. This pipeline would have had a devastating effect on the flows of the Russian and Eel Rivers and on their salmon fisheries. This issue came to a head during the campaign, when his much better-funded opponent took the opposite position.
In looking for the right office, don’t think only of obviously environmental positions. You can put your environmental principles to work in a number of local offices. John Rizzo had long dreamed of developing a program in green technologies and environmental sciences at the community-college level. As a Club activist and chair (2005 - 06) of the Bay Chapter, John Rizzo decided to run for the Board of San Francisco City College. A strong environmental message and the help of active Sierrans, helped put him in a position to make those dreams a reality.
Building coalitions—the key to winning public office
An important building block of any campaign is bringing together people from various backgrounds and interest groups. In running for MMWD Alex Forman realized that not only environmentalists were lining up behind him for his stand against the pipeline, but also a host of tax-reform advocates, because the pipeline would cost the ratepayers more than Alex’ alternative of expanding conservation measures. This coalition of “unlikely allies” won Alex unexpected support from more conservative voters for sailing to an easy victory. Alex still serves on both the MMWD Board and the Marin Group, where he is the political co-chair. He also continues his work on the Political Committee of the Bay Chapter.
Veteran Berkeley Councilmember Kriss Worthington has become a champion coalition builder over his years in office. Even before his involvement as a Sierra Club activist and Bay Chapter ExComm member, Kriss had worked for years with the student community. Building a labor/environmental coalition worked well for Andy Katz as well. Having coalition partners on board with your campaign can help with other endorsements and donations, which can make the difference in getting your environmental message out to the voters.
John Rizzo’s win shows how a strong progressive message can transcend party lines. Although he is a proud Green Party member, John earned the support of influential Democratic Clubs in his San Francisco City College bid, including the liberal Harvey Milk Club.
And of course, that all-important Sierra Club endorsement can not be over-emphasized.
Getting Your Issues on the Table as a Newly Elected Official
Transitioning from Club volunteer to elected official is not always easy. It helps if the environmental activists who helped you to get into office stick around for the heavy lifting. Keep those volunteers involved, advises EBMUD’s Andy Katz. Their voice at meetings and on advisory committees can be invaluable in helping the office-holder keep the environmental issues on the table and “provide an elected environmental advocate the ability to translate that perspective into real policy.” It also can boost the morale of an outvoted environmental office-holder to be surrounded by supporters, who will keep them energized and focused on the task at hand.
When you work strictly as a volunteer, you have the luxury of taking firm positions and stating them unwaveringly. As an elected official, you must work with others to accomplish your goals. Helen Burke calls this “boring from within”.Starting out as a lone voice for the environment, Helen started making a difference right away, finding support for her ideas of instituting tiered water rates. Her lively campaign and new ideas transformed EBMUD meetings from dull to delightful and attracted local press as well to see what this energetic woman could do.
Some tasks take longer than others. One of Helen’s proudest achievements was an end to the practice of subsidizing developers for the cost of the water infrastructure for their projects. “It took 12 years and getting a second vote on the Board, but eventually that subsidy was eliminated!” says Helen. Dennis Waespi, first elected in 1999, today serves as president of the Board of the Castro Valley Sanitary District. He is proud of the innovative environmental programs his Board has instituted, including making Castro Valley a leader in recycling and recently instituting a pilot program in the schools to collect and compost food waste. Castro Valley was the first town in Alameda County to successfully integrate food-waste collection into its green-waste recycling. Waespi urges other Club members and activists to run, saying “We need more environmentalists involved in the political process. And the time is now.”
Are you next?
Running for office isn’t for everybody. But it is one way to extend your environmental volunteerism. One intermediate step is to get appointed to an advisory board or commission. And we all can volunteer to help the environmental leaders who do run.
Dotty Le Mieux
Dotty LeMieux first ran for office when her never-to-be-named coastal Marin town was threatened with overdevelopment. The only local body that dealt with issues related to growth was the Public Utilities District, which had for years maintained a moratorium on water hookups due to shortage of storage capacity.
She ran for that seat and won in 1981; later she was encouraged to run for county supervisor, receiving Club support against an incumbent whose environmental rating had slipped over his years in office. Although she didn’t win that one, her campaign brought environmental and social issues to the forefront, prompting the incumbent not to seek another term.
Dotty went on to serve on the Sierra Club Marin Group Executive Committee, serving as chair for four years.
Today she runs a campaign-consulting firm in Marin, Green Dog Campaigns and Communications. Alex Forman was her first successful client. She has since helped many Club-supported candidates win tough races, including Marin County Supervisor Susan Adams and Fairfax Councilmember Mary Ann Maggiore. Her most recent victory was the election of Lake County Supervisor Denise Rushing, who, with the Club’s support, was able to defeat a long time incumbent.
For more information, contact Dotty at:del@greendogcampaigns.com or check her web site:www.greendogcampaigns.com
If you’ve worked as a volunteer on practically any conservation concern, you’ve probably had occasion to contact public officials and even to put your volunteer spirit to work helping get environmental candidates elected to office. It’s just a hop, skip, and short hike on Mount Tam to go from volunteering for a candidate to becoming one yourself. I spoke with several local Sierrans who’ve taken that hike to the top of the mountain and discovered several common themes.Sierra Club issues made them into candidates
Volunteer Power
Some people run for office because they want power. Others are frustrated over the lack of response from their elected representatives on an issue of importance to them and decide they can do better. For this article, I talked to Sierra Club leaders whose interest in running for office began with activism on particular issues. But if you are active in any local organization, your child’s school or ad hoc neighborhood committee, the same principles apply.
Take Helen Burke, the first Bay Chapter leader to get elected to public office, who after years of advocating on behalf of the Sierra Club, was urged by her fellow Club leaders and other environmental activists to run for the Board of the East Bay Municipal Utility District. Volunteering 40 - 60 hours a week on the Conservation Committee wasn’t enough for Helen, so she took her friends up on their offer to help her win the seat from the newly created Fourth Ward. She ran on a platform of water conservation and reform and won in a landslide, becoming the first woman and first environmentalist to serve on the EBMUD.
Helen went on to mentor other activists whom she encouraged to take their volunteerism to new levels. Andy Katz, a member of the Northern Alameda Group Executive Committee and newly elected to the EBMUD seat that Helen used to hold, credits her with inspiring him to jump in the race. Andy finds that “Serving in public office is an opportunity to put environmental goals into action.”For some, a single issue sparks the decision to run. A long-time activist on Hayward planning issues as well as chair of Sierra Club California in 1991 - 92, Sherman Lewis was inspired to run for the BART Board to stop a parking structure proposed for the Hayward BART station.
In Marin County, long-time Political Committee member Alex Forman was motivated by his concern about a proposed pipeline to bring water from Sonoma to Marin. This pipeline would have had a devastating effect on the flows of the Russian and Eel Rivers and on their salmon fisheries. This issue came to a head during the campaign, when his much better-funded opponent took the opposite position.
In looking for the right office, don’t think only of obviously environmental positions. You can put your environmental principles to work in a number of local offices. John Rizzo had long dreamed of developing a program in green technologies and environmental sciences at the community-college level. As a Club activist and chair (2005 - 06) of the Bay Chapter, John Rizzo decided to run for the Board of San Francisco City College. A strong environmental message and the help of active Sierrans, helped put him in a position to make those dreams a reality.
Building coalitions—the key to winning public office
An important building block of any campaign is bringing together people from various backgrounds and interest groups. In running for MMWD Alex Forman realized that not only environmentalists were lining up behind him for his stand against the pipeline, but also a host of tax-reform advocates, because the pipeline would cost the ratepayers more than Alex’ alternative of expanding conservation measures. This coalition of “unlikely allies” won Alex unexpected support from more conservative voters for sailing to an easy victory. Alex still serves on both the MMWD Board and the Marin Group, where he is the political co-chair. He also continues his work on the Political Committee of the Bay Chapter.
Veteran Berkeley Councilmember Kriss Worthington has become a champion coalition builder over his years in office. Even before his involvement as a Sierra Club activist and Bay Chapter ExComm member, Kriss had worked for years with the student community. Building a labor/environmental coalition worked well for Andy Katz as well. Having coalition partners on board with your campaign can help with other endorsements and donations, which can make the difference in getting your environmental message out to the voters.
John Rizzo’s win shows how a strong progressive message can transcend party lines. Although he is a proud Green Party member, John earned the support of influential Democratic Clubs in his San Francisco City College bid, including the liberal Harvey Milk Club.
And of course, that all-important Sierra Club endorsement can not be over-emphasized.
Getting Your Issues on the Table as a Newly Elected Official
Transitioning from Club volunteer to elected official is not always easy. It helps if the environmental activists who helped you to get into office stick around for the heavy lifting. Keep those volunteers involved, advises EBMUD’s Andy Katz. Their voice at meetings and on advisory committees can be invaluable in helping the office-holder keep the environmental issues on the table and “provide an elected environmental advocate the ability to translate that perspective into real policy.” It also can boost the morale of an outvoted environmental office-holder to be surrounded by supporters, who will keep them energized and focused on the task at hand.
When you work strictly as a volunteer, you have the luxury of taking firm positions and stating them unwaveringly. As an elected official, you must work with others to accomplish your goals. Helen Burke calls this “boring from within”.Starting out as a lone voice for the environment, Helen started making a difference right away, finding support for her ideas of instituting tiered water rates. Her lively campaign and new ideas transformed EBMUD meetings from dull to delightful and attracted local press as well to see what this energetic woman could do.
Some tasks take longer than others. One of Helen’s proudest achievements was an end to the practice of subsidizing developers for the cost of the water infrastructure for their projects. “It took 12 years and getting a second vote on the Board, but eventually that subsidy was eliminated!” says Helen. Dennis Waespi, first elected in 1999, today serves as president of the Board of the Castro Valley Sanitary District. He is proud of the innovative environmental programs his Board has instituted, including making Castro Valley a leader in recycling and recently instituting a pilot program in the schools to collect and compost food waste. Castro Valley was the first town in Alameda County to successfully integrate food-waste collection into its green-waste recycling. Waespi urges other Club members and activists to run, saying “We need more environmentalists involved in the political process. And the time is now.”
Are you next?
Running for office isn’t for everybody. But it is one way to extend your environmental volunteerism. One intermediate step is to get appointed to an advisory board or commission. And we all can volunteer to help the environmental leaders who do run.
Dotty Le Mieux
Dotty LeMieux first ran for office when her never-to-be-named coastal Marin town was threatened with overdevelopment. The only local body that dealt with issues related to growth was the Public Utilities District, which had for years maintained a moratorium on water hookups due to shortage of storage capacity.
She ran for that seat and won in 1981; later she was encouraged to run for county supervisor, receiving Club support against an incumbent whose environmental rating had slipped over his years in office. Although she didn’t win that one, her campaign brought environmental and social issues to the forefront, prompting the incumbent not to seek another term.
Dotty went on to serve on the Sierra Club Marin Group Executive Committee, serving as chair for four years.
Today she runs a campaign-consulting firm in Marin, Green Dog Campaigns and Communications. Alex Forman was her first successful client. She has since helped many Club-supported candidates win tough races, including Marin County Supervisor Susan Adams and Fairfax Councilmember Mary Ann Maggiore. Her most recent victory was the election of Lake County Supervisor Denise Rushing, who, with the Club’s support, was able to defeat a long time incumbent.
For more information, contact Dotty at:del@greendogcampaigns.com or check her web site:www.greendogcampaigns.com
Thursday, February 22, 2007
New Blog Check it out!
For some months, the Green Dog has been posting at the new Community Blogs section of www.sfgate.com, the San Francisco Chronicle's Blog central.
My Blog is called Boomer Bytes and still contains satire, unapologetic progressive politics, as well as Boomer related tales. (My youth as an anti-war activist during Vietnam, mostly.) I'm posting there more than here, so won't you check it out today and leave me a comment on the new site?
url is http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/contribute/sn/persona?plckPersonaPage=PersonaBlog&User=greendogdemo
Come on over!
Dotty the Green Dog Democrat
My Blog is called Boomer Bytes and still contains satire, unapologetic progressive politics, as well as Boomer related tales. (My youth as an anti-war activist during Vietnam, mostly.) I'm posting there more than here, so won't you check it out today and leave me a comment on the new site?
url is http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/contribute/sn/persona?plckPersonaPage=PersonaBlog&User=greendogdemo
Come on over!
Dotty the Green Dog Democrat
Wednesday, November 08, 2006
Demos in; Rumsfeld out!
ODDS AND ENDS FROM THE (PROGRESSIVE) CAMPAIGN TRAIL
What a night! Democrats rocked the House and maybe have even taken the Senate. We are keeping our fingers crossed over Virginia. Yes, some of these Dems are from the Republican wing of the Party, but at least there's a shift.
And what better way to acknowledge it than to dump Rumsfeld? George had to admit he took a thumpin' from the Dems. But watch out. He and Cheney are not gone yet. And if the Senate splits, then Cheney gets to cast all those deciding votes. The Dark Side is plotting, you can be sure.
On the local front, one of the best progressives we have in Marin, Frank Egger, lost his bid for a seat on the MMWD to a newcomer, a "water manager" for San Francisco. Could there be a conflict brewing?
We shall see as the saga unfolds. The voters seem to have a thing for so called "experts" when they vote for boards that cover specialty areas, such as Health Care District (progressives lost here, too, as the voters put two more doctors on the board, and one of those had been recalled from the very same board years ago!) and water board.
Two years ago Richard Rubin, another well qualified, well known contender was trounced by a nobody with "water engineer" after his name.
Go figure. At least Jennifer Rienks was elected as the third Health Care District board member, probably because she had "health policy analyst" after her name, not because she's a progressive community activist.
The Progressive Caucus of our own California Democratic Party is hoping to make some gains in Party leadership this year. Watch this space for news of of our Progressive Plan, the progressive 58 County Program for California.
What a night! Democrats rocked the House and maybe have even taken the Senate. We are keeping our fingers crossed over Virginia. Yes, some of these Dems are from the Republican wing of the Party, but at least there's a shift.
And what better way to acknowledge it than to dump Rumsfeld? George had to admit he took a thumpin' from the Dems. But watch out. He and Cheney are not gone yet. And if the Senate splits, then Cheney gets to cast all those deciding votes. The Dark Side is plotting, you can be sure.
On the local front, one of the best progressives we have in Marin, Frank Egger, lost his bid for a seat on the MMWD to a newcomer, a "water manager" for San Francisco. Could there be a conflict brewing?
We shall see as the saga unfolds. The voters seem to have a thing for so called "experts" when they vote for boards that cover specialty areas, such as Health Care District (progressives lost here, too, as the voters put two more doctors on the board, and one of those had been recalled from the very same board years ago!) and water board.
Two years ago Richard Rubin, another well qualified, well known contender was trounced by a nobody with "water engineer" after his name.
Go figure. At least Jennifer Rienks was elected as the third Health Care District board member, probably because she had "health policy analyst" after her name, not because she's a progressive community activist.
The Progressive Caucus of our own California Democratic Party is hoping to make some gains in Party leadership this year. Watch this space for news of of our Progressive Plan, the progressive 58 County Program for California.
Tuesday, October 31, 2006
IT'S STILL THE WAR STUPID!
What I would like the Democrats to be saying about now is that we have lost more American lives in Bush's uncalled for, unneeded, disastrous War in Iraq, than were lost in the World Trade Center attack on 9/11. In fact, this has been the case for months. World Trade Center deaths 2819 or 2823, depending on whose account is more accurate, the Americans' or the British.
Iraq War deaths as of October 30, 2006 - 2834. So, say what you will how the World Trade Center happened, we know George Bush is responsible for the Iraq War deaths, and for no reason that has become discernible over the years.
Not to mention at least 21,000 wounded Americans and countless non-combatant Iraqi deaths.
Hammer this point home Democrats. Cheney is out scaring people with Halloween talk of how a Democratic victory in Congress means the terrorists win.
Bush and Cheney are the terrorists. It's them or us. It's all war all the time, or it's fight back now.
Got it? Now, let's put those sneering Republican death's heads back in the closet until next Halloween.
Iraq War deaths as of October 30, 2006 - 2834. So, say what you will how the World Trade Center happened, we know George Bush is responsible for the Iraq War deaths, and for no reason that has become discernible over the years.
Not to mention at least 21,000 wounded Americans and countless non-combatant Iraqi deaths.
Hammer this point home Democrats. Cheney is out scaring people with Halloween talk of how a Democratic victory in Congress means the terrorists win.
Bush and Cheney are the terrorists. It's them or us. It's all war all the time, or it's fight back now.
Got it? Now, let's put those sneering Republican death's heads back in the closet until next Halloween.
Thursday, October 19, 2006
STAY THE COURSE?
I don’t usually resort to cancelling my subscription to publications over their editorial stances or election picks, especially ones that purport to be news outlets (and ones with such enlightened columnists as Mark Morford and Jon Carroll). But the Chron’s editorial endorsing Schwarzengger for 4 more years made me gag up my breakfast oatmeal and had me all but reaching for the phone to so I could say “Stop the presses, cancel my subscription and go F*** yourselves!”
It wasn’t the endorsement so much as the headline accompanying it. Arnold to “Stay and the Course.”
"Stay the Course?” Has that insidious Bushism about the continuing the disastrous Iraq policy made its way so deeply into the lexicon of American press that they use it almost cavalierly to tout endorsements? Or is there something more venal at work?
In this week’s New Yorker there’s a telling article about conspiracy theories, how they start and why they find such currency among true believers. I’ve always tried to stay away from them, but this is too much. Is “Stay the Course” dropped into a headline supporting the popular body building champ turned politician a not so subtle signal that the Chronicle supports the present administration and its Iraq War?
Sure Angelides has been a big disappointment. No, his handlers have; they represent everything that is old and tired and wrong about the Democratic Party (Hey, I’m old and tired, but I like to think mostly right about political strategy.)
Like the Reps, the Dems “stay the course” in their lackluster campaigns. Kerry did it, ignoring his progressive base and the “practical aspirations of the American people” to borrow a phrase from Dennis Kucinich, one of the few Presidential hopefuls who chose a different course in his campaign – taking the message to the people and eschewing the hackneyed play-to-the-middle strategy of his peers. You say he didn’t get very far, but that’s because all the course-stayers and their moneyed friends hogged the resources and scared the public the same way the Bushies did over who can keep you safer.
Kerry bristled at being called “Bush lite” by some of his progressive supporters. But after the campaign, it was that accusation that stuck.
Why can’t the Democrats be more like Democrats? This year they have the chance and still, amidst all the anger and frustration and grief over the failed Bush Iraq war, scandals in Congress and policies that threaten our very existence on the planet, “Stay the Course” is the phrase of the hour.
Could it really be that Stay the Course means nothing more than “Take the path of least resistance?”
I will continue to read the Chronicle; because the path of least resistance is to cancel my subscription, throw my hands in the air and give up. They’re not going to get me to do that, just yet.
It wasn’t the endorsement so much as the headline accompanying it. Arnold to “Stay and the Course.”
"Stay the Course?” Has that insidious Bushism about the continuing the disastrous Iraq policy made its way so deeply into the lexicon of American press that they use it almost cavalierly to tout endorsements? Or is there something more venal at work?
In this week’s New Yorker there’s a telling article about conspiracy theories, how they start and why they find such currency among true believers. I’ve always tried to stay away from them, but this is too much. Is “Stay the Course” dropped into a headline supporting the popular body building champ turned politician a not so subtle signal that the Chronicle supports the present administration and its Iraq War?
Sure Angelides has been a big disappointment. No, his handlers have; they represent everything that is old and tired and wrong about the Democratic Party (Hey, I’m old and tired, but I like to think mostly right about political strategy.)
Like the Reps, the Dems “stay the course” in their lackluster campaigns. Kerry did it, ignoring his progressive base and the “practical aspirations of the American people” to borrow a phrase from Dennis Kucinich, one of the few Presidential hopefuls who chose a different course in his campaign – taking the message to the people and eschewing the hackneyed play-to-the-middle strategy of his peers. You say he didn’t get very far, but that’s because all the course-stayers and their moneyed friends hogged the resources and scared the public the same way the Bushies did over who can keep you safer.
Kerry bristled at being called “Bush lite” by some of his progressive supporters. But after the campaign, it was that accusation that stuck.
Why can’t the Democrats be more like Democrats? This year they have the chance and still, amidst all the anger and frustration and grief over the failed Bush Iraq war, scandals in Congress and policies that threaten our very existence on the planet, “Stay the Course” is the phrase of the hour.
Could it really be that Stay the Course means nothing more than “Take the path of least resistance?”
I will continue to read the Chronicle; because the path of least resistance is to cancel my subscription, throw my hands in the air and give up. They’re not going to get me to do that, just yet.
Wednesday, August 30, 2006
Eminent Domain in Reverse
There's a Proposition on the November ballot in California deceptively called "Protect our Homes." Proposition 90 is supposed to be about eminent domain reform, prohibting the government from taking private property for other private use, in the name of economic benefit. That would be a good thing, as far as it goes. But Proposition 90 goes much farther. It contains a provision that would require compensation for any government regulation of land use, including such useful tools to protect the environment and protect neighboring homeowners as height limitations, zoning changes and even regulations on mining and other destructive activities.
Proposition 90 goes too far in the wrong direction. What we really need for the protection of our communities is Eminent Domain in Reverse. Now, local governments can take your property, the small business you earn a meager but satisfying living from or the bungalow that your grandfather worked and slaved at the factory to buy, and give it to big business for a new industrial mall or shopping center.
They say this is for the public good because it will create jobs and bring economic benefit into the area. Your neighborhood, which has now been declared blighted, like some slum full of rats and boarded up windows.
You are mad and rightly so. Your neighborhood isn't blighted. It's just lived in. Well, how about this? We start a movement in this country for Reverse Eminent Domain. We need courageous legislators to do this and a population "mad as hell" and not willing to take it any more.
Then we get the legislators to enact a law that allows us, We the People, to take the property of big busines and corporations and the McMansions their CEOs live in and give them to the working people and those who would be working if they could really get a job at that factory, which is all automated now, with customer service outsourced to Pakistan.
Reverse Eminent Domain would be about real public benefit to the real public. Not some nameless faceless corporate stooges.
But, wait, it sounds good, it sounds American, people standing up for what is rightfully theirs. People standing up to Government abuses.
But it sounds like something Homeland Security might find suspicious. It would be declared a terrorist plot, and denounced from pulpits and Fox news shows. Honest hard working Americans would be put into detention centers and called traitors and liberals.
They'd say the next thing we'd want would be socialized medicine and free lunches. And you know what? They might be right. Because once people are free of powerful corporate greed and corrupt governments, they can start making decisons for themselves and the good of their communities. What a concept!
So, think about it, Reverse Eminent Domain. It might be the wave of the progressive future.
Proposition 90 goes too far in the wrong direction. What we really need for the protection of our communities is Eminent Domain in Reverse. Now, local governments can take your property, the small business you earn a meager but satisfying living from or the bungalow that your grandfather worked and slaved at the factory to buy, and give it to big business for a new industrial mall or shopping center.
They say this is for the public good because it will create jobs and bring economic benefit into the area. Your neighborhood, which has now been declared blighted, like some slum full of rats and boarded up windows.
You are mad and rightly so. Your neighborhood isn't blighted. It's just lived in. Well, how about this? We start a movement in this country for Reverse Eminent Domain. We need courageous legislators to do this and a population "mad as hell" and not willing to take it any more.
Then we get the legislators to enact a law that allows us, We the People, to take the property of big busines and corporations and the McMansions their CEOs live in and give them to the working people and those who would be working if they could really get a job at that factory, which is all automated now, with customer service outsourced to Pakistan.
Reverse Eminent Domain would be about real public benefit to the real public. Not some nameless faceless corporate stooges.
But, wait, it sounds good, it sounds American, people standing up for what is rightfully theirs. People standing up to Government abuses.
But it sounds like something Homeland Security might find suspicious. It would be declared a terrorist plot, and denounced from pulpits and Fox news shows. Honest hard working Americans would be put into detention centers and called traitors and liberals.
They'd say the next thing we'd want would be socialized medicine and free lunches. And you know what? They might be right. Because once people are free of powerful corporate greed and corrupt governments, they can start making decisons for themselves and the good of their communities. What a concept!
So, think about it, Reverse Eminent Domain. It might be the wave of the progressive future.
Thursday, August 10, 2006
Leave Your Liquids at the Gate!
Talk about knee-jerk reactions. First it was terrorists on airliners with boxcutters, so we had to relinquish our sharp objects, nail scissors and files, letter openers and those cute Swiss Army knives every one kept tucked in their purse. Airport security checks were filled with little old ladies in wheelchairs being searched for contraband.
After a while, the ban on nail clippers was lifted. And did you notice they took away the metal knives from the airline meal, but left you a metal fork with all those sharp tongs intact?
Then it was some wacko trying to light his shoes on fire, so we all have to put our footwear in plastic bins before we go through the metal detector.
Now it's liquid. Not that they haven't known for years that explosives can be made from liquid. Liquid fertilizer, liquid nitroglycerin, not to mention all the easily obtainable flammables: gasoline, kerosene, propane. How interesting that the day after Lieberman's defeat in the Democratic Primary in Connecticut, a terrorist plot to blow up planes from London to the US was uncovered. A plot using liquid explosives.
So now, it's hand over your baby bottles, contact lens solution, toothpaste and Evian.
I predict it won't be long before they've outlawed chewing gum (plastique) and eyeglasses (can be used by junior Al Quaeda scouts for starting fires).
Oh, yeah, what about Snakes on a Plane? That would surely cause a commotion. Better leave your boa constrictor home.
Seriously, the point is, anyone can use anything as an agent of terror or disruption. So what's the point of waiting until someone tries something new, and then confiscating whatever object they used from everybody else?
And seriously (and cynically) again, did you hear Bush using this opportunity to trot out his trusty war rhetoric? "This just shows that we're still at war with the Islamo Fascists" said our fearless leader, never missing a chance to push his all war all the time agenda.
Or as Randy Rhodes, of Air America puts it, "Perpetual war for pertpetual profits."
After a while, the ban on nail clippers was lifted. And did you notice they took away the metal knives from the airline meal, but left you a metal fork with all those sharp tongs intact?
Then it was some wacko trying to light his shoes on fire, so we all have to put our footwear in plastic bins before we go through the metal detector.
Now it's liquid. Not that they haven't known for years that explosives can be made from liquid. Liquid fertilizer, liquid nitroglycerin, not to mention all the easily obtainable flammables: gasoline, kerosene, propane. How interesting that the day after Lieberman's defeat in the Democratic Primary in Connecticut, a terrorist plot to blow up planes from London to the US was uncovered. A plot using liquid explosives.
So now, it's hand over your baby bottles, contact lens solution, toothpaste and Evian.
I predict it won't be long before they've outlawed chewing gum (plastique) and eyeglasses (can be used by junior Al Quaeda scouts for starting fires).
Oh, yeah, what about Snakes on a Plane? That would surely cause a commotion. Better leave your boa constrictor home.
Seriously, the point is, anyone can use anything as an agent of terror or disruption. So what's the point of waiting until someone tries something new, and then confiscating whatever object they used from everybody else?
And seriously (and cynically) again, did you hear Bush using this opportunity to trot out his trusty war rhetoric? "This just shows that we're still at war with the Islamo Fascists" said our fearless leader, never missing a chance to push his all war all the time agenda.
Or as Randy Rhodes, of Air America puts it, "Perpetual war for pertpetual profits."
Wednesday, August 02, 2006
PRACTICAL POLITICS CLASS NEARS
Yes, it's that time of year again for the Practical Politics class at the College of Marin. The next session is Saturday September 16, 2006, from 10-4 PM. Anyone running for office, thinking of running for office or working with a campaign are especially invited to join us.
We will, as always, go over some basics for activists, that can be used in campaigns or in your neighborhood battles.
Email me with any questions: del@greendogcampaigns.com
PRACTICAL POLITICS
How YOU can be an Activist for Your Community
"All politics is local" -Tip O'Neill
Dotty LeMieux’s community activist training class will be held at the College of Marin, Saturday September 16, from 10 AM to 4 PM. Learn how to be a more effective activist for your cause.
Environmental: Are you reviewing an EIR for a project in your neighborhood, fighting big box retail or struggling to preserve wetlands?
Social: Would you like your local government to be more responsive to community needs in the areas of affordable housing, transit or other pressing neighborhood issues?
Political: Have you thought about running for office yourself or working for a candidate or ballot measure to make changes in your community?
This training may be just what you’re looking for. Meet like minded people and hear their stories. Gain new allies and learn new techniques in working for your cause or candidate Topics include:
• Telling our stories, campaigns won and lost, what you are doing now in your community!
• Frame that issue: How to get your message just right
• Tracking the elusive volunteers
• Getting the Press to pay attention
• Creating effective materials to carry your message to the streets, City Hall or Washington
• Finding likely and unlikely allies. Learn why "The enemy of my enemy is my Friend."
• Yes, you CAN raise money! Tips to help you get over your fear.
• Planning your next steps; An activist's work is never done!
Successful students of past classes have won elected office offices, led citizen petition drives and become effective at getting their message across in public hearings and in the press.
It would be helpful, but not required, if students read George Lakoff’s Don’t think of an Elephant before the class. Binders with class material provided to each student.
Yes, you CAN make a difference!
Go to http://marincommunityed.org/regist/resources/index.htm
to register
We will, as always, go over some basics for activists, that can be used in campaigns or in your neighborhood battles.
Email me with any questions: del@greendogcampaigns.com
PRACTICAL POLITICS
How YOU can be an Activist for Your Community
"All politics is local" -Tip O'Neill
Dotty LeMieux’s community activist training class will be held at the College of Marin, Saturday September 16, from 10 AM to 4 PM. Learn how to be a more effective activist for your cause.
Environmental: Are you reviewing an EIR for a project in your neighborhood, fighting big box retail or struggling to preserve wetlands?
Social: Would you like your local government to be more responsive to community needs in the areas of affordable housing, transit or other pressing neighborhood issues?
Political: Have you thought about running for office yourself or working for a candidate or ballot measure to make changes in your community?
This training may be just what you’re looking for. Meet like minded people and hear their stories. Gain new allies and learn new techniques in working for your cause or candidate Topics include:
• Telling our stories, campaigns won and lost, what you are doing now in your community!
• Frame that issue: How to get your message just right
• Tracking the elusive volunteers
• Getting the Press to pay attention
• Creating effective materials to carry your message to the streets, City Hall or Washington
• Finding likely and unlikely allies. Learn why "The enemy of my enemy is my Friend."
• Yes, you CAN raise money! Tips to help you get over your fear.
• Planning your next steps; An activist's work is never done!
Successful students of past classes have won elected office offices, led citizen petition drives and become effective at getting their message across in public hearings and in the press.
It would be helpful, but not required, if students read George Lakoff’s Don’t think of an Elephant before the class. Binders with class material provided to each student.
Yes, you CAN make a difference!
Go to http://marincommunityed.org/regist/resources/index.htm
to register
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)