Mn-prog-events Mailing List: Progressive Calendar 01.23.06

[David Shove (shove001]

            P R O G R E S S I V E   C A L E N D A R     01.23.06

1. Children's rights    1.23 12noon
2. Maplewood land grab  1.23 7pm
3. Transportation       1.23 7pm
4. Vs cross burning     1.23 7pm
5. No Fridley stadium   1.23 8:30pm
6. Weimar democracy     1.23-2.10

7. Business/environment 1.24 7:30am
8. Vs mercury pollution 1.24 12:30pm
9. Health/minors        1.24 5.45pm
10. Schaffer/Council    1.24 6:30pm St Francis MN
11. 9-11 inquiry/CTV    1.24 8pm

12. Brecher/Smith - Command responsibility?
13. Molly Ivins   - I will not support Hillary Clinton for president
14. Liberty Underground/Ralph Nader - Congressional ethics after Abramoff
15. Paul Krugman  - The K Street prescription
16. ed            - Sex, dull and great (paired haikus)

--------1 of 16--------

From: humanrts [at] umn.edu
Subject: Children's rights 1.23 12noon


January 23 - The Children's Human Rights Speaker Series: An Introduction
to the Human Rights of Children. 12noon-1pm

Faegre and Benson LLP and Minnesota Advocates for Human Rights Present:
The Children's Human Rights Speaker Series - An Introduction to the Human
Rights of Children.

Biographic information
Michele Garnett McKenzie, Esq., is the Director of Minnesota Advocates for
Human Rights Refugee & Immigrant Program, where she directs the pro bono
Asylum Project, client services, and advocacy on legal issues affecting
refugees and immigrants. She received her J.D. from the University of
Minnesota Law School, and her B.A. from Macalester College. Prior to her
work at Minnesota Advocates, Ms. McKenzie worked in private immigration
practice in Saint Paul, and as a Judicial Law Clerk for the Executive
Office for Immigration Review in Arizona and Nevada. She has served as an
adjunct faculty member of William Mitchell College of Law and as co-chair
of the Minnesota State Bar Association Human Rights Committee. She is a
frequent lecturer on immigration and asylum law. Ms. McKenzie is a member
of the American Immigration Lawyers Association and the Minnesota State
Bar Association. She is admitted to practice in the State of Minnesota and
the U.S. District Court for the Dist! rict of Minnesota.

Robin Phillips, Esq., is the Executive Director of Minnesota Advocates for
Human Rights. She formerly served as the Director of the Women's Human
Rights Program and the Deputy Director of the organization. She has
written on a variety of topics related to women's human rights including
trafficking in women, employment discrimination, sexual harassment and
domestic violence. She has taught courses on human rights at the
University of Minnesota Law School and at St. Thomas University Law
School. Ms. Phillips has conducted fact-finding missions to document human
rights violations in Romania, Bulgaria, Albania, Macedonia, Poland,
Armenia, Moldova, Ukraine and Uzbekistan. She has organized international
conferences and trainings on human rights and NGO development issues.
Prior to Minnesota Advocates, Ms. Phillips practiced law with the firm of
Briggs and Morgan. She received her law degree from Northwestern
University School of Law and her B.A., magna cum laude, from Pepperdine !
University.

The bi-monthly Children's Human Rights Speaker Series will be held
throughout 2006 and 2007.

The bi-monthly Children's Human Rights Speaker Series will be held
throughout 2006 and 2007.  Lectures are free and open to the public
(registration required). For more information, please contact Minnesota
Advocates for Human Rights at (612) 341-3302 or see our website at
www.mnadvocates.org. You may find directions to Faegre & Benson LLP. at:
www.faegre.com.

Please RSVP to Amy Beier at Minnesota Advocates by noon on Thursday,
January 19 at (612) 341-3302 ext. 118 or abeier [at] mnadvocates.org.

Lunch will be provided to those who RSVP. Application will be made for one
CLE credit. Location: Faegre & Benson LLP, The Century Room, 2200 Wells
Fargo Center, 90 South Seventh Street Minneapolis, MN 55402


--------2 of 16--------

From: Andy Hamerlinck <iamandy [at] riseup.net>
Subject: Maplewood land grab 1.23 7pm  [ed head]

Background on Maplewood's Gladstone Redevelopment Issue

At our January meeting on the 7th, Bruce Roman alerted St. Paul Greens about
the threat to a public open space in his city of Maplewood.  Bruce is a new
Green who became involved in the Elizabeth Dickinson campaign as a ward
captain.  Bruce passed around copies of a business proposal for a large
installation of new housing and commercial buildings in the Gladstone area
of Maplewood.  It included a drawing of the area with Bruce's drawing of a
yellow highlighter around the open savanna.  Preserving the natural
environment of the savanna is of great importance to Bruce, who grew up in
Maplewood.  He attended the Maplewood City Council meeting on Monday, Jan.
9, to find out the progress of the proposed installments.  He hopes to
preserve as much of the savanna as possible from installments.  He asked for
help from St. Paul Greens.  I arranged for Bruce to get a list of our Green
contacts in Maplewood.

Redevelopment or Installation?

Some people freely use the term "development" and "redevelopment," whereas I
will not use these inaccurate terms.  I use the word "installation" because
it more accurately describes that humans install structures on a landscape
which humans think are good but which do NOTHING to improve nature.
"Development projects" which alter nature in any way (such as putting a
house on a lot) destroy nature, they do not improve it.

Update from Bruce

Bruce called me today and authorized me to pass on information from the
Maplewood City Council meeting to St. Paul Greens on this list.  (He does
not have a computer.  My e-address is mysteriously barred from posting
directly, and our cyberspace expert is stumped as to why I cannot do so.
Thus, Andy Hamerlinck is pressed into relay service.)

The new mayor of Maplewood, Diana Longrie, voted with Councilmembers Hjelle
and Dave Bartol to review a scaled-down installment plan, different from the
large plan originally proposed for the Gladstone area.  These three outvoted
the other two members.  Dave Bartol is an interim member of the Council and
he created the scaled down version which is now under review, known as the
Bartol Plan.  There will be an election for his council seat on February 28.

Bruce anticipates that a public hearing on the scaled-down plan will be
scheduled.  He hopes to attract save-the-savanna supporters to it.

The next Maplewood City Council Meeting will be on Jan. 23 at 7 PM; Bruce
will attend early to interview the Council about the Gladstone plans before
the meeting starts.

The plan preferred by two of the Councilmembers costs $18 million and has
over 800 new housing units for a projected population of 3,000 residents.

The smaller plan, voted for review, costs $11 million and has 490 units.  Of
those 490 units, 150 are slated for replacing the old resort cabins
currently occupying the north side of Lake Phalen.  This smaller plan does
not threaten the savanna with installments.  Bruce prefers this plan.

Diane's Perspective

I have become acquainted with Maplewood's Mayor Diana Longrie through her
live public issues show broadcast weekly from the community access cable TV
studio in White Bear Lake.  She seems like a strong advocate for people
versus corporations, describes herself as fiscally conservative, and gave
the old City Council a hard time on her TV show over its plans for the
Gladstone installations in the recent past.  I believe she was elected as
the new mayor in November by a groundswell of popular support from voters
who do not want corporate profiteers to ruin their city with extravagant
installations, and who demand accountability from their elected officials.
I think she has an enthusiastic following based partly on her TV show and
upbeat, highly shrewd, personality.  She seems capable of keeping a collar
on corporate greed and corruption, and it would be wise for St. Paul Greens
to form an alliance with her administration.  I do not know her political
affiliation, but she seems too be a hero for democracy.

Contact Bruce

Bruce's phone number is 651-777-1422; call him to get clarification on this
information.


--------3 of 16--------

From: Andy Hamerlinck <iamandy [at] riseup.net>
Subject: Transportation 1.23 7pm

From the Grand Avenue Business Association (GABA):

TRANSPORTATION SUMMIT

Saint Paul Mayor Chris Coleman will join the city's district councils in
hosting a forum on key transportation initiative in Saint Paul on January
23rd at Hamline University in the Drew Science Center Auditorium.

The purpose of the forum is to give St. Paul citizen participation
community councils, business associations and the public an opportunity to
see how St. Paul neighborhoods fit into citywide transportation plans and
initiative, and to inform community planning and priority setting. City
Engineer John Maczko will moderate presentations by the Minnesota
Department of Transportation, the Metropolitan Council/Metro Transit,
Ramsey County Public Works and the Ramsey County Regional Rail Authority,
and the City of St. Paul Public Works and Planning & Economic
Developments. State Representative Alice Hausman will update the audience
on transit and transportation funding.

The forum is free and open to the public. Doors will open at 6:30 to give
participants a chance to mingle and gather literature; the forum will
begin at 7pm and end at 9pm. For more information or a copy of the summit
agenda, please call the Macalester-Groveland Community Council office at
651-695-4000.


--------4 of 16--------

From: suzzo [at] bitstream.net
Subject: Vs cross burning 1.23 7pm

In response to the cross burning incident there will be an ecumenical
prayer service at Liberty Outreach Temple, on Monday, January 23, 7 PM.

The community is encouraged to attend. Liberty Outreach Temple is located
at 793 Armstrong Avenue. The church is located at the corner of Armstrong
Avenue and View Street, east of 35E, two blocks north of West 7th and two
blocks south of Randolph Avenue, one block east of Victoria.

Come one, come all.  Not in our town.
Suzanne Stenson O'Brien 651-216-7613 suzobr [at] mac.com


--------5 of 16--------

From: Ron Holch <rrholch [at] attg.net>
Subject: No Fridley stadium 1.23 8:30pm

The Fridley City Council will take up the issue of a resolution supporting
the State required referendum for Taxes to pay for a Vikings Stadium:

	Monday January 23, 2006

The meeting will start at 7:30 but the resolution is near the end of the
agenda. If you arrive at 8:30 pm that should be plenty early.  The meeting
may run very late.  I am told that there is a lot on the agenda.

Fridley City Hall is located at:
6431 University Avenue NE
inside the Fridley Municipal Building
Call 763-572-3500 with any questions

We need all those who can be there to show support.  You can speak on the
issue if you want to.  There is no need to preregister.
Please tell everyone you know.  You can forward this email as well.
If you have any questions email or call me
651-642-9717
Ron Holch Organizer Tax Payers Against an Anoka County Vikings Stadium


--------6 of 16--------

From: Stephen Feinstein <feins001 [at] umn.edu>
Subject: Weimar democracy 1.23-2.10

Facing History educators are invited to join a free online workshop
designed to introduce the resources and interactive features of our online
module, "The Weimar Republic: The Fragility of Democracy"
(<http://www.facinghistorycampus.org/campus/weimar.nsf/Welcome?OpenForm>www.facinghistory.org/weimar).

This workshop will focus on critical questions about both pedagogy and
content, and connections between the Weimar period and today. You'll learn
how to use this module for your own investigations into issues of
democracy and citizenship, as well as how to create web-based inquiry
projects for your students.

This Online Campus Workshop will be held between January 23rd, and
February 10, 2006. The format will consist of several asynchronous online
conversations and guided investigation into the Weimar module.
Participants will be encouraged to login to the workshop a minimum of
three times during the workshop. All educators are invited regardless of
their computer use skill level. Click the link below to find out more and
fill out an application!

<http://www.facinghistorycampus.org/OW_WeimarRepublic>http://www.facinghistorycampus.org/OW_WeimarRepublic


--------7 of 16--------

From: Darrell Gerber <darrellgerber [at] earthlink.net>
Subject: Business/environment 1.24 7:30am

Minnesota Environmental Initiative presents:
BUSINESS AND THE ENVIRONMENT
Strengthening Minnesota's private sector and protecting the great outdoors
  
EVENT DETAILS:
 
Tuesday, January 24
7:30am-11:15am
Science Museum of Minnesota
Saint Paul 

There is growing consensus in Minnesota that the private sector must play
a role in developing solutions to environmental problems. At MEI's
Business and the Environment conference, leaders from business, government
and nonprofits will discuss the private sector's growing role and how
Minnesota's business environment relates to its natural environment.
Speakers and panelists will reflect on how well Minnesota businesses are
addressing environmental problems, discuss visions for business
leadership, and explore other issues important to both the environmental
and business communities, such as transportation, energy, water quality
and climate change.

Keynote speaker David Saggau, CEO of Great River Energy, will discuss his
company's environmental vision.

Other speakers will include:
Martha Brand, Executive Director, Minnesota Center for Environmental
Advocacy
Randy Johnson, Commissioner, Hennepin County
Ken Keller, Professor and Director, Center for Science, Technology and
Public Policy at the Humphrey Institute of Public Affairs
David Olson, President, Minnesota Chamber of Commerce
Joe Swedberg, Vice President, Hormel Foods Corporation
MEI has applied for Continuing Legal Education credit for this event.
 
for a full AGENDA and REGISTRATION information >
http://www.mn-ei.org/policy/events.html

MEI members: $40 Nonmembers: $60


--------8 of 16--------

From:    "Diane J. Peterson" <birch7 [at] comcast.net>
Subject: Vs mercury pollution 1.24 12:30pm

Eating Fish Should Not Harm Us or Our Children
Tell the Pollution Control Agency that it is time to start controlling
mercury pollution NOW!

Problem:
The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (PCA) has drafted a plan to reduce
mercury pollution so that fish from Minnesota lakes and rivers will be
safe to eat.  Unfortunately, the PCA is using the plan as an excuse to put
off regulating power plants, taconite plants, and new sources of mercury
until an unspecified time in the future.

Solution:
PCA has all of the regulatory authority it needs to require power plants,
taconite plants, and new mercury sources to control their mercury
emissions now.  There is no need to wait for the implementation phase of a
plan that may be years away.  We must not allow the PCA to use this
planning process as an excuse for delay.

Action Needed:
Tell the PCA to start controlling mercury pollution now.

1. Attend a press event and rally outside the MN Pollution Control Agency
office at 12noon January 24.  Representative Keith Ellison will be the
highlighted speaker for this event.

2. Immediately following the press event, attend the PCA Citizens' Board
meeting, to ask the Board to direct the PCA to take action immediately to
reduce mercury pollution.

The meeting is at 12:30 PM on January 24th in the Board Room on the Lower
Level of the PCA's offices located at 520 Lafayette Road North in St.
Paul.

For more information about the meeting, contact Patience Caso at Clean Water
Action Alliance: 612-623-3666

Deadline for responding: Please take action by January 24, 2006.

The following organizations are participating in this campaign:
    Clean Water Action Alliance of MN
    Environmental Association for Great Lakes Education
    Friends of the Boundary Waters Wilderness
    Friends of the Mississippi River
    Midwest Center for Environmental Science and Public Policy
    Minnesota Center for Environmental Advocacy
    Minnesotans for an Energy-Efficient Economy
    North American Water Office


--------9 of 16--------

From: ewomenwin [at] mnwpc.org
Subject: Health/minors 1.24 5.45pm

Opportunity: Documentary on Minors Consent Will Be Shown On Jan. 24

In Minnesota, minors have the right to access confidential health
services, including sexual health services. This legal protection is
associated with reductions in risky sexual behavior, particularly those
that can lead to pregnancy and sexually transmitted infections.

A new documentary, Minnesota Confidential, about Minnesota's Minor's
Consent statute will be shown at the University's Coffman Memorial Union
theater on Tuesday, January 24 at 5:45 p.m., followed by a guided
discussion. The film explores differing perspectives regarding the statute
and includes interviews with opponents and proponents. The event is
sponsored by the Minnesota Public Health Association.



--------10 of 16--------

From: Cam Gordon <camgordon333 [at] msn.com>
Subject: Schaffer/council 1.24 6:30pm St Francis MN

You are invited
Come support longtime Green Party and Labor Activist,
Leroy Schaffer
in his run for St. Francis City Council

Tuesday, January 24
6:30 pm

Dinner at the Old Country Buffet
6540 University Ave.
Fridley, MN

$20 suggestion donation


--------11 of 16--------

From: leslie reindl <alteravista [at] earthlink.net>
Subject: 9-11 inquiry/CTV 1.24 8pm

Tuesday, Jan 24, 8pm, Minneapolis cable MTN channel 16:  "International
Inquiry Into 9/11: Phase one."  Altera Vista's program presents panel with
Nafeez Ahmed, Paul Thompson and Barry Zwicker, 9/11 investigators, hosted
by Lynn Pentz, and a talk by Jim Marrs.  Do you accept the official story
about how 9/11 happened?  Listen to these speakers and decide for
yourselves.

[The more the BushCo/ruling class misgovernment shows its authoritorian
fascist face, the more I am willing to believe it guilty until proven
innocent. If fascist now, not _that_ different under previous govenments;
fundamentally fascist, slowed only by counterveiling powers (eg at times
unions, mass movements, daring reporter/papers). Meaning, all we have to
do to have a totally fascist country is do nothing and let BushCo do what
is in its heart of hearts. Further, this has been the basic situation for
5000 years - as soon as a few people in a state gain great wealth, they
move to destroy all opposition by all means necessary, crucially including
mass violence. Usually the few have won and made life hell for the many.
The moneyed are the root of all evil. All democracy has to do to sign its
own death warrant is to allow vast amounts of money to accumulate in a few
hands, and wait a few decades. For democracy to survive, it must make
great wealth illegal, as its number one law. -ed

Here's Michael Parenti:
Much of history is a chronicle of immense atrocities. Whenever surplus
wealth accumulates in any society, whenever people emerge from a
cooperative subsistence economy, some portion of the population will do
everything it can to exploit the labor of the rest of the people in as
pitiless a manner as possible. This is true whether it be the slaveholders
of ancient Egypt, Greece, Rome, the antebellum American South; or the
feudal aristocracy of medieval Europe; or the financial moguls of modern
capitalist society. Today, throughout much of the capitalist Third World
and increasingly in the United States and other industrialized nations,
people are being driven into desperation and want, made to work harder for
less, when able to find work.
The Gangster State
The state is the instrument used in all these societies by the wealthy few
to impoverish and maintain control over the many.
("Dirty Truths" by Michael Parenti, p153, City Lights Books, 1996)]


--------12 of 16--------

Command Responsibility?
By Jeremy Brecher and Brendan Smith
January 22, 2006
ZNet Commentary
http://www.zmag.org/sustainers/content/2006-01/22brecher-smith.cfm

*A jury verdict in Memphis late last year caused little stir among the
general public, but it may have caught the attention of Dick Cheney,
Donald Rumsfeld, and other high officials of the Bush administration.
The jury found Colonel Nicolas Carranza, former Vice Minister of Defense
of El Salvador and now a U.S. citizen living in Memphis, responsible for
overseeing the torture and killing in that country 25 years ago. 1 Could
similar charges be brought against high U.S. officials for the actions of
their subordinates in Abu Ghraib, Falluja, and Guantanamo? *

Carranza was sued by victims of armed forces under his control. The jury
applied the principle of "command responsibility," which holds a superior
legally responsible for human rights abuses by subordinates if the
official knew or should have known about them and failed to prevent them
or punish those who committed them.

Intelligence agency whistleblowers recently leaked to ABC News a list of
six "Enhanced Interrogation Techniques" authorized for CIA agents in
mid-March 2002. The agents, according to an ABC News report, did so
"because the public needs to know the direction their agency has chosen."
2

The techniques included "Water Boarding:" "The prisoner is bound to an
inclined board, feet raised and head slightly below the feet. Cellophane
is wrapped over the prisoner's face and water is poured over him.
Unavoidably, the gag reflex kicks in and a terrifying fear of drowning
leads to almost instant pleas to bring the treatment to a halt." CIA
officers who subjected themselves to the technique lasted an average of 14
seconds before caving in. According to John Sifton of Human Rights Watch,
"It really amounts to a mock execution, which is illegal under
international law." 3

President Bush has said "We do not torture." 4

But according to a classified report by the CIA's own Inspector General
John Helgerwon, the techniques appeared "to constitute cruel and degrading
treatment under the [ Geneva ] convention." 5

If so, they are likely to be crimes not only under international law, but
under the U.S. Anti-Torture and War Crimes Acts.

Where they have acknowledged prisoner abuse, Bush administration officials
have often blamed it on a few "bad apples" at the bottom of the chain of
command. But under the principle of command responsibility, this is no
excuse - and no legal defense.

Colin Powell's top aide, Colonel Larry Wilkerson, said late last year that
the United States has tortured and "There's no question in my mind where
the philosophical guidance and the flexibility in order to do so
originated - in the vice president of the United States' office."

According to Wilkerson, "His implementer in this case was Donald Rumsfeld
and the Defense Department." Wilkerson explained, "The vice president had
to cover this in order for it to happen and in order for Secretary
Rumsfeld to feel as though he had freedom of action." 6

The former commander at Abu Ghraib prison, Brig. Gen. Janis Karpinski,
confirms Wilkerson's charge: Abusive techniques at Abu Ghraib were
"delivered with full authority and knowledge of the secretary of defense
and probably Cheney." 7

This is not just a question of past abuses. According to Wilkerson,
"There's no doubt in my mind that we may still be doing it." When the vice
president of the United States "lobbies the Congress on behalf of cruel
and unusual punishment" Wilkerson says he can "only assume" that "it's
still going on." 8

Asked whether Cheney was guilty of a war crime, Col. Wilkerson said the
vice president's actions were certainly a domestic crime and, he would
suspect, "an international crime as well." 9 Wilkerson says his charges
are based on an "audit trail" he prepared for Secretary Powell, including
government memoranda and reports from the International Committee of the
Red Cross. 10

Criminal investigation is warranted where facts or circumstances
"reasonably indicate" that a crime has been committed. 11 Wilkerson's
charges are sufficient in themselves to require the Department of Justice
to immediately open a criminal investigation of Vice President Cheney and
Donald Rumsfeld. Such an investigation could take as its starting point
Wilkerson's "audit trail," the statements of CIA agents and the CIA
Inspector General, and extensive published evidence indicating torture and
prisoner abuse by U.S. personnel around the world.

If I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby and other high government officials can be
investigated for outing Valerie Plame, don't facts that "reasonably
indicate" war crimes and crimes against humanity deserve equal time?

Bush administration officials have said over and over that they have acted
within the law. If so, they have nothing to fear from an investigation and
should encourage one to clear the air.

The United States is supposed to have "equal justice under law." Colonel
Carranza has had his day in court. We as citizens - and our prosecutors,
judges, and elected representatives - need to address the question: When
will Vice President Cheney, Secretary Rumsfeld, and their collaborators
get theirs?

   1. Julia Preston, "Ex-Salvadoran Colonel is Ordered to Pay for Crimes
      against Humanity," /New York Times, /November 19, 2005; "El
      Salvador: Col. Nicolas Carranza," Center for Justice and
      Accountability, www.cja.org/cases/carranza.shtml
      .
   2. Brian Ross and Richard Esposito, "CIA's Harsh Interrogation
      Techniques Described," ABC News, November 19, 2005.
   3. Ross and Esposito.
   4. "Bush Defends Detainees Policy," Associated Press, November 7, 2005.
   5. /New York Times,/ November 9, 2005, quoted in Ross and Esposito.
   6. "Powell Aide: Torture 'Guidance' from VP," CNN, 11/20/05.
   7. Marjorie Cohn, " Abu Ghraib General Lambastes Bush
      Administration," /truthout, /August 24, 2005.
   8. "Powell Aide: Torture 'Guidance' from VP," CNN.com, 11/20/2005.
   9. Rupert Cornwell, "Cheney 'Created Climate' for U.S. War Crimes,"
      /The Independent /, November 30, 2005.
  10. "Powell Aide: Torture 'Guidance' from VP," CNN.com, 11/20/2005.
  11. "The Attorney General's Guidelines on General Crimes, Racketeering
      Enterprise, and Terrorism Enterprise Investigations," IND, p. 105.

Legal scholar Brendan Smith and historian Jeremy Brecher are the editors,
with Jill Cutler, of /In the Name of Democracy: American War Crimes in
Iraq and Beyond / (Metropolitan/Holt, 2005) (
www.americanempireproject.com ), and the founders of
www.warcrimeswatch.org . They are regular contributors to Foreign Policy
In Focus (www.fpif.org )./


--------13 of 16--------

I will not support Hillary Clinton for president
Molly Ivins
January 20, 2006
<http://www.freepress.org/columns/display/1/2006/1304>

AUSTIN, Texas - I'd like to make it clear to the people who run the
Democratic Party that I will not support Hillary Clinton for president.

Enough. Enough triangulation, calculation and equivocation. Enough clever
straddling, enough not offending anyone. This is not a Dick Morris
election. Sen. Clinton is apparently incapable of taking a clear stand on
the war in Iraq, and that alone is enough to disqualify her. Her failure
to speak out on Terri Schiavo, not to mention that gross pandering on
flag-burning, are just contemptible little dodges.

The recent death of Gene McCarthy reminded me of a lesson I spent a long,
long time unlearning, so now I have to re-learn it. It's about political
courage and heroes, and when a country is desperate for leadership. There
are times when regular politics will not do, and this is one of those
times. There are times a country is so tired of bull that only the truth
can provide relief.

If no one in conventional-wisdom politics has the courage to speak up and
say what needs to be said, then you go out and find some obscure junior
senator from Minnesota with the guts to do it. In 1968, Gene McCarthy was
the little boy who said out loud, "Look, the emperor isn't wearing any
clothes." Bobby Kennedy - rough, tough Bobby Kennedy - didn't do it. Just
this quiet man trained by Benedictines who liked to quote poetry.

What kind of courage does it take, for mercy's sake? The majority of the
American people (55 percent) think the war in Iraq is a mistake and that
we should get out. The majority (65 percent) of the American people want
single-payer health care and are willing to pay more taxes to get it. The
majority (86 percent) of the American people favor raising the minimum
wage. The majority of the American people (60 percent) favor repealing
Bush's tax cuts, or at least those that go only to the rich. The majority
(66 percent) wants to reduce the deficit not by cutting domestic spending,
but by reducing Pentagon spending or raising taxes.

The majority (77 percent) thinks we should do "whatever it takes" to
protect the environment. The majority (87 percent) thinks big oil
companies are gouging consumers and would support a windfall profits tax.
That is the center, you fools. WHO ARE YOU AFRAID OF?

I listen to people like Rahm Emanuel superciliously explaining elementary
politics to us clueless naifs outside the Beltway ("First, you have to win
elections"). Can't you even read the damn polls?

Here's a prize example by someone named Barry Casselman, who writes,
"There is an invisible civil war in the Democratic Party, and it is
between those who are attempting to satisfy the defeatist and pacifist
left base of the party and those who are attempting to prepare the party
for successful elections in 2006 and 2008."

This supposedly pits Howard Dean, Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi, emboldened
by "a string of bad new from the Middle East ... into calling for
premature retreat from Iraq," versus those pragmatic folk like Steny
Hoyer, Rahm Emmanuel, Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden and Joe Lieberman.

Oh come on, people - get a grip on the concept of leadership. Look at this
war - from the lies that led us into it, to the lies they continue to dump
on us daily.

You sit there in Washington so frightened of the big, bad Republican
machine you have no idea what people are thinking. I'm telling you right
now, Tom DeLay is going to lose in his district. If Democrats in
Washington haven't got enough sense to OWN the issue of political reform,
I give up on them entirely.

Do it all, go long, go for public campaign financing for Congress. I'm
serious as a stroke about this - that is the only reform that will work,
and you know it, as well as everyone else who's ever studied this. Do all
the goo-goo stuff everybody has made fun of all these years: embrace
redistricting reform, electoral reform, House rules changes, the whole
package. Put up, or shut up. Own this issue, or let Jack Abramoff politics
continue to run your town.

Bush, Cheney and Co. will continue to play the patriotic bully card just
as long as you let them. I've said it before: War brings out the patriotic
bullies. In World War I, they went around kicking dachshunds on the
grounds that dachshunds were "German dogs." They did not, however, go
around kicking German shepherds. The MINUTE someone impugns your
patriotism for opposing this war, turn on them like a snarling dog and
explain what loving your country really means. That, or you could just
piss on them elegantly, as Rep. John Murtha did. Or eviscerate them with
wit (look up Mark Twain on the war in the Philippines). Or point out the
latest in the endless "string of bad news."

Do not sit there cowering and pretending the only way to win is as
Republican-lite. If the Washington-based party can't get up and fight,
we'll find someone who can.


--------14 of 16--------

Liberty Underground commentary followed by a Nader article on ethics

If we had a system of justice, George Bush and most of his administration
would be wearing stripes, dragging a ball and chain in a maximum security
slammer, together with the executives who run the corporate media and
protect him from being exposed.  Could thousands of innocent people have
been slaughtered in the Bush invasions without a massive propaganda effort
on their part?

It is the corporate media bigs who fear Ralph Nader most, because the
information he constantly tries to reveal to the public is the information
they most try to hide from the public.  That's why about 90% of everything
they put out concerning Nader is lies.  We have a good Nader column today.

I once estimated that corporations get back a thousand percent on their
campaign financing investments, which I prefer to call bribes.  A thousand
dollar investment, therefore, gets back about a million dollars on average,
better than any other investment on this planet.  Enron provided their
corporate jet for the whole 2000 Bush campaign, after which their
executives were invited to the White House for a secret meeting in Cheney's
office to decide how the treasury would be apportioned.  The American
people are not, for obvious reasons, allowed to know what was said, but
rest assured Enron would have gone far had other chasms in their Ponzi
scheme not begun to show.

Nothing gets corporate media more riled up than the thought that a tax
dollar should get back to the American people.  Their columnists rant and
rave about "entitlements," going to citizens, which interfere with
corporate welfare.  The goal of the owners of corporate media, who are tied
to the polluters, defense cheats and other mafiosos who run the planet, is
to "privatize" everything in government so that taxpayers can pick up the
check for the multimillion dollar paychecks of corporate executives as well
as the profits which go to transnational corporate investors.

The reasons we are given for privatization are all phony.  One of them is
that "competition" brings down costs for the taxpayer - an outright lie.
When we add bloated executive salaries and profits, it winds up costing
taxpayers much more than public servants cost.

When I was in the Army a cook who was a private got about $68 a month (and
other services worth about that much again).  Today's Halliburton cooks
get about $10,000 a month, and the company gets paid billions for their
services.  Okay, figure in inflation, the taxpayer is still getting
screwed big time.

As far as competition goes, a local shipyard run by Northrop-Grumman is
the only place American aircraft carriers are made.  There is no
competition.  Northrop-Grumman gets whatever they want as they are the
only bidder.

Americans are kept from knowing these facts because the "defense"
industries are tied closely to the mass media industries through
ownership, investments of corporate board members and advertising
revenues.  Foreigners need to know this information to understand why the
US invades so many countries, dozens since Eisenhower warned of the
Military/Industrial Complex.

Perils must be manufactured, when necessary, with which to "justify" the
trillions of dollars in spending.  Otherwise, there is always the threat
of democracy breaking out in the world, as in Haiti.  There is little fear
it will happen here, thanks to campaign financing and media control.

But one of the things which would speed us toward democracy in the Land of
the Free, aside from an objective mass media source that allowed a wider
range of information and opinion, would be public financing of elections.
That alone would save hundreds of billions of dollars annually, if it were
done right.

Gore Vidal has written about memories of his wandering through the Senate
as a little boy, and watching senators in the cloak room getting their
pockets stuffed with bribes, big rolls of hundred dollar bills.  "They
were more honest in those days," he laments.

During my lifetime I have seen a huge number of scandals in government,
always followed by sham "reform," intended, with the help of mass media,
to placate a troubled populace.  We are interminably told that if only we
repaint the house, the termites will no longer bother us, even as the
walls crumble around us.  It's happening again --Jack

----------

A Clean Sweep
Congressional Ethics After Abramoff
By RALPH NADER
The Abramoff scandal has spurred one of the episodic "reform" moments on
Capitol Hill.

Republicans and Democrats are competing to offer ethics reform packages
that ignore entirely their past entanglement in the very activities they
now seek to regulate or eliminate.

Not all of these reforms are toothless, and if enacted and enforced, some
may, perhaps, reduce the scale and scope of corruption that has reached a
zenith in the Congress.

But there is far too little attention being devoted to what exactly is
provided in exchange for the favors that lobbyists bestow on members of
Congress.

Those gifts - the campaign contributions, the airplane rides, the visits
to resorts disguised as speech opportunities - are not really gifts as
such. They are more like investments (or quasi-bribes). And they are
investments that pay back beyond the dreams of the greediest Wall Street
prospector, in the form of corporate welfare: grants and direct subsidies,
government giveaways, bailouts, tax subsidies, loopholes and other
escapes, below-market loans and loan guarantees, export and overseas
marketing assistance, pork for defense, transportation and other
companies, regulatory removals, immunities from civil justice liability,
and a host of other government-provided benefits.

To take one example of note: the Washington Post reported on December 31
how Jack Abramoff helped arrange the payment of half a million dollars from
textile firms in the Mariana Islands in the Pacific, to a front group
controlled by Tom DeLay. In exchange, they "solicited and received Rep.
DeLay's public commitment to block legislation that would boost their labor
costs, according to Abramoff associates," the Post reported. Textiles made
in the Mariana Islands may be labeled "Made in the USA," the factories
there are exempt from U.S. labor law, and working conditions are appalling.

The goodies bestowed by Congress on their patrons are too numerous and
diverse to be addressed with any single reform approach.

But good legislation could go a long way toward reducing corporate welfare
doled out in the form of giveaways, subsidies, and cheap loans.

In one sweeping bill, Congress should decree that every federal agency
shall terminate all below-market-rate sales, leasing or rental arrangements
with corporate beneficiaries, including of real and intangible property;
shall cease making any below-market-rate loans or issuing any
below-market-rate loan guarantees to corporations; shall terminate all
export assistance or marketing promotion for corporations; shall cease
providing any below-market-rate insurance; shall terminate all fossil fuel
or nuclear power research and development efforts; shall eliminate all
liability caps; and shall terminate any direct grant, below-market-value
technology transfer or subsidy of any kind. The bill should also amend the
Internal Revenue Code to eliminate all corporate "tax expenditures"
(Beltway talk for loopholes and gimmicks for corporate taxpayers) listed in
the President's annual budget.

Some of what gets cancelled in such a bill might be good public policy. If
so, Congress should reauthorize it. But there's too much accumulated
contribution/lobbyist-driven institutionalized graft for a case-by-case
review to eliminate what's in place. What's needed is a clean slate.

Other steps should be taken to complement a clean-sweep bill:

Citizens should be given standing to sue to challenge corporate welfare
abuses - to restrain agencies that reach beyond their statutory powers to
dole out corporate welfare.

Automatic corporate welfare sunsets should be established, with every
corporate welfare program automatically phasing out in four years after
initial adoption, and every five years thereafter.

Annual agency reports should be required on corporate welfare, with each
federal agency listing every program under its purview which confers
below-cost or below-market-rate goods, services or other benefits on
corporations - and identifying the recipients. The president's budget
already does this for tax giveaways, though the beneficiaries are not
identified.

A ban on corporate welfare for corporate wrongdoers. Corporations
convicted of serious wrongdoing should not be eligible to receive the
government's largesse.

Corporate welfare cuts to the core of political self-governance, because
it is perpetuated in large measure through campaign contributions and the
subversion of procedural and substantive democracy; and because the
perpetuation of corporate welfare itself misallocates public and private
resources and exacerbates the disparities of wealth, influence and power
that run counter to a functioning political system in which the people
rule. The current reform moment is the time to address the problem.


--------15 of 16--------

The K Street Prescription
By PAUL KRUGMAN
The NY Times
January 20, 2006

The new prescription drug benefit is off to a catastrophic start. Tens of
thousands of older Americans have arrived at pharmacies to discover that
their old drug benefits have been canceled, but that they aren't on the
list for the new program. More than two dozen states have taken emergency
action. At first, federal officials were oblivious. "This is going very
well," a Medicare spokesman declared a few days into the disaster. Then
officials started making excuses. Some conservatives even insist that the
debacle vindicates their ideology: see, government can't do anything
right.

But government works when it's run by people who take public policy
seriously. As Jonathan Cohn points out in The New Republic, when Medicare
began 40 years ago, things went remarkably smoothly from the start. But
this time the people putting together a new federal program had one foot
out the revolving door: this was a drug bill written by and for lobbyists.

Consider the career trajectories of the two men who played the most
important role in putting together the Medicare legislation.

Thomas Scully was a hospital industry lobbyist before President Bush
appointed him to run Medicare. In that job, Mr. Scully famously threatened
to fire his chief actuary if he told Congress the truth about cost
projections for the Medicare drug program.

Mr. Scully had good reasons not to let anything stand in the way of the
drug bill. He had received a special ethics waiver from his superiors
allowing him to negotiate for future jobs with lobbying and investment
firms - firms that had a strong financial stake in the form of the bill -
while still in public office. He left public service, if that's what it
was, almost as soon as the bill was passed, and is once again a lobbyist,
now for drug companies.

Meanwhile, Representative Billy Tauzin, the bill's point man on Capitol
Hill, quickly left Congress once the bill was passed to become president of
Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America, the powerful drug
industry lobby. Surely both men's decisions while in office were influenced
by the desire to please their potential future employers. And that undue
influence explains why the drug legislation is such a mess.

The most important problem with the drug bill is that it doesn't offer
direct coverage from Medicare. Instead, people must sign up with private
plans offered by insurance companies.

This has three bad effects. First, the elderly face wildly confusing
choices. Second, costs are high, because the bill creates an extra,
unnecessary layer of bureaucracy. Finally, the fragmentation into private
plans prevents Medicare from using bulk purchasing to reduce drug prices.

It's all bad, from the public's point of view. But it's good for insurance
companies, which get extra business even though they serve no useful
function, and it's even better for drug companies, which are able to charge
premium prices. So whose interests do you think Mr. Scully and Mr. Tauzin
represented?

Which brings us to the larger question of cronyism and corruption.

Thanks to Jack Abramoff, the K Street project orchestrated by Tom DeLay is
finally getting some serious attention in the news media. Mr. DeLay and his
allies have sought, with great success, to ensure that lobbying firms hire
only Republicans. But most reports on the project still miss the main point
by emphasizing the effect on campaign contributions.

The more important effect of the K Street project is that it allows the
party machine to offer lavish personal rewards to the faithful. For a
congressman, toeing the line on legislation brought free meals in Jack
Abramoff's restaurant, invitations to his sky box, golf trips to Scotland,
cushy jobs for family members and a lavish salary after leaving office. The
same kinds of rewards are there for loyal members of the administration,
especially given the Bush administration's practice of appointing lobbyists
to key positions.

I don't want to overstate Mr. Abramoff's role: although he was an important
player in this system, he wasn't the only one. In particular, he doesn't
seem to have been involved in the Medicare drug deal. It's interesting,
though, that Scott McClellan has announced that the White House, contrary
to earlier promises, won't provide any specific information about contacts
between Mr. Abramoff and staff members.

So I have a question for my colleagues in the news media: Why isn't the
decision by the White House to stonewall on the largest corruption scandal
since Warren Harding considered major news?

[Behind this crime is the criminal ruling class and their criminal
corporations. The moneyed are the root of all evil. Greed, boundless
greed, and not a whit of compassion. -ed]


--------16 of 16--------

 The sex was so dull
 and Miss Mannerized, you could
 write home about it.

 The sex was so great
 and glorious, you couldn't
 write home about it.

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

   - David Shove             shove001 [at] tc.umn.edu
   rhymes with clove         Progressive Calendar
                     over 2225 subscribers as of 12.19.02
              please send all messages in plain text no attachments