Category Archives: News

Levin Considering Strategy to Reduce Iraq Funding Request

photo of carl levin

Michigan Senator Carl Levin is working on a strategy in the Senate that would halve President George W. Bush’s recent supplemental budget request for Iraq. Essentially, the strategy would fund the war for six months and then require President Bush to make another request. In addition, The Hill newspaper reports that Senator Levin is considering language in the supplemental that would target a “complete withdrawal” from Iraq in nine months. It is unclear as to whether or not this will be a full withdrawal–including all military forces and contractors–or if it will be a variation of Levin’s earlier proposals that would leave an unknown number of soldiers in Iraq.

If such a bill is indeed proposed, the strategy is designed to put the onus on the Republicans by forcing them to either filibuster or muster sixty votes to remove the withdrawal language from the bill. Levin has reportedly said that he favors this strategy to avoid “sending a negative message to the troops” and Republican opposition to a strict timeline. Moreover, this strategy would help limit attacks from Republicans who charge that cutting funding for the war puts US soldiers in danger:

“We ought to … put that kind of pressure on the administration by taking a positive act, which is providing funding for the troops, and doing it for a period which requires revisiting this issue after the president reports to us next spring.”

Environmental Group Submits 700 Page Review of Kennecott Mine Permit

The National Wildlife Federation submitted a 700+ page review of Kennecott Minerals permit application for a proposed sulfide mine near Marquette in Michigan’s Upper Peninsula. According to a summary posted online by Save the Wild UP, the review indicates several deficiencies with Kennecott’s permit and asserts that it should be denied based on Michigan and federal law. Among the issues not discussed or disproved in Kennecott’s permit are the likelihood of:

“Wetlands drawdown of up to 12 feet near the mine site

The Salmon Trout River’s flow reduced by 0.16 cfs near the mine site

Crown pillar instability with an estimated average weighted RMR of 45 rated “unstable”

Concentrations of sulfate, nickel, total dissolved solids, aluminum, beryllium, cadmium, cobalt, copper, iron, lead, and manganese exceeding relevant water quality standards in the underground mine

Unanticipated inflow flooding the mine to the point that the WWTP could not handle the volume and the water’s poor quality

Acid Mine Drainage many orders of magnitude higher than predicted

Deposition of more than 430 tons of particulate matter deposited within 1.6 miles of the Site and more than 959 tons of particulate matter, including more than 7,000 lbs of copper and 7,130 lbs of nickel, deposited within 12.4 miles of the Site over the 8-year life of the mine

TDRSA leaking highly acidic and metal-laden water into ground water and eventually, surface water”

The review was submitted as part of the public comment process that drew considerable participation of residents in both the Upper Peninsula and lower Michigan. Organizing has continued since the end of the public comment period earlier this month, with Save the Wild UP calling for people to send letters to Governor Jennifer Granholm opposing the mine.

http://www.savethewildup.org/blog/nwf-review-of-kennecott-mining-permit-application/trackback/

Speaker Addresses Immigration

On Tuesday, Flor Crisostomo spoke at Grand Rapids’ Aquinas College on immigration, its underlying causes, and immigration reform. Crisostomo–an indigenous Zapoteca–has been in the United States since 2000 after emigrating from Oaxaca. Since April of 2006 when agents from Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) raided her place of employment, Crisostomo has been working with Centro Sin Fronteras in the Chicago area. She is currently on tour with the Mexico Solidarity Network.

Crisostomo told the audience of students and community members that immigrants are in the United States only by necessity. Many–herself included–have children in Mexico or Central America and would prefer to be with them. However, they have made the decision to come to the United States rather than watch their children die of hunger. Crisostomo explained that it has been “painful” not to be able to watch her children grow. The current wave of immigration has been driven by the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and its destruction of indigenous peoples’ livelihoods. Crisostomo said that these trade agreements have been made without any thought of their human impacts, with the authors only looking at the potential profits and not their effects on families.

Crisostomo talked about immigration reform and current organizing efforts designed to address the issue. She traced current efforts for immigration reform to the 1980s and the call for general amnesty, but explained that particularly since 9/11, the effort has faced a significant backlash. Underlying the debate has been a “great cloud” of racism that has sought to scapegoat immigrants, with Crisostomo referring to the Minutemen and the Ku Klux Klan, as well as a legacy of racist immigration policies including Operation Wetback and the Repatriation Act. She reminded the audience that immigrants have made significant contributions to society while most have fulfilled the obligations–including working honestly, paying taxes, and obeying laws–of citizenship. Unlike the portrayal of immigrants by opponents of immigration, who describe immigrants as seeking to live off the government and wanting to change the traditions of the United States, Crisostomo said that most immigrants simply want to send a little bit of what was “snatched” from them by international trade agreements back to their families.

She said that the current debate over immigration reform has been helped by recent mass mobilizations and asserted that reunification of families should be at the forefront of reform efforts. Enforcement-only measures and ICE raids have had the effect of deporting parents almost daily, especially because so many families live in mixed-status homes. Crisostomo said that unfortunately the current debate has emphasized the political aspects rather than the human aspects. Moreover, she said that the Democrats promised to “resolve” the immigration issue if they won the Congress and Senate but they have not done so thus far, nor have most of the Democratic frontrunners offered plans on immigration.

New Report Addresses “Extremist” Rhetoric in Immigration Debate

A new report titled “Immigrants Targeted: Extremist Rhetoric Moves into the Mainstream” by the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) explores how the debate over immigration has been shaped by anti-immigrant rhetoric. According to the ADL, this rhetoric has been advanced by “a handful of groups that have positioned themselves as legitimate, mainstream advocates against illegal immigration in America” while advancing thinly veiled “dehumanizing, racist stereotypes” like the overtly racist Ku Klux Klan that has also used immigration as an organizing issue.

The ADL report asserts that a number of seemingly “mainstream” groups–among them The Dustin Inman Society, Mothers against Illegal Aliens, the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), Choose Black America, You Don’t Speak for Me and Americans for Legal Immigration Political Action Committee (ALIPAC)–have sought to “distort” the debate by:

“Describing immigrants as “third world invaders,” who come to America to destroy our heritage, “colonize” the country and attack our “way of life.” This charge is used against Hispanics, Asians and other people of color.

Using terminology that describes immigrants as part of “hordes” that “swarm” over the border. This dehumanizing language has become common.

Portraying immigrants as carriers of diseases like leprosy, tuberculosis, Chagas disease (a potentially fatal parasitic disease), dengue fever, polio, malaria.

Depicting immigrants as criminals, murderers, rapists, terrorists, and a danger to children and families.

Propagating conspiracy theories about an alleged secret “reconquista” plot by Mexican immigrants to create a “greater Mexico” by seizing seven states in the American Southwest that once belonged to Mexico.”

The report concludes with a selection of statements from media personalities and politicians showing how the rhetoric of the anti-immigrant movement has been forced into the “mainstream” debate over immigration and immigration reform.

Regional Antiwar March in Chicago Draws Thousands, Raises Questions

chicago_antiwar march

Last Saturday, October 27th, roughly 5,000 people gathered in Chicago as part of a regional march against the Iraq War. This march was organized by a coalition of groups including United for Peace and Justice, ANSWER, and World Can’t Wait.

Different groups partaking in the main march formed their own feeder marches that met up with the main march for a rally at Union Park. This report follows the student feeder march organized by the Chicago chapter of Students for a Democratic Society (SDS) and several other groups.

The Student March

The student feeder march began assembling at 525 State Street in front of an Armed Forces Career Center. About two-dozen police on bikes were stationed at the Career Center well before people began to assemble. Around 1:30 the organizers of the march allowed some people to address the crowd of about 60 people. Members of SDS, World Can’t Wait, as well as a passerby who free-styled into the mega phone, addressed the crowd in order to build energy. The march then left the Career Center and marched on the sidewalk though various shopping districts of Chicago chanting things such as “while you’re shopping bombs are dropping”, “The people of Iraq are under attack, what do we do? Stand up fight back”, and “stop the war yes we can, SDS is back again.” The group attempted to take the streets as they neared Union Park.

The Arrests

The police who had followed the group in the road responded by shoving protesters onto the sidewalk with their bikes. Most of the group responded by moving to the sidewalk and trying to take the streets again when the police moved back. During this police grabbed the flag of one member of the march that resulted in some pushing and pulling. The police eventually let the person go and the march continued on its way. During the next attempt to take the street the police targeted the same person with the flag and pulled them into the road and arrested him using three officers. During this time the group responded verbally to the force used by the police. The police responded by pulling out their batons and using their bikes aggressively to control protestors. The police reported that protestors damaged a bike in this scuffle, however, police threw down their bikes and stepped on them themselves during this scuffle. The group continued on its way after the first arrest, but the police then made two more arrests while the group crossed the street on the sidewalk. This again contradicts reports claiming that all three protestors were arrested while running into the street. Several police hit one of the arrestees with their batons and tackled them while they screamed in pain. The arrestee then had to be carried off from the scene, as they appeared to be unable to walk at the time. After the attack by the police, the march continued on to Union Park much less energetic than it started. As the group approached the park to meet with the rest of the main march they chanted, “war and occupation can never bring liberation, that’s bullshit, get off it, this war is for profit.”

The attack by the police caused the student feeder march to arrive late for the rally at Union Park, resulting us missing the majority of the rally. After a music performance by a local hip-hop artist, the gathering began to march through the streets of Chicago. The group that made up the main march consisted of dozens of smaller groups that brought people to the march.

Ron Paul

Oddly, one of the largest and most visible groups in the main march was the Ron Paul campaign. This group had various slick looking signs and even hired a plane to fly over the main march with a large banner calling for people to elect Ron Paul in 2008. This support of a politician is troubling for numerous reasons. In 2004, the anti-war movement adopted an “anybody but Bush” stance and threw their support behind John Kerry, a candidate that did not represent the interests of most of the anti-war movement, or even the interests of most Americans. Because of this the anti-war movement redirected much of its energies into Kerry’s campaign causing it to lose much needed energy.

Even more troubling than the potential to repeat the mistakes of 04 is the stance of Ron Paul. Running on a Republican ticket using libertarian values, Ron Paul is attempting to appeal to a variety of interests by claiming to want to end the war as well as implement a system that would benefit mainly the rich by doing away with many social programs. Aside from supporting free market economics which have all but destroyed many nations in South and Central America, Ron Paul takes an extremely conservative approach to immigration policy claiming that we need to end birthright citizenship and physically secure our borders and coastlines.

Paul’s immigration policy is not the only questionable position he holds. On gay marriage Paul claimed, “If I were a member of [a state] legislature, I would do all I could to oppose any attempt by rogue judges to impose a new definition of marriage on the people of my state” as well as “We do know what marriage is about. We don’t need a new definition or argue over a definition and have an amendment to the Constitution.” Ron Paul also has stated in 1981 that “Abortion on demand is the ultimate State tyranny; the State simply declares that certain classes of human beings are not persons, and therefore not entitled to the protection of the law.” Ron Paul’s anti-immigration, anti-gay marriage, and anti-women positions should speak for themselves, however, yet many members of the left continue to endorse Paul simply because he is against the Iraq war. Such narrow criteria for support will undoubtedly result in troubles for many Americans should the Ron Paul “revolution” come to be. Again, members of the left need to take off their blinders with regards to Ron Paul and recognize that he is not a friend of the left.

The Rest of the March

The student group attempted to stay close together during this march, but it became difficult in a group of 5,000. Police presence though out the early part of the march was minimum. As the group came into the business districts police presence continually increased. Riot police wielding thick wooden clubs and facemasks guarded various corporate stores such as the Gap, McDonalds, and Starbucks. It appears this was done in order to prevent members of the march to partake in property damage. The fear of this may have been heightened by the recent events at the World Bank and IMF protests in Georgetown where a march broke several corporate store windows before being dispersed. The police did not interfere with the main march and it reached its destination for the second rally at the Federal Plaza.

Despite drawing in 5,000 participants, it is unlikely that this march will have any real effect on the Iraq war. As many Saturday shoppers lined the sidewalks and took pictures, the main march felt more like a parade than an expression of dissent. Participation in the march came from groups who are already involved in anti-war organizing. The entire event was well-scripted and did not interfere pose any real threat to those who hold the power to make war. The march vaguely demanded, “troops out now” but possessed no real power to influence those who can make that decision to do so. Like many events that failed to do much stop the war before and after it started, this event focused on mass numbers, bringing people together, and making vague demands to an elite that clearly is not listening.

Noteworthy Articles

The following articles of interest were published elsewhere on the web today:

Previously archived links are available on the news links page or on Media Mouse’s del.icio.us page. To recommend links, tag them with “mediamouserecommended” on del.icio.us or contact us via email.

2nd Ward Commission Candidates Respond to Green Party Questionnaire

The two candidates for Grand Rapids’ 2nd Ward City Commission seat–Ruth Kelly and David LaGrand–recently responded to a questionnnaire from the Green party of Kent County. One candidate will be elected next Tuesday. The responses to the questionnaire and the rationale for the questions are printed below:

“Information on their respective campaigns may be found at www.davidlagrand.com and www.kellyforgr.com. We asked them to focus on issues of particular concern to the Green Party, namely our “four pillars” of: Grassroots Democracy, Social and Economic Justice, Ecological Wisdom, and Nonviolence. We have also included a question on education. Here are the questions and their responses:

1) Grand Rapids has at times supported movements for democracy in other countries, opposed war, called for reductions in military spending, and more. Though its record is mixed, it has also taken some tepid steps to promote energy reduction. Other cities have done much more, asserting control over corporate activity within their borders, for instance. And some cities have allowed neighborhoods to determine their own budget priorities where practicable. What role do you believe grassroots democracy should have in Grand Rapids? How will you work with the existing neighborhood organizations?

2) Disempowered groups tend to get support in Grand Rapids to the extent they adopt ‘safe’/upper middle class, competitive values; otherwise they get very little. Corporations and the well-off get practically all the City tax breaks and other “economic incentives”. Issues of class are not even discussed. What will you do, if elected, to promote social and economic justice in Grand Rapids?

3) Our City leaders continue to promote indiscriminate “economic growth” even as our planetary Titanic is sinking. Do you believe we face an ecological crisis? If not, please explain. If so, what would you do about it as a Commissioner?

4) The present Commission is having trouble working together to pass a mild resolution against a war of greed and aggression that has devastated millions of human beings in Iraq and has had numerous negative repercussions on our community. Could you support a resolution against the ‘war’ in Iraq? Do you support town meetings on the topic? These aspects of our culture of violence, along with other long-standing structural inequities, teach our youth that violence in the service of selfish aims is a legitimate solution. What will you do about all levels of violence in our City? For instance, what would you look for in a new police chief?

5) What is your opinion about GR Schools and the quality of education across the District? Should we be spending more money on studies and/or PR campaigns? Why? Have you met w/ Grand Rapids Public Schools Superintendent Bernard Taylor? How do you plan to work w/ the Board of Education? To what extent should education occur within schools as opposed to within the entire community? To what extent do you believe parents should have the right to choose which, if any, schools for their children? 6) Do you have any other thoughts you would like to share here?

Ruth Kelly

I am eager to work with our neighborhood associations and neighborhood businesses to promote local interdependence. It has become increasingly apparent that we need to promote local purchasing and decision making. When businesses are locally owned the likelihood of their being financially generous and responsible to their community grows. As a former community organizer I remember we often invoked the old saying, “Knowledge is Power”.

Only when issues are researched and the knowledge is shared will we truly empower our communities.

I believe the city should not only encourage our grassroots organizations to assist in research and citizen participation, it also must honestly provide the tools needed to implement initiatives. We need to provide the neighborhoods with the same types of tools we provide our downtown. We must involve those who live in these neighborhoods in the planning and implementation of changes where the city can assist. Those involved must represent the many diverse groups in the city. I will actively work to bring people together of all backgrounds.

In our downtown we need to provide opportunities for families and individuals to enjoy public space and be sure that those who cannot afford entertainment costs have public spaces to enjoy. Our public library is a great example of space that is affordable and open to all. We need to insure that everyone has the opportunity to enjoy the arts, parks and public museums.

I would be an advocate for citizen participation in the budget process and work to bring groups together to share expertise and plan. As an educator and mother I have learned that in order to promote social justice people must be brought out of their comfort zone in a non threatening way. People don’t learn when threatened. We learn when we are awakened emotionally, given good information, and find connections with our values. I will work to promote understanding between various groups. I’ve had training and experience in building relationships between those who might otherwise avoid each other. I will intentionally create opportunities for disparate groups to meet to address common concerns. It is in that dynamic that we can begin to experience change. I think we need to have dialogue about class difference and economic justice.

I do believe that we face a serious environmental crisis. It is imperative that we begin to address this. This will take a grassroots educational and organizing initiative unlike anything we’ve seen in Grand Rapids. I want to be a part of this, but this must be a collective effort. We need to “sell” this idea and prove that it is in the long term the best plan for economic growth. I have children and grandchildren to be concerned about. As a commissioner I would look to other progressive communities for ways to champion ecological responsibility. I think we need to market bus ridership and bicycling in the city and make these options convenient.

I would work with groups like Clean Water Action and WMEAC to protect our natural resources and educate. I believe that we need to have faith that when we turn on the tap and get city water it is safe to drink. We are polluting with all of the plastic water bottles we use.

Violence: I believe that we must begin with our youngest citizens to prevent violence. Prevention of violence begins in the treatment of each other and the habits we develop. I would work with our public schools and police department to encourage non violent crisis intervention training. In cities where the police department is seen as legitimate and fair there is more cooperation in the community. A new chief needs to be an innovator who is committed to professional development that includes relationship building and non violent interventions. We need a chief committed to community policing and prevention.

I support town meetings on the war in Iraq. I am an ardent believer in civic engagement. I prefer a grassroots approach that addresses the causes of war and educates us as to the impact on our community, not a top down resolution.

It is so crucial that this community works toward intergovernmental cooperation to address serious environmental concerns that I don’t want to alienate people, I want to build bridges. In order to make this a priority, my sense is that the commission must focus locally. The civic discussion on the war must come from the community. It is all too easy to focus on the commission instead of actively engaging the entire community in this discussion. I support our troops and want them home. I was and am personally opposed to this war and am convinced that we must heal our own community here at home. This should be our focus. We need to promote participatory democracy here in our own backyard. Peace begins at home and of us must be encouraged to examine our intent in all we do.

GR Schools: I believe that strong public schools are necessary for a strong democracy. I would call on the residents of Grand Rapids to support our schools and our young families to join together to return to them. As a teacher I know how important it is to have school families who help pay for a field trip, clothing or supplies for children who can’t afford these things. We’ve lost many of those families in the past 10 years.

We have wonderful diversity in our schools. Students who experience working with people with different backgrounds are well prepared for the working world. Diverse perspectives enrich the educational experience. We need people with the social and economic advantage to join our schools. We also need to insist that the news media publicize the great things that are happening in our schools. I intend to be a member of the liaison committee between the schools and the commission. Choice has been a double edged sword. The downside is that people have left problems rather than fix them.We reached a tipping point that left behind the most poor in our community. We must work to reverse that trend.

In conclusion, I will work hard to serve this city through consensus building and networking people of diverse interests together. We all breath the same air, drink the same water and traverse the same streets. That needs to be our common connection as we work for the common good. Together we can rethink our priorities, set new ones and celebrate as we make progress.

David LaGrand

1) Grand Rapids has at times supported movements for democracy in other countries, opposed war, called for reductions in military spending, and more. Though its record is mixed, it has also taken some tepid steps to promote energy reduction. Other cities have done much more, asserting control over corporate activity within their borders, for instance. And some cities have allowed neighborhoods to determine their own budget priorities where practicable. What role do you believe grassroots democracy should have in Grand Rapids? How will you work with the existing neighborhood organizations?

I think that grassroots democracy is incredibly important to put into practice. One of the things that I have noticed while being involved in politics is that it is all too easy to assume that concerned people will come to events, or even worse that the only people who need to be consulted are those who go to web sites, write emails, or button hole candidates. In fact, all too often I see the same people again and again at events, rallies, and meetings. I applaud those citizens, and I value their imput, and they are people with real ideas, energy and conviction who have taught me a great deal, and continute to teach me. However, I don’t’ think that is enough. A lot of our community is disenfranchised either in practice or even worse by choice. A lot of people are simply disillusioned with politics, and don’t think that representative democracy works in any meaningful fashion. The best response I have to that problem is simply taking it to the streets. I have been knocking on doors block by block, precinct by precinct in the second ward to make sure that all the people in ward have the chance to tell me what issues concern them. Of course I value neighborhood organizations, and those organizations can play a critical role in facilitating good local representation, but most of all I think that my job in this race is to talk to individual citizens, one at a time, and not to assume that people have opinions or concerns because of someone else’s or even my own agenda.

2) Disempowered groups tend to get support in Grand Rapids to the extent they adopt ‘safe’/upper middle class, competitive values; otherwise they get very little. Corporations and the well-off get practically all the City tax breaks and other “economic incentives”. Issues of class are not even discussed. What will you do, if elected, to promote social and economic justice in Grand Rapids?

I spent a significant amount of time recently campaigning to raise the minimum wage in Michigan, and in defense of affirmative action. I think that the issue of class is one of the biggest problems our society faces. From the Reagan years on, we have steadily become a country divided between the rich and the poor. I will continue to raise this issue, face it squarely, and champion the cause of the dispossessed as best I can. Of particular concern for me is the interplay between race, class and our prison-industrial complex. We have to work constantly to bring people in,, not shut them out, and I see every day evidences of ostracism and inappropriate segregation at work. For example, a GRPS school teacher just brought to my attention a new public school policy which prevents parents with any criminal record, even a misdemeanor, from going on class field trips. Aside from the obvious constitutional problems with the policy, it also flies in the face of the goal of encouraging parental involvement. Keeping the world safe from “criminals” always plays well politically, but is very easy to apply irrationally.

3) Our City leaders continue to promote indiscriminate “economic growth” even as our planetary Titanic is sinking. Do you believe we face an ecological crisis? If not, please explain. If so, what would you do about it as a Commissioner?

Yes we face an ecological crisis. We have to think globally and act locally to use the now-cliche. For me that means walking to work, walking to my businesses, the library, stores, and church. It means recycling, but only as a last effort- first we must conserve and reduce consumption. All growth is not good, and our basic measure of economic activity is arguably in large part a measure of waste. We have to push for alternative energy issues, but only ones that are really good for the environment, not the tokenism that so often passes for real environmentalism. I believe that good environmentalism is always good economics, in the true measure of that term. I have too many ideas on the subject to go into here, but one thing I would like to work for as commissioner is a City tax credit for geothermal heating systems for homes.

4) The present Commission is having trouble working together to pass a mild resolution against a war of greed and aggression that has devastated millions of human beings in Iraq and has had numerous negative repercussions on our community. Could you support a resolution against the ‘war’ in Iraq? Do you support town meetings on the topic? These aspects of our culture of violence, along with other long-standing structural inequities, teach our youth that violence in the service of selfish aims is a legitimate solution. What will you do about all levels of violence in our City? For instance, what would you look for in a new police chief?

I have long opposed the war in Iraq, publicly and vocally. I do support holding town meetings on the subject, but I have decided that I do not support a city resolution on the issue. The reason is simply that I believe that representative democracy is a sharply limited tool, and that direct action is always preferable. Simply put, if I win this race I do not think that I will have been elected to set Federal policy, or speak for those who elected me on that issue. Not everyone in Grand Rapids opposes the war. While I do, and am acting on that conviction, I do not believe that I have the right to deny others their voice, by appearance or otherwise.As for levels of violence in our community, this is another issue I have thought about and think about constantly, and can only start to respond to here. I think that a lot of the violence we see is the byproduct of a culture that glorifies violence, but I also see young men with no role models on our streets. Young men need mentors, particularly men, who understand their potential for violence, but can model peace. I have mentored young men who have come into my life with exactly these concerns in mind. I think that often violence comes from people who do not feel heard or understood, and again I think that direct contact with alienated people in our city, and active inclusion is critical. The abliltiy to really connect with citizens is the formost quality I want in a new chief.

5) What is your opinion about GR Schools and the quality of education across the District? Should we be spending more money on studies and/or PR campaigns? Why? Have you met w/ Grand Rapids Public Schools Superintendent Bernard Taylor? How do you plan to work w/ the Board of Education? To what extent should education occur within schools as opposed to within the entire community? To what extent do you believe parents should have the right to choose which, if any, schools for their children?

I think that the best thing we can do right now for the public schools is publicize and talk about the good programs that are available. I think that the City Commission needs to constantly be talking with the school board and administration about issues of common concern. One issue that has become obvious and urgent of late is that of public and school safely. I think it is imperative that we take steps to ensure that our children have safe, and non-chaotic environments to study and learn in , and also safe routes to and from school.

6) Do you have any other thoughts you would like to share here?

In the coming years it is imperative that those who represent us not just have the right ideals, but have actual plans of action. It is easy to talk the language of whatever ideas are in vogue at the present, and to stake out safe rhetorical positions. All politicians will say that they are against crime, for neighborhood delevopment, committed to listening, and will try to bring people together. What we need are leaders who don’t just lead a parade, but who have ideas, and can implement them.”

DNC Chair Howard Dean Speaks at Hope College

The Hope College Democrats invited Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean to speak in Holland about “Faith and Politics.” He began with a story about volunteers from his office going to help out after Hurricane Katrina. Dean said that after the tragedy of Katrina, the Democratic Party stopped its fundraising efforts and offered to pay staffers to help out in New Orleans. Two women went and were teamed up with women with the Southern Baptist Convention, who after they got to know these women, said that they were a lot alike. Dean tried to stress that the story shows that “Democrats are human beings” and “young people in general want us to focus on what we can do together.”

Dean then quoted the US Catholic Conference on how morality should dictate our response to economic issues. He feels that the Democratic Party needs to reclaim the use of morality and faith and that “Republicans don’t have a monopoly on God.” Democrats over the past thirty years have been afraid to go where they might loose or where people “don’t like them,” Dean said, in reference to not speaking with people in the language of faith.

Dean said that Democrats need to tell people what they believe and then he listed what he thought the Democratic Party stood for. He said he believed in:

“…equal opportunity and justice. That no child should go to bed hungry and that health care is a right. War should only be used as last resort and that we should take care take care of our veterans. We should be good stewards of the environment and not pass on a debt to the children.”

Finally, he said “I am a Democrat because I favor funding health care over war.” Nowhere did Dean offer any clear examples or evidence that would support that these were issues that Democrats were committed to.

Dean then talked about how he has been meeting with evangelical leaders to have a dialogue on the things they can do together. He said, “We can agree that there are too many unintended pregnancy in the US. We should work to reduce the number of abortions instead of arguing over Roe vs. Wade.” He said that this is what young people are focusing on–their similarities–rather than their differences. Dean said that lived through the Civil Rights movement and that in studying King one realizes that it was thirteen years from Montgomery to the Voting Rights Act. Young people are impatient on political issues–which Dean argued is a good thing–but his generation can help young people by reminding them of the importance of keeping the long-term in mind. Dean said that “every day was not a good day for Dr. King. My generation needs to talk to your generation about the need for persistence. Succeeding and maintaining democracy is needed for the long haul. I hope that some of you will run for office, become involved in your community.” He argued that his generation hoped for a different outcome from the Civil Rights era, but that while racism had not been defeated, youth are handling diversity by being inclusive. In support of his argument, he said that across ethnic lines this generation has voted the same (~52% turnout) and majority Democrat.

After his short speech, Dean took questions submitted from the audience and selectively read by one of the student organizers. A total of ten questions were asked of Dean, two of which were about Iraq. The first Iraq question was “If we pull our military out of Iraq will it threaten national security and destabilize the Middle East?” Dean responded by saying that he thinks the National Guard and Reserves should come home. In addition, 20,000 troops should go to Afghanistan, where there is a real threat to our national security. We should have 20,000 troops in the Middle East in case we need to intervene. He said that “There will be real hardship in Iraq if we leave, but there will be if we leave or don’t.” He argued that the United States should “get out as soon as we can, but not tomorrow” and argued for a 16-24 month timeline. Dean pretty much reflected the Democratic Party’s position, which is not an anti-war position, but one of redeployment of US troops. Dean was also asked why the Democrats won’t stop funding the war in Iraq. Dean said, “We have tried, but you have to understand that the American people don’t want the funding cut off for the troops and people want to bring them home in a time table.” Dean also said that “If you really want to end the US occupation of Iraq vote for a Democrat in 2008,” even though there is no evidence that any of the current Democratic Presidential candidates are in favor of truly ending the war. Dean did mention that the Republicans can filibuster and that is part of the problem, but he ignored Democrats’ capacity to use it.

Dean was also asked a few questions about why people should vote Democrat in the 2008 election. Dean said, “we need to heal America.” He argued that the last 15-20 years has been about divisive politics and that instead we have to consider ourselves as human beings first. Secondly, Dean argued that we desperately need to restore moral leadership in the world which he asserted has been lost in the past 5-6 years. In the past, Dean asserted that “high moral values” are what made the United States get involved nationally and cited the United States’ winning of World War II and our involvement in Bosnia in the 1990s. Dean asserted that voting Democratic in 2008 will restore the world’s confidence in America’s moral leadership. There was no elaboration on this, but Dean seemed to suggest that it has only been recent that the rest of the world has viewed US foreign policy in a negative light, which would contradict a great deal of scholarship on the topic.

Dean was also asked about questions of faith and party politics. Dean said that there are issues that we all won’t agree on, but “applying moral principles is difficult.” He then went on to give the example of abortion and how they have supported Bob Casey, a Democrat, who was elected on a pro-life position in Pennsylvania. In response to the question “How much room is there for a pro-life Democrat in the party,” Dean said, “plenty.” He said that there is a significant pro-life caucus. Dean didn’t want to label Democrats as “pro-life” or “pro-choice.” He said, “What makes you a Democrat is fairness, toughness and personal responsibility/accountability – not pro-life. There is a core belief in fairness.”

In many ways, Dean’s short talk and his responses to questions was very similar to the ideas put for by liberal Christians like Jim Wallis who has been advising Democrats on “faith” with the Democratic Party or linguist George Lakoff who argues that the Democrats need to adopt a moral platform.

Racist Speaker Disrupted at Michigan State University

photo of nick griffin

A speech by the British National Party’s (BNP) Nick Griffin, a well-known racist who’s BNP calls for “…an immediate halt to all further immigration, the immediate deportation of criminal and illegal immigrants, and the introduction of a system of voluntary resettlement whereby those immigrants who are legally here…” was effectively disrupted by anti-racist protestor at Michigan State University. Shortly into the Griffin’s talk, which was sponsored by MSU’s chapter of Young Americans for Freedom, Griffin abandoned his planned speech after being repeatedly overshadowed by protestors calling him a racist and citing his involvement in the racist right.

During his speech, which was billed as an expose on how “multiculturalism, mass immigration, and Islam are destroying Western civilization,” Griffin made several statements reflecting his racism, homophobia, and hatred of Muslims. Griffin stayed true to how his talk was billed, stating, “We don’t believe in integration. Integration is extermination.” Early on, Griffin told the audience that he would “shove homosexuals into the closet” and while later telling an audience Muslim member of the audience that he sees her as a threat. Griffin said that he does believe the Holocaust happened, downplaying his previous statements denying the Holocaust by stating that “…in the past I have said very rude things about the Holocaust which doesn’t make me an anti-Semite” and later stating “I have no doubt whatsoever–I have never doubted–that vast numbers of entirely innocent Eastern European Jews were murdered by the Nazis and their allies.” Of course, this statement contradicts Griffin’s previous claims, but it does reflect the way in which the BNP has sought to gloss over its most extreme positions in order to appeal to reactionary tendencies within Britain. It is also important to remember that despite what Griffin says publicly, in 1998 he was convicted of distributing materially likely to insight racial hatred and that he has a long history of involvement in organized racism and fascism.

Throughout his talk, Griffin was flanked by Preston Wiginton, a man who has been associated with the racist right via his involvement with the white supremacist Stormfront online community. When confronted about his involvement with Stormfront, Wiginton denied being a Nazi, stating “I have not been to Stormfront in a year” and claiming that he is “just a person who loves my people.” While fairly immaterial, a simple search on Stormfront turns up posts from Preston Wiginton authored in July of 2007. Like Griffin–who has spoken at a conference organized by the racist American Renaissance group–Wiginton has been associated with other white supremacists, including David Duke. Wiginton also runs a website called “Noaztlan.org” on which he declares that “Illegal Immigration Spells Cancer for the American Way of Life.” Wiginton appears to have booked Griffin’s current speaking tour and in the past ran a website defending Griffin’s BNP.

Young Americans for Freedom appeared to have few members in attendance and few people came to listen to the talk. The overwhelming majority who were there were opposed to Griffin’s lecture. Prior to the start of the speech, there was a march across MSU’s campus that ended with a “community speak out” in which representatives of a variety of campus and community organizations opposed both Griffin’s message and YAF’s continued hosting of racists.

Ehlers Votes against Revised SCHIP Legislation

photo of vern ehlers

On Thursday, Grand Rapids area Representative Vern Ehlers voted against a revised version of the State Children’s Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) legislation vetoed by President George W. Bush last month. Initially, Ehlers opposed Bush’s veto and voted in support of an earlier attempt to override the veto. However, Ehlers was the only Republican to change his vote, arguing that Democrats failed to get enough input from Republicans on the new version of the legislation. In the revised legislation, Democrats maintained their goal of insuring an additional ten million children while limiting program eligibility to 300% of the poverty line, restricting access for illegal immigrants, and trimming coverage for adults with no children. The bill passed the House by a vote of 265-142 but is twenty-five votes short of the 290 to override a promised veto.