Why Greens won’t kiss Democrat butt
Dolores M. Bernal has an interesting column on Newsvine.com about the relationship between the Greens and the Democratic Party. She says Greens
don’t put up with ANY flip-flopping, they’re extremely passionate, and they can organize a mass grassroots protest of some 50,000 people on Pennsylvania Avenue in a matter of hours. I know this because I was a radio reporter with Pacifica Radio and I covered many events that the Greens coordinated.
Many of her Green friends, Bernal says, started out
seriously optimistic about Obama. I suppose he was the first Democrat, aside from McKinney and Kucinich, that they really liked. They have been considering voting for him, but after Obama’s move to the center, these Greens are abandoning the idea of voting for a Democrat.
The one question I have for Bernal is in regard to her comment that “our Green brothers and sisters and the Democratic Party have one enemy in common: radical-conservative Republicans.”
My question: Just who are these “radical-conservative Republicans”? There’s a sharp division on the Right today between the Bush Republicans and constitutionalist conservatives and libertarians like Ron Paul and Bob Barr. As for the latter group, they often have a surprisingly friendly relationship (thanks to the overweening importance of the war issue) with anti-war Democrats like Kucinich as well as anti-war Greens and Naderites. Note how Kucinich and Paul were so nice-nice to each other on the campaign trail.
So, “radical-conservative Republicans” needs better definition. I know we must all look alike to a former Pacifica reporter, but don’t put these two groups in the same room if you don’t want combustion!
July 15th, 2008 at 11:28 am
thats a lie that the green can mobilize 50,000, atleast not these days, maybe in 2000.
July 15th, 2008 at 12:24 pm
The history of 21st Century Green Party USA: ineptitude, stumbling, bumbling, former and potential allies drifting or sprinting away….
July 15th, 2008 at 12:56 pm
I watched a little of what was apparently the Green party acceptance speeches by McKinney and the v.p. nominee, Clemente. At one point, Clemente said something like, “I’m ready to debate you, Cheney.” Apparently, she is unaware that Cheney is not actually running for Vice President again.
July 15th, 2008 at 2:37 pm
Are you sure that he isn’t? There’s actually a movement by the radical fringe of the religious right to write-in Bush and somehow get the 22nd overturned.
Of course their reason for keeping Bush is that he’s “God’s President”...
Ack
July 15th, 2008 at 3:12 pm
they can recruit 50k protestors in hours, but don’t have volunteers to circulate petitions.
one of the contenders for the nomination, kat swift, raised a total of $252 & the nominee, Mckinney around 1K. and we’re talking about running for President of the United States.
the Green Party is a party of “leaders” who are leading only themselves. . the glory days of 2k are long gone.
July 15th, 2008 at 3:14 pm
the greens never had any glory days. They were just lucky ducks to get Ralph Nader to run on their ticket once.
July 15th, 2008 at 3:47 pm
I can only assume McKinney represents the perfect Green voter: batshit insane and running around like a headless chicken.
July 15th, 2008 at 4:16 pm
batshit insane? okay, maybe…
http://retrocrush.buzznet.com/archive2007/annoying/mckinney.jpg
July 15th, 2008 at 4:19 pm
Libertarianism is NOT a form of conservatism.
Libertarianism is NOT on the right.
Constitutionalism is a republican (small R) philosophy, not a conservative philosophy.
“The Bush Republicans” are more-accurately described as neoconservatives or conservative socialists. They combine a worship for democracy with the authoritarianism of the conservatism that existed prior to the short-lived “Old Right” (which itself was never truly right-wing, despite the name).
“Radical-conservative Republicans” doesn’t need a better definition. Neoconservatism is as much a form of conservatism as it is a form of socialism, and it is certainly an extremist position. Perhaps the word “radical” should be dropped, however, since it has a positive connotation.
Sincerely,
Alex Peak
July 15th, 2008 at 4:26 pm
What, photographs do not lie? And that mean left hook! And that diva like, pompus, elitist attitude! With one of the worst matches for vp available!
Cobb/ LeMarche
Cobb/ LeMarche
Cobb/ LeMarche
www.politics1.com, ballot access news, www.reformparty.com, and Liberterian Party Watch give me such moral superiority complex!
What ever wrong I have done in my six decades can not begin to match what other so called reformers and so called patriots vomit up on a regular basis. I even have a better hair cut than Zsa Zsa Gabor Junior!
July 15th, 2008 at 10:36 pm
I guess the regulars on this site have gotten less Green-friendly since greenpartywatch.org got started. Oh well. I just wanted to correct some of your truthy factual errors:
Rosa Clemente never offered to debate Cheney. It’s bad form to make up quotes. She did, however, say that Cheney would be horrified to see rich and poor, Christian and atheist, black and white and Latino, all working together to end his dream of a plutocratic military surveillance state.
Cynthia McKinney has raised far more than 1K… not that Greens measure success by fundraising. In fact, Greens are working hard to get money out of politics.
If anyone here is keeping an open mind, I encourage you to check out http://runcynthiarun.org/
Peace!
July 16th, 2008 at 5:48 pm
“She says Greens don’t put up with ANY flip-flopping,”
*************
Most radicals, no matter what banner is flown over their HQ, are against ANY compromise.
July 16th, 2008 at 11:20 pm
Mckinney is a reverse racist nut who supports slavery reparations. I imagine most Greens (if they have any sense left) will split their vote between Nader and Obama now.
July 17th, 2008 at 10:56 pm
joell, Cynthia has raised $5000+ just in matching funds in WI alone
(only counting the first $250 of each donation)
Sivarticus, reparations ARE part of the party’s platform:
http://gp.org/platform/2004/socjustice.html#999024