Pennsylvania Observer

A blog for progressive people in Pennsylvania. Greens, Democrats and others who want to comment on current news items in the Keystone State.

Tuesday, December 28, 2004

Democrats vs. Greens, Part 3

Democrats vs. Greens, Part 3 (and final exchange). The heat generated by this exchange between the Greens and progressive Democrats is importnant, but the Observer is not a discussion list. This is the final piece we’ll publish on this, with one Democrat and one Green opinion:



I don't want to appear to be continuing this fight, but I would like to clear the record. Most of waht happened during Lois Murphy's legal challenge of Dorothy Schieber is so complicated that it is difficult to explain in a single letter. The Deomcrats fought us [the Greens] on about 20 different levels hoping we would go away. Even with all of their efforts, Dorothy missed getting on the ballot by only 8 signatures.
Murphy and the Democrats employed "win at all costs strategy" that backfired. Any one that thinks winning at all costs is the only way to win is mistaken. We tried to work with the Democrats to defeat Gerhlach. We got the door slammed in our face at every turn. We contacted every level of leadership in the Democratic party to work with them to defeat Gerhlach all to no avail. Then they pull a George W Bush on us, purging voter records mainly Latino, and spend $50,000 dollars to stop democracy. This was total BS. If you liked GW's tactics in Florida and Ohio then you probably loved Murphy's tactics even more. If this is the way elections are won now we are all in trouble.
Even the corporate media realized something was fishy in the way the Democrats were operating in trying to limit voters' choices. We got great new coverage on this across the state because almost all of the reporters looked at the information and saw we were right.
If anyone wants to talk to me about this please call 610-374-2897 so you can hear the real story. Come with a open mind because you will not believe what you are going to hear. I will also keep a open mind. What's done is done, but trust me that no one in the Green Party wanted it to be this way. But when a friend is being attacked, such as Dorothy who spend hundreds of hours collecting thousands of signatures, I willfight back. That's exactly what the Green Party did in response to the attacks by the Democratic Party. I am glad we stood for the principle that democracy is for everyone, not just millionaire campaigns.
We did not choose this fight. We pleaded with Democratic leaders for weeks to not start it. But I am proud the Greens went down swinging.
Jennaro Pullano, Reading, Chair, PA Green Party
-------------------------------------
My e-mail to the PA observer was slightly longer than some they "published." It was also quite evenhanded. Without asking, they edited it--making it entirely partisan (and carelessly dismissive of the Greens).
For future reference, please do not take anything printed in PA-observer as necessarily "true to the spirit or intent of the contributor." Muck-raking is one thing, distortion quite another. (And yes, I'd have edited my comments further, if asked.)
as quoted:
"Lois Murphy was not only more progressive than other PA democrats, she was progressive enough to meet every qualification in some state Green party platforms...[The Greens] joined in re-electing an anti- gay, anti-woman, anti-minority, anti-environment, anti-drug-law- reform, anti-labor, anti-fair wage Bush-backing incumbent. Way to go, Greens."
original message:"How sad. Lois Murphy was not only more progressive than other PA democrats, she was progressive enough to meet every qualification in some state Green party platforms. Murphy, was a late entrant in the race. With no loss of face, Greens could have shifted support to her. There's no ideological problem there; progressives generally support the rights of candidates to cross-file. By throwing support behind Murphy, on the issues, they could in turn have taken credit for her victory--a much stronger boast. Instead, the local Greens focused on the big-G Green party rather than on green issues. (Ironically, this is the same thing we all love to hate about big-DDemocrats.) They joined in re-electing an anti-gay, anti-woman, anti-minority, anti-environment, anti-drug-law-reform, anti-labor, anti-fair wage Bush-backing incumbent. Way to go, Greens. At the same time, given that progressive D's make a lot of noise about increased ballot access, drawing a bead on the Greens (as opposed to that Republican stooge, Nader) is not a defensible move for any progressive candidate. As the R's have shown, if you want to mess with the system, you can legitimately support someone on your opponent's flank, instead of shooting your own fringe. Or, better yet, save the cash, and sink your resources into your own campaign, where it belongs."
Joy Sabl, Pittsburgh

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home