Progressive Principles

On the rare occasions when I actually run into a Green Party activist (whenever I run into them they always looking to collect signatures--it is never anything else), the response I typically receive when I ask them to join the Democratic Party and help transform it is something along the lines of "I can't abandon my principles." Well, here is the great, principled Green Party in my state:Green Party candidate Carl Romanelli, making his first bid for statewide elective office, acknowledged Monday that Republican contributors probably supplied most of the $100,000 that he said he spent gathering signatures to qualify for the Nov. 7 ballot.(...)

Records on file with the Federal Election Commission show the Luzerne County Green Party received $66,000 in June from 20 contributors who gave between $1,000 and $5,000 apiece.

The Luzerne County Green Party in turn reported paying $66,000 in June to a Florida company called JSM Inc. for work that Romanelli described as an integral part of his signature-gathering campaign.

An analysis showed that at least $29,000 came from donors who also have given to Santorum's campaign, and nearly all the donors had given to Republican candidates in recent elections.

Santorum said he hopes Romanelli makes it onto the ballot. If people want to float into irrelevancy by working with the Green Party then fine, less power to them (less power, of course, being exactly what they will get). However, if your party is being funded almost entirely by large contributions from Santorum donors, don't talk to me about how "progressive principles" form your rationale for being a member of that party. Someone who is a principled progressive wouldn't take money from people like that.

Speaking of which, here is another one of my favorite "principled" politicians showing what a load of nonsense his principles really are:Apaprently, Sen. Lieberman has now asked to speak at the "Wake Up Wal-Mart" rally in Bridgeport tomorrow. Unsurprisng, since almost all Democratic elected officials and candidates in the state - including Ned Lamont, Rep. DeLauro, Destefano, Malloy, Farrell, and Dinardo - were scheduled to attend as of a few days ago.

But Sen. Lieberman's sudden opposition to Wal-Mart's policies would be a lot more believable if he didn't accept $1,000 from their PAC in February (major hat tip to Maura at MLN): So, Lieberman takes money from Wal-Mart back when the race wasn't supposed to be close, but now that he realizes that he is in trouble, he suddenly wants to speak out against Wal-Mart. What a principled guy. Fortunately, his campaign these days appears to be about as effective as campaigns run by the Green Party.

Tags: Bob Casey, CT-Sen, Fundraising, Joe Lieberman, Ned Lamont, PA-Sen, Rick Santorum, Senate 2006, Third parties (all tags)

Comments

20 Comments

at one time.

The Green Party may have seemed potentially viable, and "the place to be", but now there is no doubt whatsoever that the rise of people powered progressive politics is very firmly in the Democratic party.

I have voted Green in the past in rare occaisons when the Democrat is just too odious to consider (and usually a lock to win anyway), or it's for a smallish local office.

But that is because I vote the candidate.

I have no interest whatsoever in helping to build a party whose national security policy seems to be: "everybody just needs to be nice."

-C.

by neutron 2006-08-01 08:32AM | 0 recs
Re: Progressive Principles

I agree with this post 100%.  The Green Party totally lost me in 2000 with the Nader crap about how Gore and Bush were the same.  It is pretty clear after all the stuff Bush has done in the last 6 years those statement were the biggest loads of BS ever uttered by anyone.

It doesn't surprise me the Repubs fund the Greens.  All the Greens do is take votes away from Dems and that helps the Repubs.  They maybe slimy and evil but Repubs are incredibly smart politicos.  

I guess the Libertarians are to the right what the Greens are to the left.  Maybe we should help them where they are viable and can hurt Repubs!  Just a thought.

by John Mills 2006-08-01 08:45AM | 0 recs
Re: Progressive Principles

I agree with you that the Greens are often a right royal pain in the ass, but here in Illinois they've been doing excellent work campaigning and working for our Democratic Congressional candidate David Gill--so I've actually run into Green Party activists doing something other than collecting signatures.

by Baltimore 2006-08-01 08:45AM | 0 recs
Re: Progressive Principles

The Greens did the same thing here in Illinois; don't know about the money, but the repugs helped them get on the ballot to make mischief in the gov's race. Maybe Joementum should file with them.

by thelonius 2006-08-01 08:46AM | 0 recs
Re: Progressive Principles

You're right about the Greens making mischief in the Governor's race. I didn't know the Republicans gave them money, but I'm not in the least surprised. They do the right thing in one place, and then immediately turn around and revert to their old bad behavior in another place.

by Baltimore 2006-08-01 12:33PM | 0 recs
Re: Progressive Principles

so now you want to talk about the PA senate race and who is taking money from whom?  you don't have to look to the greens, just look at who is giving [and who is taking] money between Man on Dog and the doucebag Dem.  here, here, here.

i'm not saying what the idiot greens are doing is right, just that it's stupid and it's happening quite in the open on 'our' side in the same exact fucking race.

later

by Albert 2006-08-01 08:59AM | 0 recs
Re: Progressive Principles
Not 100% of his funds, like the Greens. And Albert, you should know that I'm not defending what Casey did, and that I supported someone else in the primaries. I'm just saying that if people are going to claim "principle" as their rationale, then they shouldn't be bought and paid for by Santorum.
by Chris Bowers 2006-08-01 12:28PM | 0 recs
Re: Progressive Principles

I've voted Green plenty in the past, including recently for mayor and councilwoman of my city. Some Greens are worthy of consideration, though the majority are admittedly not, being of the tinfoil loon variety unfortunately. They are  also not immune to corruption, the absence of stench of which being something the European left can usually count as a virtue, all other things being considered.

I also think that while Casey is certainly better than Santorum, he's no great shakes.

All this being said, if Green supporters think that their movement gets any forward motion by having members and entire state organizatio0ns being blatantly the tool of the GOP, they're sadly but brutally mistaken.

And they've made this mistake before as well, in MN against Wellstone. Back then, in 2002, a large minority of Greens in '02 angled for no-endorsement for Senate, recognizing Wellstone as the real deal, but were overruled by the loony fringe which is alas the biggest group in most Green Party organizations. Needless to say, most of those minority Greens are Greens no more, and the party is dead.

Which is kinda too bad, for in the urban core, Greens could've kept the Democrats honest. One-party rule is bad no matter the party, and having Greens in oppo is certainly better than having GOoPers.

Unfortunately, for every admirable and honest Elizabeth Dickinson, there are 100 Ed McGaa/Dean Zimmerman/Carl Romanelli fools. All ego, no brains.

by redstar67 2006-08-01 09:03AM | 0 recs
Re: Progressive Principles

I see them all the time in front of my Whole Foods in Cambridge asking for sigs as well.  After having run into several, I must say, they are the Left's version of the kooky Rightists who wanted that Constitution Party or some shit.

Quite frankly, I a glad to NOT be associated with such loons that handed us Alito and that equally reich-wing Roberts on a silver platter by taking votes from Gore.

Those Green assholes will never be forgiven by me.  Side note:  I saw one get picked up to go home in an SUV...a BIG SUV...haha.

by jgarcia 2006-08-01 09:08AM | 0 recs
Re: Progressive Principles

Quite frankly, I a glad to NOT be associated with such loons that handed us Alito and that equally reich-wing Roberts on a silver platter by taking votes from Gore.

Just curious...are you glad to be associated with Democrats who not only wouldn't support a filibuster of Alito, but voted to confirm him?

You can't blame Greens for rotten Republican-supporting Democrats. One can only make lame excuses for such Dems.

by Sitkah 2006-08-01 10:30AM | 0 recs
Re: Progressive Principles

I switched to Green a couple of years ago because I was tired of GOP-lite.  I still am, and I won't be a Dem again until they are a true opposition party.

In that time, I've learned enough to know that it is the establishment Dems that I have issue with.  The DLC people, the Bidens, Liebermans, HRC, Kerry...the types who fought against Howard Dean for Chair and the types who vote for illegal war powers.

I still vote Dem most of the time, but if I'm stuck with HRC vs. GOP in '08, I'll probably vote Green.  I'm in CA so it won't matter, anyway.

by Village Jenius 2006-08-01 10:56AM | 0 recs
Re: Progressive Principles

I don't blame anyone for being or voting Green. We each serve democracy best by voting our own principles rather than scheming about outcomes.

How I'll vote in 2006 or 08 is a closely guarded secret that I won't divulge even to myself ;-)

But I especially won't divulge it to politicians, since once they know I'm in their hip pocket they no longer have reason to care what I think. Let them keep doing and saying what it takes to earn my vote right up to election day.

by Sitkah 2006-08-01 11:25AM | 0 recs
Re: Progressive Principles
"I switched to Green a couple of years ago because I was tired of GOP-lite. I still am, and I won't be a Dem again until they are a true opposition party."

Then you are just waiting for people to change, rather than taking an active role and making them change.

I would suggest rather than just waiting around fo rthigns to change, to take an active role by runnign for committee positions, supporting progressives in primaries, and continuing to build new progressive infrastructure separate fromt eh establishment. Otherwise, you might as well just wait until your local establishment Dem looks up your home address, knocks on your door, and gets down on one knee to apologize for whatever you didn't like.
by Chris Bowers 2006-08-01 12:32PM | 0 recs
Ballot thresholds

Really high burdens to make the ballot, like PA's leave upstart Parties little choice but to become catspaws. Contrast PA's 67,070 required signatures with wisconsin's 2,000 for a Statewide race.

A more reasonable standard would not only benefit Green candidates, but Libertarians and Constitution party as well, so it's not clear that thisa would always work to the detriment of Democrats.

by benmasel 2006-08-01 09:11AM | 0 recs
Re: Ballot thresholds

just for clarification, for Greens to be on the ballot is not set at 67K, but 2% of the highest total, state-wide, from the last election.  it's a ridiculous PA law making it especially hard for 3rd parties to get on the ballot here.

by Albert 2006-08-01 09:22AM | 0 recs
Re: Ballot thresholds
I don't think so. If your party is so weak that you can't get 67K signatures without without taking huge donations from wingers, then I'm not really sure why that party is in the poltiics business in the first place. NEd LAmont had an almost identical threshold in CT, and met it easily.
by Chris Bowers 2006-08-01 12:35PM | 0 recs
Re: Progressive Principles

I think it's terrible who some of the Greens are taking money from. I also think it's terrible who most Democrats and Republicans are taking money from.

Apparently, the only thing "principle" and "politics" have in common is the letter "p".

That's why I don't call myself a Democrat, Republican, or Green, etc. I'm just a Reformer who wants good and honest government, and I see lifting Democratic Party out of its personal sewer of corruption as the best way to go about it.

by Sitkah 2006-08-01 10:23AM | 0 recs
Re: Validating signatures

This week, the Casey campaign is looking for volunteers to verify and validate the signatures on the Romanelli nominating petition.

I'm volunteering to check sigs Sat and Sun. If you're there, too, give a "yo, phillydem", shout out to me.

by phillydem 2006-08-01 10:44AM | 0 recs
When and where?

I'd be happy to volunteer.

by PantherDem 2006-08-01 01:24PM | 0 recs
Re: When and where?

Contact the Casey campaign HQ in Phila, but the volunteer coordinator advised me they are trying to keep the group small so I don't know if or how many other volunteers they'll take for this particular project. I'm guessing the reason is because they'll be culling and matching names and maybe that doesn't lend itself to a big volunteer group like stuffing envelops or making calls does.

I'm sure, though, if this particular project is filled up, they'd still be delighted to have to have you and others on their volunteer list.

FTR, I got contacted from Hoeffel's volunteer list of two years ago. Hoeffel must've passed it along to Casey.

by phillydem 2006-08-01 02:58PM | 0 recs

Diaries

Advertise Blogads