Repeal the "Affordable Care Act"

There is nothing "affordable" with Obama's "Affordable Care Act" which in reality should have been named the "Health Insurance and Pharmaceutical Industry Bailout And Profit Maximization Act of 2010." What we need is a working class based peoples' party to enact a National Public Health Care System--- everyone in/nobody out financed by a peace dividend, taxing the rich and a payroll tax.

Enough!

Enough!

Governor Dayton,

First of all I want to say that I agree with the above comment about saving the wild rice because by saving the wild rice from destruction we are protecting human health and saving ourselves, too. Plus, you and the DFL talk a lot about "jobs, jobs, jobs" and "business, business, business;" yet, in the wild rice there are many jobs being created through environmentally friendly real "green" businesses. I think it is deplorable you have not publicly scolded DFL State Senator Tom Bakk for tacking on this racist, anti-jobs, anti-small business environmentally irresponsible rider to this legislation that is part and parcel of a long-standing campaign of genocide against First Nations Peoples. You call yourself a liberal, Governor Dayton. Do what a good liberal would do and show some leadership in standing up to racism, for jobs and for a "green" economy.

Now---

Run this by the tax-cutting, anti-tax, "fiscally responsible" Republicans, the DFL business caucus and the DFL Summit Hill Club:

When people are unemployed they shouldn't have to pay any taxes--- income taxes, property taxes, sales taxes, gas taxes. A government that can't organize a full-employment economy while there is so much needed to be done doesn't deserve the support of unemployed workers.

Tell the Republicans to forgo their legislative salaries and become "volunteers."

Get on the phone to Obama and tell him to end these dirty wars and send the money to Minnesota.

Tax the casinos to resolve the state's debt.

Come on, man, stand up for your liberal ideals. Get a back-bone.

These budget battles are a reflection of our true priorities.

End the wars; don't just tax-the-rich--- tax-the-hell out of the rich.

Stop playing games with these Republicans and business Democrats from the DFL Business Caucus and the Summit Hill Club.

Gather together a "People's Lobby" in support of a "People's Budget."

Get the Minnesota AFL-CIO to get people on buses from every county... bring in liberal, progressive and left-minded Minnesotans to deck these Republicans and the wealthy elite of the Democratic Party.

Stand up and fight for your liberal beliefs; no compromises with these greedy pigs who want to feed at the public trough and then cry about "fiscal responsibility."

There is only one way Minnesotans are going to get jobs and that is when you turn the State of Minnesota into the employer of first choice putting the unemployed to work solving the pressing problems of the people.

You also might consider joining with those of us looking for a working class based peoples party as an alternative to the thoroughly rotten and corrupt Minnesota Democratic Farmer-Labor Party.

By the way; why was Ken Martin, the head of the Minnesota DFL, in Iowa campaigning against Tim Pawlenty when he should have been right here in Minnesota standing at your side mobilizing to defeat the filthy rich?

You are now traveling across Minnesota talking with Minnesotans. Great! This is what Jeffersonian democracy is supposed to be all about.

Let me suggest that you ask each and every Minnesotan a very basic and fundamental question which you can convey their answers to your buddy, Barack Obama:

How is Barack Obama's Wall Street war economy working for you?

If you get as far north as Warroad, stop on in; the coffee is always on and there are some chocolate chip cookies my grand-kids made to munch on.

Maybe over coffee and cookies we can discuss why you have reneged on our agreement; we supported you, and you haven't fulfilled your end of the deal--- we need to know why; it's all about accountability. Between a "red" Finn and a good liberal I'm sure you understand what I am getting at.

Alan L. Maki
Director of Organizing,
Midwest Casino Workers Organizing Council

Workers of the World, Please See Our Web Site

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/23/nyregion/leftist-parties-in-new-york-have-new-appeal.html?_r=1&ref=nyregion&pagewanted=all

Workers of the World, Please See Our Web Site

From: New York Times

By JOSEPH BERGER

Published: May 22, 2011

You can still be a card-carrying Communist in New York, but these days committed Communists usually register online.

Yana Paskova for The New York Times

Jared Abbott, left, Andrew Porter and Frank Llewellyn, all Democratic Socialists, after a rally on living wages.

Michelle V. Agins/The New York Times

Billy Wharton, a co-chairman of the Socialist Party, in his office on Lafayette Street.

Librado Romero/The New York Times

 Sam Webb, left, the national chairman of the Communist Party, and Libero Della Piana, communications director.

  

“We actually have a card, but we don’t make a big deal of it,” said Sam Webb, the national chairman of the Communist Party U.S.A.

The Socialist Party U.S.A. does distribute red cards to members willing to “subscribe to the principles” of the party, but another leftist group, the Democratic Socialists of America, prefers online registration, with members using a virtual shopping cart to pay yearly dues of about $60 by credit card — Marx be damned.

In some ways, the Left remains locked in place. Its three major national parties are still confined to cramped Manhattan offices that are plastered with gaudy posters and honeycombed with pamphlets for distribution and envelopes for stuffing.

But in other ways the landscape has changed significantly. All three parties are finding the Internet to be a fruitful recruiting tool and believe their message has been given a fresh, beguiling appeal by the failures of capitalist symbols like Lehman Brothers and by debacles like the billions of dollars in securities tied to subprime mortgages.

“The economic crisis of 2008 gave us new life,” said Billy Wharton, a co-chairman of the Socialist Party, who grew enamored of socialism while battling tuition increases as a student at the College of Staten Island. “We have ideas for resolving the economic crisis, and people began to listen to them.”

Rather than trumpeting membership numbers, the parties, embracing the norms of the digital era, prefer to discuss the number of hits on their Web sites and Facebook pages. And philosophically, they take a kind of I-told-you-so schadenfreude in statistics that indicate a growing gap between the rich and the poor, with top chief executives now making 275 times as much as the average proletarian.

Still, it is hard to imagine that the parties have inherited a revolutionary tradition once so popular that in the 1932 presidential election, Norman Thomas, the Socialist candidate, garnered 884,000 votes and William Z. Foster, the Communist candidate, had over 100,000. But then again, after the breakup of the Soviet Union and the collapse of socialist republics in Eastern Europe, some people may be surprised to learn that these parties are still around.

All three have greatly shrunk from their heydays. The Socialist Party has about 1,000 members nationally. The Communists claim 2,000. The Democratic Socialists, which for many years included luminaries like Michael Harrington and Irving Howe, have about 6,000.

“It’s not easy to make political progress outside the two-party structure because people don’t want to waste their votes,” said Frank Llewellyn, 62, the national director of the Democratic Socialists, who became a socialist as a result of the civil rights and antiwar movements.

Rather than battling for power through elections, all three parties try to sway the national conversation through coalitions with labor unions and other mainstream organizations. Both socialist groups turned out at City Hall this month to protest budget cuts, at a rally that was largely organized by the unions.

But on matters of principle, the leftist parties diverge. All three oppose President Obama’s health care program, seeing it as a giveaway to insurance companies and preferring either a single-payer government plan or a socialized system like that of Britain, where doctors work for the government.

The Socialists sometimes do have candidates who run in states where the rules for getting on the ballot are not too onerous; Greg Pason, the national secretary, ran for governor of New Jersey in 2009. But the Democratic Socialists see that effort as futile and prefer endorsements; they supported David N. Dinkins and Ruth W. Messinger in their mayoral bids in New York City.

The parties’ enduring character is obvious in visits to their offices. The Socialist Party is housed in a tumbledown building on Lafayette Street known informally as the “Peace Pentagon” or the A. J. Muste building, not because the name approximates its mildewed atmosphere but because Mr. Muste was a benefactor of the peace groups that the building houses. The Democratic Socialists even have a foothold on Wall Street, with cluttered offices in a building on Maiden Lane. It is not because Wall Street has suddenly adopted a philosophy of “to each according to his own needs.”

“It’s cheap,” Mr. Llewellyn explained. “This is an area of the city where you get the best deals.”

The Communists even own the means of production — they lease out their eight-story building on West 23rd Street to other left-wing organizations. The party has the most decorous space, having redesigned its office with glass walls and tall windows.

“We’re not up to some nefarious business we have to hide from the American government,” said Libero Della Piana, 38, the party’s communications director.

Physical space matters less these days than virtual space. All three groups have lively Web sites that flaunt their philosophies and histories. Mr. Della Piana, the child of an Italian anarchist, boasts that the Communists’ news site has 25,000 unique visitors a week; before it stopped publishing in the late 1960s, its newspaper, The Daily Worker, was read by just 5,000 subscribers. In 2010, he said, 700 prospective members applied through the Web site.

Recent disclosures of capitalist excesses have given the parties a second wind after the collapse of the Soviet Union suggested the bankruptcy of collectivist philosophy. Mr. Llewellyn said that since 2007 his party’s membership had increased by 50 percent, to 6,000.

“People see the consequences of unregulated markets, greed, a lack of checks on the power of the private flow of capital to drive the economy and undermine jobs,” Mr. Llewellyn said.

Mr. Webb, who joined the Communists in the 1970s, likes to emphasize the party’s rich history, including the fight against McCarthyism and the volunteers who helped the Spanish Republicans battle the Fascists, rather than more unpleasant episodes like the case of the American Communist Julius Rosenberg, who spied for the Soviet Union.

Mr. Della Piana says the Soviet Union’s dissolution freed the party to be more ideological because “no one could ever say again we were puppets.”

“We have a whole generation of young people attracted to the idea of communism without the baggage of the cold war,” he said.

After declining to 250 members in 1980, the Socialist Party’s membership has quadrupled, Mr. Wharton said. He was even asked to appear on a Fox affiliate when conservatives raised suspicions that Mr. Obama was a socialist.

“They thought I’d go on and on and actually support the policies of President Obama,” said Mr. Wharton, 42, a General Educational Development, or G.E.D., teacher in Brooklyn. “The question was ‘Is he a socialist?’ and my answer was ‘I’m not sure he’s even a liberal.’ I called him a hedge-fund Democrat.”

None of the parties view their existence as futile — immersing themselves in everyday local battles, they believe, will spread their influence.

“Socialism won’t come to this country until tens of millions decide capitalism doesn’t work for them,” Mr. Webb said. “If you’re a revolutionary, if you’re a socialist, you have to have patience.”

A version of this article appeared in print on May 23, 2011, on page A18 of the New York edition with the headline: Workers of the World, Please See Our Web Site.

Richard Trumka should challenge Obama in the Democratic Primary--- at least in Iowa

by Alan L. Maki on Sunday, May 22, 2011 at 11:13am

I think Richard Trumka challenging Obama in the Primary would show that he is serious in his criticisms of the Democrats.

Right now it is difficult to take Trumka's criticisms seriously because after making the excellent presentation at the National Press Club luncheon he turned right around and stated continued support for Obama which doesn't convey to the Democrats that he is serious because Obama is the main offender as far as what is wrong in the Democratic Party.

I posed this question for a number of reasons but I think that Trumka challenging Obama in the Primary is the only way to take him seriously in his very justifiable criticisms. Plus, it would enable important things like the Employee Free Choice Act on the table for real consideration.

Also, I think if Trumka were to run in the Primary challenging Obama he would finally have to come out strongly in opposition to these wars draining our country of the resources needed to solve our problems.

Another thing is if Trumka were to challenge Obama it would be good for the health of our democracy since politics has come down to voting for one party out of fear the other party will win rather than a thorough discussion of issues, problems and their solutions. We really have to get away from this politics of fear.

Liberals, progressives and the left should consider pushing Trumka to at least run in the Iowa Primary. Let's see what happens if Trumka were to implement the ideas in a real challenge to Obama by bringing forward the ideas from people like Robert Reich, Paul Krugman, etc.

Trumka and all these "progressives for Obama" talked about "holding Obama's feet to the fire." What better way to "hold Obama's feet to the fire" than his supporters bringing forward the ideas so many people were led to expect Obama would deliver than to make this kind of Primary challenge. If anything, such a Primary contest would most likely bring back to the ballot box those who have walked away because Obama has not delivered as anticipated.

After the way Richard Trumka invested so much in Obama's and the campaigns of other Democrats that never panned out, this is the least Trumka can do to help rectify the situation. I really think he has a very personal responsibility to toss his hat in the ring--- along with the ideas he says he is for.

And think what would happen if all the state AFL-CIO affiliates were to follow suit and run their own candidates in the Primaries.

Please vote here:

http://www.facebook.com/?sk=questions&ap=1&axn=y

Please vote above on this question:

Should AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka challenge Barack Obama in the Democratic Party Primary?

Richard Trumka sure opened the door for one hell of a discussion... we should all engage

Some thoughts on Richard Trumka's heavily publicized speech to the National Press Club

by Alan L. Maki on Friday, May 20, 2011

 

A lot of people are ecstatic over Richard Trumka's speech to the National Press Club today. I have been following Trumka's speech, and his comments afterwards, very closely.

Some thoughts...

I would note something Trumka stated later, after his presentation, which I think needs to be stressed because it demonstrates just how two-faced and hypocritical he is. He has only repackaged and re-worded the longstanding positions of the AFL-CIO going back many decades to its conception and further back to when it was the AFL--- for about a decade or so the CIO had a real pro-worker stance on elections, supporting candidates and voting, and even running worker candidates.

But here is the most important point Trumka made TODAY which was not included in his remarks--- he had to be pressed knowing this was not going to be popular among working people after delivering a militant sounding speech:

"Later, Trumka said that President Obama was working for workers and that the AFL-CIO, the nation's largest labor group, would continue to support the president."
Link to statement- http://money.cnn.com/2011/05/20/news/economy/afl_cio_washington/?section=money_latest


Here are some other links to the National Press Club Luncheon:

http://press.org/events/npc-luncheon-richard-trumka

http://press.org/news-multimedia/news/union-leader-promises-fight-states-over-worker-rights

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/05/20/977808/-Trumka-denounces-Republicans,-declares-labor-independence

Here is a link to the official AFL-CIO website:

 http://blog.aflcio.org/2011/05/20/trumka-working-people-want-a-strong-independent-labor-movement/

I would note that Richard Trumka does understand what working people want: political independence. But, when pressed as to whom the AFL-CIO will endorse for president Trumka says: Barack Obama--- this is not political independence from Wall Street in any way, shape or form. Nor has Barack Obama done a damn thing for working people justifying this endorsement; quite to the contrary, Obama has hurt working people and his wars are making us all poor.

Trumka has failed to grasp the very simple and basic understanding of these budget battles as articulated by my friend, Virg Bernero in Michigan: "Budgets are a reflection of our true priorities."

Trumka, at this late date, refuses to recognize what both liberal Minnesota Governor Mark Dayton has articulated along with Virg Bernero: We can't continue to squander our Nation's resources on wars and expect to have the resources to take care of the needs of the people. Again, a recognition of this Wall Street government's priorities when it comes to these budget battles. Why does Trumka refuse to ask the all important question of the working women and men whose dues pay has big, fat salary: How is Obama's Wall Street war economy working for you?

Check out Richard Trumka's complete speech. We need to ask: How is it that Trumka can make a speech like this and not one single mention of these dirty imperialist wars killing working people abroad and our own youth while working people and being forced into funding these wars abroad through austerity measures here at home as Wall Street coupon clippers fatten their bank accounts from profits derived from these wars as well as profiting directly from the austerity measures being imposed creating so much poverty resulting in untold misery; we need answers from Trumka as to why he is not properly formulating a response and call to action.


Also, I am sharing with all of you a website for what might be the beginnings of a national movement for a progressive political movement that has the potential to help us free ourselves from the two-party trap set for us by our Wall Street enemies.

I would encourage all of you to consider getting involved in any way you can. Please feel free to contact Anthony Noel--- his email is next to Mike's in the "To" line. Here is the link to the website: http://newprogs.org/

Also, I would like to make you aware of what is the most important book on progressive politics that you could possibly read--- bar none. The book is, "Keep True, a life in politics" by Howard Pawley who was elected and re-elected for almost twenty years to the Manitoba Provincial Legislature, having served about ten of those years as Manitoba's Premier (kind of like a state governor). The New Democratic Party government of Howard Pawley (during the 1980's) remains an example of the most progressive government in North America--- of course, with the exception of the Minnesota Farmer-Labor Party socialist governments of governors Floyd Olson and Elmer Benson. All joking aside, Pawley's government was a majority government a distinction the Minnesota Farmer-Labor Party governments never quite achieved since capturing majority control of the Senate was never achieved.

Here is a link to ordering Pawley's book: http://msupress.msu.edu/bookTemplate.php?bookID=4250

All too often U.S. progressives think there is nothing to learn from our northern neighbors. I can assure you we have much to learn from our northern neighbors when it comes to politics and if you read this book by Howard Pawley you will quickly find out a lot of what we have missed. Personally, I lived in Manitoba as the Pawley government fell because of a traitor inside of the NDP and I saw and experienced the sharp contrast in quality of life going from the most progressive government in North America to what was most definitely one of the most reactionary governments in North America. What we do in politics most definitely determines the quality of life working people have. Please, do yourself a favor and those you are politically engaged with a favor, by reading this most important book, "Keep True." For any political activist the purchase of this book will be the best money you have ever spent.

I also want to share with you an alternative to Obama's Wall Street agenda. This comes from my meetings and conversations with working people across Minnesota, Wisconsin and Michigan--- dozens of discussions in union halls, hundreds of meeting around kitchen tables and in living rooms and from conversations I have had with people after speaking at demonstrations, vigils and on picket-lines and at various protests...

The most important question, in my opinion, that we need to be asking people is:

"How is Barack Obama's Wall Street war economy working for you?"

After asking this question, we need to offer up some real alternatives like this:

A program for real change...

* Peace--- end the wars in Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya and shutdown the 800 U.S. military bases on foreign soil.

* A National Public Health Care System - ten million new jobs.

* A National Public Child Care System - three to five million new jobs.

* WPA - three million new jobs.

* CCC - two million new jobs.

* Tax the hell out of the rich and cut the military budget by ending the wars to pay for it all which will create full employment.

* Enforce Affirmative Action; end discrimination.

* Raise the minimum wage to a real living wage

* What tax-payers subsidize in the way of businesses, tax-payers should own and reap the profits from.

* Moratorium on home foreclosures and evictions.

* Defend democracy by defending workers' rights including the right to collective bargaining for improving the lives and livelihoods of working people.

* Roll-back and freeze the price of food, electricity, gas and heating fuels; not wages, benefits or pensions.

* Wall Street is our enemy.

Let's talk about the politics and economics of livelihood for a real change.

Don't forget, Cindy Sheehan talks in the Twin Cities this weekend (tomorrow) and there is a Fighting Bob festival in Wisconsin.

Yours in solidarity and struggle,

Alan L. Maki
(contact info at very bottom)



On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 6:45 PM, greenpartymike wrote:

President of the AFL-CIO warns Democrats, says workers want a more ‘independent’ labor movement
May 20th, 2011 · No Comments
From the Hill (H/T to Third Party and Independent Daily):
   AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka said Friday that workers want an “independent” labor movement designed to help the working class, not a specific party or candidate…
   “Our role is not to build the power of a political party or a candidate. It’s to improve the lives of working families and strengthen our economy, our country…”
   In a question-and-answer session after his speech, the labor leader elaborated on how unions plan to change their political operations for the 2012 election cycle.
   “We are actually redoing our entire political program and the way we do things,” Trumka said. “We will change the way we spend … the way we function in a way that creates power for workers.”
   The AFL-CIO, which spends most of its funds on member education and get-out-the-vote efforts, wants to better coordinate with their affiliated unions that tend to make direct campaign contributions to candidates. In addition, the labor federation wants to mobilize its members year-round to campaign on issues dear to labor, instead of dismantling its political program after every election, which makes it harder to motivate workers when the next election comes around in two years, Trumka said.
   Asked if labor will campaign against Democrats, Trumka responded, “Ask Blanche Lincoln.”

--
Alan L. Maki
Director of Organizing,
Midwest Casino Workers Organizing Council

58891 County Road 13
Warroad, Minnesota 56763

Phone: 218-386-2432
Cell: 651-587-5541

Primary E-mail: amaki000@centurytel.net
E-mail: alan.maki1951mn@gmail.com

Blog: http://thepodunkblog.blogspot.com/

Obama supporters post on my FaceBook "wall" then get offended that I respond.

• 

  Katherine Wernier

  The point of OFAMA is not to provide a platform for LWNJs to troll & bash..there are plenty other opportunities for that online. Go away. BTW the door to Firedog Lake is always open.

  
  

  • • 

      Patrick Frank sorry for engaging...nothing like a prodigal son

      about an hour ago via ·
    • 

      Katherine Wernier That guy was only interested in taking our eye off the work to be done by hurling marxist firebombs. I guess I see this as a workplace:)

      54 minutes ago ·
    • 

      Mary Ellen Palermo Please, get involved and be heard...but never forget to listen as well. We can all learn and have an exchange of ideas without trolling and bashing anyone's ideas. The best way to spread the word is by our knowledge and discussions. Without knowledge, there is no insight.

      52 minutes ago ·
    • 

      Patrick Frank good point. ive just been working for obama for a long time (since senate primary) and it hurts me when people project their dissatisfaction with the country on this one man who is working so hard to play his role in setting
      it right.
• 

  Bernice Nowack

  Yes, I would like to see the war end....but don't blame Obama...he is the best...and what do you have for a Republican Candidate....the worse group I have ever seen.

  
  

  • • 

      Alan L. Maki What do the Republicans have to do with whether or not you vote for Obama or any of the many rotten, worthless Wall Street serving Democrats? In most countries the people vote for politicians and political parties based on what kind of country they want to create. Obama is nothing but a Republican anyways--- and a thoroughly reactionary Republican at that.

      16 hours ago ·
    • 

      Patrick Frank

      speaking as someone who did not have healthcare until the ACA I disagree with your statement. Speaking as someone whose parents lost 50% of their wealth to financial insitutions that can no longer do what they did without over sight...I disagree with your statement. Speaking as someone paying a lower interest rate on his student loans, i disagree with your statement. Obama is most certainly a democrat, and "Obama's wars" include ending combat operations in Iraq which he said he would do, and turning up the pressure on Al Queda which he said he would do. Libya was Obama's Rwanda moment and he choose not to let genocide happen. You must be careful not to lump all politicians together because it makes picking diamonds like Obama out of the rough that much harder.

      5 hours ago ·
    • 

      Alan L. Maki

      Obama is no "diamond" although he might be considered a well-polished fake.
      
      What you fail to mention, Patrick, is that while each of these programs might help you and your family, there are millions of other people hurt by the pieces of legislation that these programs are attached on to.
      
      Apparently you are easily tricked by an unprincipled, crooked and corrupt diamond peddler.
      
      Obama is no "crown jewel."

      4 hours ago ·
    • 

      Patrick Frank since you decided to insult me (easily tricked?) I will answer you with truth. Your argument is weak and unfocused. Make your case with fact then I can respond. I told you SPECIFIC things that I appreciate about Obama's legislative record, complaining about "millions hurt" does not offer any specific criticism. Please make a rational thought clearly, do not insult me...and then we can continue a discussion

      4 hours ago ·
    • 

      Alan L. Maki

      Obama is nothing but a part-time health insurance salesman working for Wall Street posing as a president. There is nothing at all "weak" about my position that while you selfishly tout being "helped" by the "Health Insurance and Pharmaceutical Industry Bail-out and Profit Maximization Act of 2010," millions will be left without healthcare of any kind while millions more will be ripped off, forced to pay expensive premiums.
      
      What is required is a National Public Health Care System; publicly funded, publicly administered and publicly delivered based of the model of VA set up along the lines of public education but financed from funds saved from ending Obama's dirty wars and taxing the hell out of the rich.

      4 hours ago ·
    • 

      Patrick Frank

      ya cause our education system funding is the way to go on healthcare...that way inner cities dont get care and rich neighborhoods would get great care. Look, I'm all for single payer, but doing single payer in one swoop during a job crisis would have exacerbated the economic struggles since the Health Insurance industry is one of this nation's largest employers. You are saying millions without healthcare but the estimates are that by 2014 98% of the country will be covered...where are you getting your statistics? And since when is raising the top tax rate back to Clinton era levels considered "taking the hell out of the rich" Your hyperbole and personal attacks reveal your ignorence.

      4 hours ago ·
    • 

      Alan L. Maki

      You are obviously very dishonest, Patrick. Did you see anything about me saying a National Public Health Care System should be financed the way we fund public schools? In fact, I think our public schools should be funded just like the military is presently funded and the military should be funded through bake good sales and sending the soldiers out selling candy bars and flower seeds door-to-door.
      
      Also, if you would have read what I wrote I am not a big fan of Medicare for All but rather VA for All--- maybe you should check out the difference.
      
      That you acknowledge, but don't care, that there will be at least six-million people without access to health care who are the poorest of the poor says all I need to know about you.

      3 hours ago ·
    • 

      Patrick Frank

      well...what defines you is the fact you came to an obviously pro-obama group just to start a fight... you are right that i extrapolated too much from your comment "set up along the lines of the education system" you were not referring to the funding so that's a fair point. As to the few million that will be without care, that's an issue, but we are already talking about a federal mandate and these are folks that will still find a way not to get healthcare. I don't think I nor anyone in this group wants to stop working on reforming the system until we get everyone. I guess the best way to defuse the craziness of this conversation is to ask you some questions. Forgetting about what you clearly don't want. What do you think Obama COULD have done differently taking into a account the hostility of congress to passing anything?

      3 hours ago ·
    • 

      Alan L. Maki

      First of all for two long years Obama had a majority of Democrats in the House and Senate. Instead of coming forward with a peoples' agenda for real change based upon the reason why voters elected him he should have:
      
      1. Ended the wars instea...See More

      3 hours ago ·
    • 

      Patrick Frank

      Thank you, this is a much better line of argument. You use actual points that can be addressed. I think some of your criticisms are fair, but not all of them. 1. Obama did what he said he would do on Iraq and on Afghanistan. Remember that Obama didnt start Libya, France fired the first shots and we didnt get involved until the UN and the Arab League sanctioned the action. Calling it a "war" is not accurate, we were trying to stop Gaddaffi from liquadating the inhabitants of Benghazi which belong to a different tribe than his, it would have been genocide. 2. Obama said what he said about the wars and healthcare when he was running he never claimed he would push single payer or end the war in afghanistan. He mentioned on many occasionas expanding operations in Pakistan. Your other points are mostly valid though I remind you that 60 senators were needed for everything and that included Ben Nelson, Joe Liberman, and other "blue dog" democrats. I think fair critique of Obama is that he was unwilling to let nothing happen because of a stance on his laurels, he is always willing to comprimse. I appreciate that quality, but I can see how it can annoy some on the left.

      3 hours ago · ·  1 person
    • 

      Patrick Frank

      its clear your problem is not with "Obama" it is with "America" as a
      global hegemony. I think thats a fair point to argue about our military
      bases, but that isn't about an individual politician its about how we see ourselves as a country. Obama is not the President of the 10% of the
      country that is very liberal and progressive. He takes very seriously the
      47% of America that voted against him and tries to pick policies that
      reflect us all. On healthcare Obama has said that if he were starting from scratch he would go single payer, but since running for President he has not once said that was what his plan would be

      about an hour ago via ·
    • 

      Alan L. Maki

      Patrick; Obama has not simply "annoyed" those on the "left." He has "annoyed" liberals and progressives, too. We are not "annoyed" with Obama without reason or for any minor concerns. In fact, Obama and the Democrats are attacking the standard of living of ALL working people the overwhelming majority of whom consider themselves liberal, progressive or left.
      
      In fact, Obama DID state his support for single-payer universal health care many, many times--- over and over again as he sought the Democratic Party's nomination. Here is the indisputable proof:
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fpAyan1fXCE
      
      In fact, it was Obama who led the effort to re-elect Joe Lieberman when had the desire of Democrats for an alternative in the Democratic Primary stood, a very progressive Democrat for peace and single-payer would have been elected to the U.S. Senate.
      
      The war in Iraq is not ending; in fact, the costly 100 year occupation of Iraq favored by McCain is just beginning--- both Puerto Rico and the Philippines have been occupied by the United States for over 100 years as a result of similar wars. There is the 60 year occupation of South Korea, too along with more than 800 U.S. military bases on foreign soil not to mention a huge presence of our naval fleet on all the oceans of the world.
      
      You know, and I know--- we both know that Barack Obama never would have been elected president of the United States had he campaigned on the basis that he was going to do what he has done.
      
      You may come back with "all politicians do this." However, this argument holds no water because Obama led people to believe he was going to be a different kind of politician not beholden to the interests of the wealthy elite. Obama is nothing but a flim-flam man and con-artist--- that he is a master of his "craft" in no way alleviates any of the anguish and suffering he has caused.
      
      You and your Obama supporting friends claim that things would be so much worse with a Republican in the White House and yet you continue to support this loser Obama.
      
      Obviously Obama can no more run for re-election on his "accomplishments" while in office than he could have run had he told the American people what he would really be doing once elected.
      
      Come on; really. Do you really believe that a president engaged in fighting three wars; soaring food prices and the robbery at the gas pumps couple with rising prices for home heating fuels combined with massive and growing unemployment with no end in sight for home foreclosures and evictions is going to be re-elected? With a record like this Obama couldn't even be elected dog-catcher in Chicago even if every dead person voted for him.
      
      Obama has instituted austerity measures here at home to pay for his dirty wars abroad and this is surely not going to be popular among the American people who in their majority have indicated in one way or another--- more often than not in numerous ways--- that they want no part of these dirty imperialist wars.
      
      "Compromise," you say.
      
      Since when is a "compromise" with injustice a human quality that should be looked upon with fondness?
      
      It was just such a "compromise" with injustice that led Abe Lincoln to go crazy as he "compromised" away the lives of 38 Dakota warriors whose only crimes were defending their Nation, their homes and their families--- from the time Lincoln ordered 38 Dakotas, instead of over 200 to hang as part of a political "compromise" in 1862.
      
      Lincoln was perhaps fortunate he was assassinated less than 3 years later because he might have been the first president to "retire" from office living out his life in a mental institution.
      
      Of course, unlike Obama, Lincoln had a conscience; Obama has no conscience as is evidenced by his order to murder Osama bin Laden without so much as a trial--- a president touting savage and barbaric revenge then calling it justice is never going to be re-elected in a country known and respected for being based upon law.
      
      Obama has to go; Obama should be either forced out of the race or primaried by liberals, progressives and leftists. Failing this, Obama should face a challenge in the General Election from a ticket for peace, social and economic justice.
      
      You and your Obama loving friends most definitely have the right to continue supporting the worst president in U.S. history; but, beware; should a Republican end up in the White House you will only have yourselves to blame.
      
      Sometimes I wonder if the Republicans haven't hired the lot of you to continue backing this loser: Obama.

      about an hour ago ·
    • 

      Patrick Frank Well it still sounds like your problem is with America, not with Obama. But I will address a few of your specific complaints. First your healthcare youtube video is bunk. Here is the politifact research into it http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2009/jul/16/barack-obama/obama-statements-single-payer-have-changed-bit/. Basically, as a State Senator Obama supported single payer, and he at no point has retracted that support. but as a Presidential Candidate he was always clear that was not going to be a possible solution given the context in which reform might take place. Your video does nothing but explain the point I already made, that he's in support of single payer but its not feasible. As for Iraq, combat operations in Iraq have stopped, 100,000 troops have been taken out. Per our treaty with the SOVEREIGN government of Iraq, we have left a few bases open to help the new government stabilize, Obama has been clear, if the Iraqi people ask America to leave, they will. But your points go wildly off track, asking Obama to withdraw trrops from South Korea and the rest of the world. Their are plenty of politicians (Kucinich, Ron Paul) who would agree with your point of view. American democracy has marginalized those viewpoints because that is not the will of the majority of the country. You can criticize the position America takes on foreign intervention but Barack Obama has done what he said he would do, and I'm sorry if that vision isn't the one you were looking for, thats why we have elections and I encourage you to display your dissatisfaction in the coalition part of the election better known as the primary. Your arguements remind me of a favorite story of mine. Labor leaders helped re-elect FDR for a second term even though he was on shaky political ground. So they sat him down and said we want A, B, C done now. FDR said, those sound great, now go make me do it. If you want American troops completely out of the world's business, and for single payer healthcare, than Obama won't stand in your way, but you have to make it happen. He is not a President who will make decrees and unilaterally turn away from 100 years of American foreign policy only to lose a re-election to Mitt Romney and watch it all be re-instated. His focus has been on reform that he has enough capital to pass, and frankly compared to the record of Bill Clinton, I think he is doing very well. I understand you like so many others saw him as an avatar for whatever you believe in, but he's not. He is a very specific individual that is upfront about his policy and always explains himself eloquently. You cannot pin a total transformation of domestic and foreign policy on one individual like that, its not going to happen.

      about an hour ago ·
    • 

      Alan L. Maki Again you insinuate I backed Obama at some point. Read my blog; I never supported, backed him nor voted for him because I recognized him for the Elmer gantry that he was, is and always will be.
      
      As for your so-called "fact check" regarding the YouTube video. This video was used by a number of organizations, groups and individuals including the "Progressives for Obama." In fact, I received the link to this YouTube video from one of the primary organizers of the "Progressives for Obama" after I gave a speech stating that there was no evidence suggesting Barack Obama supported single-payer universal health care. In fact, when I requested that the Obama campaign state publicly that Obama was not for single-payer they refused to do so. I gave the Obama campaign the opportunity to publicly state exactly what is stated in this "fact check" you have provided. Obama, being the flim-flam man and con artist he is WANTED this mis-information circulating to deceive liberals, progressives and the left to back him.
      
      No you cry "foul" when this video is once again used.
      
      In fact, the United States has prepared Iraq for what is required for long-term U.S. occupation.
      
      As I said; here is Obama's record--- let him run on it: engaged in fighting three wars; soaring food prices and the robbery at the gas pumps coupled with rising prices for home heating fuels combined with massive and growing unemployment with no end in sight for home foreclosures and evictions.
      
      I dare you to post this most important and vital question for comment right at the top of this FaceBook page:
      
      How is Barack Obama's Wall Street war economy working for you?
      
      Then the "red-baiting" slanderous comment about me: "That guy was only interested in taking our eye off the work to be done by hurling marxist firebombs." Once again proving that dishonest politicians and their supporters always stoop to "red-baiting" when faced with the truth.
      
      A "marxist firebomb;" is that what one calls the hunger pangs of a small child who can't get a free lunch in school because the wealth of the Nation is being squandered away on militarism and wars from which Wall Street's merchants of death and destruction who bank-rolled Obama's campaign reap such lucrative profits from?

FaceBook censorship--- so much for democracy and our right to participate in the political process

 FaceBook has begun blocking 90% of my posts and comments that mention anything in opposition to the Democratic Party and Barack Obama. They even prohibit me from posting things like this as "Notes."

Message Failed
This message contains blocked content that has previously been flagged as abusive or spammy. Let us know if you think this is an error.



Scott, I see the Democratic Party from a different viewpoint. I work with people in the Democratic Party around issues of mutual concern. However, there are very few elected DFL state legislators, no federal, who can be worked with. The majority of the DFL state legislators are bucking even the very mild and liberal reforms articulated by Mark Dayton. Most DFL politicians were campaigning in opposition to Dayton's "tax-the-rich" before he was even elected when they should have been riding his coat-tails supporting this kind of left agenda; it's what Minnesota workers want. Had they done this we would have DFL majorities in the House and Senate. But, then again, Dayton is too weak to fight for his own views and agenda--- demonstrated by his department appointments.

Another example is the excellent "Peace Budget" resolution put together by Representative Bill Hilty and Jack Nelson-Pallmeyer. What is being done with this? While it clearly articulates Mark Dayton's own views as he articulated in his Inaugural Speech and again in his State-of-the-State  Speech he has not mentioned this important resolution:
http://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=10150216481130086

I could cite many other issues that are so basic to solving the problems of working people, women and the nationally and racially oppressed and young people where the MNDFL either does nothing or takes the wrong positions.

A case in point is the wild rice/pollution issue. Here we have DFL'er Tom Bakk, the minority leader in the MN Senate taking the position that MORE pollution should be tolerated that will kill the wild rice. The DFL has just blocked out the voices of this legislation's opponents.

The DFL has earned the right to be challenged. Here we are with a myriad of social and economic problems and the DFL couldn't adequately respond to the concerns and needs of working people with a platform to solve the problems and if that isn't bad enough they move in mass to the right towards the business interests.

I won't vote for Obama; I voted for one Democrat in the 2010 Election--- Mark Dayton. I only voted for him because he came begging for my support and we made a deal. We kept up our part of the deal; Dayton has reneged on his part.

I tell people if the Democrats are tending to your needs and concerns then you should stick with them. Why vote against what works for you, right? Well, why should those of us for whom the Democrats are not only not giving us their ear, they join with business interests in hurting us continue voting for them? Kind of like slitting one's own throat.

It makes no sense to continue supporting party that runs over 200 candidates for state and federal offices and out of this number there are at most four or five that can be relied on to defend the interests of working people.

The MN DFL has returned full circle to its old corrupt roots--- unfortunately big-business serving bigots like Leroy Stumpf are the rule rather than the exception in today's DFL.

The DFL leadership controlled by big-business and the AIPAC lobby wouldn't even tolerate discussing resolutions on Affirmative Action or divesting from Israel.

We need a new party built around the principles and a similar platform like the original Minnesota Farmer-Labor Party.

To think that it is possible for working people to even have a voice let alone any role in the decision-making process in the MNDFL is very naive... but, isn't this the way Hubert H. Humphrey intended it to be?

And Chris; the working class hasn't exhausted electoral participation and struggle and probably never will. The proof in this is the first thing people do when they have problem is go to their elected officials--- the thing to learn is that in order to get a hearing we need to have working people in these positions.

In my opinion one of the best things workers still in the streets could do is run full slates of candidates behind a common platform for every single office on an alternative third party ticket while continuing the demonstrations in the streets.

I can understand organized calls not to vote for Democrats to punish them; but not abstaining from participating in the electoral process. Where there has been this kind of involvement working people have made considerable progress.

Minnesota Democrats and Republicans working together to kill people and wild rice

by Alan L. Maki 

Minnesota Democrats are working with Republicans to push legislation resulting in more pollution from sulfide mining. Everything that hurts or harms people and the environment is hidden behind "jobs, jobs, jobs."

With all the talk by politicians about about how everything they do is about creating jobs, I wonder why there is so much unemployment and poverty in Minnesota?

And with the few jobs that are actually created, Affirmative Action isn't even enforced.

Over one-hundred years of mining has left us with poverty, pits and pollution... the wealth leaves with the outside owners of the mining operations who stuff their pockets and couldn't care less what kind of environmental, health, social and economic mess they leave behind. Once again, a few profit and everyone else suffers.

Racist Democratic Minnesota State Senator Tom Bakk whose campaigns are bankrolled by the Minnesota Indian Gaming Association and the mining companies is the ring-leader of this push to introduce destructive sulfide mining in Minnesota.