As an independent candidate for the Vermont Senate, I can attest to the small-time corruption of Vermont politics that has been going on ever since Vermont joined the Empire in 1791. Ever since then, we have been less of a state, than a resource colony. Montpelier presides over a $1.2 billion/year tax-free give-away of our natural resources (mineral, groundwater, surface water, broadcast spectrum) to major corporations. And THAT is what the political machine are afraid of exposing, when they use the police as their personal political officers.

Vermont’s pro-rata share of the Empire’s military budget is $1.2 billion per year, and when confronted with this, the best answer the Democrat candidates can give, is that they are ‘Proud to be American’. Why don’t they go personally lead the troops into skirmishes against occupied peoples?

They should get OUT of Montpelier so that folks who are loyal to Vermont can work on energy independence, transition to post-peak-oil, local food production and distribution, as well as removing the legal barriers to all of the above.

Vermont Independence is an important possibility to keep on the table so at least people will know, why they are being kept down, why the budget is asking them to do without, why public transport is being scaled back… the list is long, but it adds up to the conclusion that the Democrats have broken the social contract with Vermonters so that Wall Street, AIG, Goldman Sachs, General Dynamics, Nestle & Coca Cola might continue to do well. The Democrats have no moral right to be in these debates, as they have nothing to say that might be of relevance to the lives of Vermonters today.

Defining Greens by their choice in the 2004 Presidential race is grossly oversimplifying things.

“You have some who actually want the GP to run no-one, anywhere at any time (seriously, the NOTA crowd)”

There are a few Greens who didn’t want to run a Presidential candidate in 2004 that see the Green Party as more of an activist group than a political party. I disagree with them, but I have much more respect for them and their activism than those who want the Green Party to be a left discussion circle.

There were other Greens who favored NOTA in 2004 who wanted to focus on other elections. They are not the enemy. I have a great deal of respect for Jill Stein, who didn’t want to run a Presidential candidate. Her runs for statewide office helped get us ballot access in Massachusetts in 2002 and 2006. She’s running again this year.

“some who want to run only in safe states, safe districts (the David Cobb crowd who remained after the Cobb farce became aparent)”

Another oversimplification. There were some Cobb supporters who got too close to the Democrats. There were others who supported safe states only for the 2004 Presidential race. Many other Greens supported Cobb in spite of safe states, not because of it. Cobb ended up campaigning in swing states after the convention anyway.

I don’t fit into your neat little categories either. I supported Cobb in 2004 and put a great deal of energy into getting McKinney on the ballot in 2008 in one of the states most heavily targeted by the Obama campaign.

“and those whose main message is, in essense
Fuck em all, the entire two party system is corrupt to it’s very core so run against the entire system itself (mainly the Nader folks along with McKinney supporters like myself, Elaine Brown supporters and others)”

The Nader supporters are not monolithic. Those who put the party before Nader are still with us. They continue to make valuable contributions to the Green Party. There was another faction (the Destructo-Greens) who were obsessed with retribution against Cobb supporters. They were very disruptive on the National Committee during the last election cycle and caused a lot of damage before they lef the party.

“Which group was targeted in what can only be discribed as a deliberate and systematic campaign of attack and remove?”

The Destructo-Greens cooked their own goose. They engaged in a series of attacks on other National Committee delegates on our listservs that were in violation of Proposal 186. As a result, they ended up on moderation. Some of them resigned when they realized that they could no longer disrupt our listservs. Others were voted out fair and square by their state parties.

“It goes to the heart and soul as to why I am committed to exposing the Greens just as much as I am committed to exposing the rotten corrupt two party system..”

No, it’s because you can’t build an alternative to the Greens and you have a one-track hate-mind.

[and I am under no illusion that Boss Ross or 'Grumpy Ole Man' are perfect ........ or that Corn Cobb and Patricia LaMarshe do not have good points ----- some where!]

This is a statement we are likely to hear more and more often in videos of this sort.

Just no Shirley Temple Lolly Pops.

We should give credit whre credit is due.

David Cobb and Michael Badnarik both helped create the momentum that opened up the issue of voter fraud in Ohio and elsewhere in 2004. After all Ralph Nader was not even allowed on the ballot in Ohio that year. These are simple facts and realities.

I am putting on my PLASma deflector before I say this next piece. In fact when Cobb and Badrarik worked together, it showed some merit to the PLAS plan espoused (endlessly and not productively) by some here (OK PLASma deflectors on at full strength) <>

However having said that we should also point out the David Cobb had his own “don’t vote for me” schtick with the safe states strategy. Which he was not honest about when he sought the GP nomination. He did not let that little cat out of the bag until AFTER.

I still thank Mr David Cobb and his cohorts. They showed myelf and countless others just how rotten, sneaky and corrupt the National GP are.

To put my “gripes” and “spleeen venting” of the GP into context.

You have some who actually want the GP to run no-one, anywhere at any time (seriously, the NOTA crowd) some who want to run only in safe states, safe districts (the David Cobb crowd who remained after the Cobb farce became aparent) and those whose main message is, in essense
Fuck em all, the entire two party system is corrupt to it’s very core so run against the entire system itself (mainly the Nader folks along with McKinney supporters like myself, Elaine Brown supporters and others)

Now of these three groupings, which will be most committed to building an actual independent political movement? Who will do the actual work instead of cyber debating and “internal squabbles?”

Which group was targeted in what can only be discribed as a deliberate and systematic campaign of attack and remove?

Which group left the GP and are now building and organizing?

There you have it. The political definitions and realities of the Green party, from a former member and former very active ativist.

If only I knew at the 2004 Milwaukee Convention what I know now.

It goes to the heart and soul as to why I am committed to exposing the Greens just as much as I am committed to exposing the rotten corrupt two party system..

So, carry on.. Building, organizing annd actual, unafraid oposition to the rotten, corrupt, pro-war two party system.

Like we really mean it..

So you are not a flan of my work then?

Oh well, carry on. Building and organizing an actual, honest, open and unafraid opposition to the pro-war, corporate corrupted two party system. Like we really mean it.

It must be tough when you realize your best years are behind you, eh?

Don’t choke on the flan.

Thank you. You are correct.

Apparently, this event in Vermont was broadcast live on tv. I have not had a chance to see if any video could be tracked down.

Back in 2006 when I was still a Green Party Flan, I mean fan I was the Green’s endorsed candidate for US Senate in Minnesota. There was a live televised debate with every other US Senate candidate except myself. I was in the audience and did the same thing. My supporters and myself were psychically ejected from the debate.

The exact same thing happened to Aarron Dixon who was the GP US Senate candidate in Oregon and to another Green candidate for Senate elsewhere in the country.

Good for Steele for exposing this for the sham debate that it is..