http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091128/ap_on_el_se/us_nader_senate

Nader noncommittal to Conn. Senate run

By SUSAN HAIGH, AP Political Writer Susan Haigh, Ap Political Writer 58 mins ago

WEST HARTFORD, Conn. – Consumer activist and Connecticut native Ralph Nader said Friday he is “absorbing” the reaction he’s receiving about a possible bid for the U.S. Senate, saying he wants to first gauge the level of grassroots support before making a decision.

Many people have called on Nader to jump into the hotly contested race to challenge Democratic Sen. Chris Dodd, who has been struggling in recent polls. Nader said he’s getting increasingly more requests from Connecticut Green Party members, independents and supporters of Ned Lamont, the upstart Democrat who challenged Sen. Joe Lieberman in the 2006 election.

“I’m just absorbing a lot of the feedback before I make a decision,” said Nader, who appeared at the Noah Webster Library in West Hartford, where he was signing his new book, “Only the Super-Rich Can Save Us!”

More than 100 people turned out to hear Nader talk about his book, including some Green Party members who held signs that read, “Run Ralph Run!” The state’s Green Party has been stepping up efforts to encourage Nader to get into the race, saying this marks one of the best opportunities for the Greens to win a U.S. Senate seat.

Some Democrats accused Nader of being a spoiler in the 2000 presidential election when he ran as the Green Party’s candidate and got 2.7 percent of the vote. Republican George W. Bush won the electoral vote that year, defeating the Democrat, former Vice President Al Gore.

This time around, supporters look to 75-year-old Nader as the person who can reform government and hold the banking industry accountable. Dodd has come under criticism for his role in the national financial crisis as chairman of the Senate Banking Committee. A recent Quinnipiac University Poll showed 54 percent of voters disapprove of the job that he’s been doing in Washington.

Nader said he wants to determine whether voters are truly dissatisfied with Dodd and whether there are enough willing to work throughout Connecticut’s 169 towns “for a new breed of political representation in Washington.”

“It really depends on what kind of momentum there is and how many people are willing to roll up their sleeves because I’m very accustomed to people saying ‘run Ralph run’ and then they drift away, predisposed and preoccupied with their daily life,” he told reporters. “It has to be bottom up.”

Nader said Dodd is “very personable” and shouldn’t be written off. He also warned against speculation that Connecticut’s senior senator might be urged by national Democrats not to run for re-election. But he said Dodd “has been very concessionary to the banks and the brokerage houses for years.”

Dodd’s campaign and the state Democrats have declined to comment on a possible Nader candidacy.

When Vic Lancia of Portland made it to the front of the line Friday so Nader could sign his book, he told his hero that he would be willing to help out with a Senate campaign.

“I’m retired, Ralph. I’ve got good legs to go to work for you,” Lancia told Nader, who just nodded and smiled. “Give me something to do next year Ralph.”

Tim McKee, a spokesman for the Connecticut Green Party, said the party is committed to proving to Nader there will be support, both volunteers and financial contributors. He said he’s pleased to see that people not associated with the party already have begun Internet pages on social networking sites, such as Facebook, urging Nader to run.

“We’re getting responses all across the nation. It’s on all the blogs and stuff,” McKee said. “They want him to run to win. That’s the most important thing. This is not symbolic or anything like that. It’s a run to win kind of effort.”

Copyright © 2009 Yahoo! Inc. All rights reserved.

, November 18, 2009 • 2:00 PM )

Greens pushing Nader for Senate

posted by Gregory B. Hladky

The idea of Connecticut’s Ralph Nader running for a U.S. Senate seat in his home state next year seems to be gaining traction, at least with the Connecticut Green Party.

It’s not a prospect that is likely to bring smiles to the faces of Democratic incumbent Chris Dodd or his fans, but it might make some Connecticut Republicans go all warm and cuddly.

Green Party spokesman Tim McKee isn’t at all worried about Nader acting as a spoiler in 2010.

“Right now we’re feeling this is a lost seat,” McKee said. He said Connecticut polls show that voters in this state “are just sick of Dodd” and that those same surveys show two GOP candidates ahead of the incumbent.

“We are serious about Nader running to win,” McKee said, adding he believes Nader can easily raise the $3-5 million he would need for a legitimate U.S. Senate campaign in Connecticut.

McKee said many voters probably thought having Nader as a president was “kind of far out, but they can see him as a U.S. senator.”

The possibility of a Nader run for Dodd’s seat was first suggested last April in an editorial in Manchester’s Journal-Inquirer. The concept resurfaced last week on a couple of Internet news websites and it’s set the blogosphere abuzz.

McKee said his group has seen “hundreds of responses urging him to run.”

“With Dodd losing in many polls to the Republicans who have announced, we think Nader could be a clear choice to many who have lost faith in Dodd and and his scandals with the banking and financial industries,” McKee said.

“Nader is America’s Public Citizen Number 1!” said Mike DeRosa, a co-chairman of the state’s Green Party. “We just want to know when to start gathering signatures for the petitions.”

Some people are still blaming Nader’s 2000 presidential run for costing Democrat Al Gore the election. (What most Nader-blamers fail to remember is that Gore lost his home state of Tennessee to George W. Bush in that election. Had Gore won his home state, he would have easily won the election regardless of the votes Nader got.)

Nader, 75, apparently hasn’t ruled out the possibility of a run. He’s currently on a book tour to promote his book, “Only the Super-Rich Can Save Us.”

McKee said Nader, a Winsted native, is scheduled to appear at the West Hartford Library the day after Thanksgiving and Green Party officials plan to be there to urge him to get in the race.

Dodd’s poll numbers have been abysmal. He’s being challenged within his own party by political newcomer Merrick Alpert, and by several Republicans, including former U.S. Rep. Rob Simmons; former World Wrestling Entertainment exec Linda McMahon; former U.S. Ambassador to Ireland Tom Foley; and Peter Schiff, a well-known investor from Fairfield County.

Mother Turned Activist

By Matt Kiernan and Melissa Traynor

Peace and social justice activist Cindy Sheehan, mother of slain U.S. Army Specialist Casey Sheehan, spoke Monday about her path since his death and the impact of individuals against war.

“I know for sure that if I don’t try to make a difference, I won’t make a difference,” said Sheehan.

Her son Casey was killed in action in Sadr City Baghdad in the Iraq War on April 4, 2004. Her grief was expounded by the fact that he was fighting and killed in a war that she did not agree with.

A few weeks later, after she saw former President George W. Bush on television, proclaiming that troops were dying for a noble cause, it inspired Sheehan to take action.

“I used to promise him, ‘you’ll never go to war,’” Sheehan said.

She decided to go to Crawford, Texas, where Bush’s vacation ranch was located, and sit outside his home with six others and established her station as “Camp Casey” in order to protest and demand that she get an appointment with the President. She wanted to know exactly which noble cause he had spoken of earlier.

“He’s our employee and we need to give him a performance evaluation,” Sheehan recalled thinking.

She didn’t know that sitting in the middle of a road with lawn chairs, an ice chest full of water and one flashlight would prompt thousands of people across America to join her.

“We never know when some single, simple act will turn into something big,” said Sheehan.

Her inboxes filled with thousands of e-mails from supporters and 15,000 people later, Sheehan was looking at a huge demonstration.

She felt that she needed to make her son’s death mean something and make an attempt at saving other people’s lives.

“I haven’t made the difference I want to make yet, though,” said Sheehan in reference to her wanting all troops to be pulled out of Afghanistan and Iraq.

Movement Rolls On

With the last five years behind her, when Sheehan grieved for her son, protested and ran for Speaker of the House, Sheehan is evaluating the current situation and what can be done for the future.

A panel discussion of five, including Sheehan and moderated by former Connecticut State Legislature representative William Dyson, was held Monday to discuss that status of the anti-war movement in America. Panelists from around CCSU and the community remarked on the languishing morale of the troops, motivation of anti-war activists and their own firm beliefs against the war in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Jeff Bartos, a former U.S. Army Sergeant and current CCSU student, said the way in which the Iraq and Afghanistan wars are being fought is cowardly.

“You want to talk about courage?” Bartos asked. “It’s not courageous for people to walk around in a country you don’t belong in with full armor, weapons and armored vehicles and telling people ‘we are here to liberate you from yourselves.’”

Much of the discussion was centered upon existing problems with the anti-war movement and the drawn-out Sheehan pointed out that here have been no major anti-war demonstrations on Washington since President Barack Obama’s election. She said when Democrats began rallying for Obama, the anti-war movement ended.

Sheehan said the elected Democrats aren’t carrying out what they were put in office to do and accused them of ignoring their base.

Bartos added that the situation of the troops only exacerbates the problem.

“I’d say morale is at a pretty low point in the U.S. military,” Bartos said. Other criticisms of the U.S. military’s handling of troops and returned veterans include lack of treatment for post-traumatic stress disorder and other psychiatric problems.

Sheehan also said that the mainstream media now label anti-war activists with what she calls “dangerous rhetoric.” She said that the media are now beginning to call on sources that suggest a loss for the United States in Afghanistan and Iraq would be due to Americans’ lack of support, or blaming activists.

“We’re already starting to be painted with this brush of failure,” Sheehan said, and added that Americans against the war who speak out are labeled as “radicals.”

Looking for ways to improve turnout and effectiveness of anti-war demonstrations and grassroots organizations, Marissa Janczewska, a CCSU student and leader at the campus’ Youth for Socialist Action spoke on behalf of students.

She made comparisons to the movements to end the Vietnam War, when she said student protest were influential enough to help end the war. She cited the Kent State incident during which four students were shot and killed by the Ohio National Guard. Janczewska said that universities across America responded.

“After Kent, schools shut down and became anti-war machines,” Janczewska said.

CCSU political science professor Ghassan E. El-Eid recommended that student educate themselves and “become activists for knowledge.”

Panelists also discussed the impact of an apathetic population who will be difficult to move and motivate. Sheehan and El-Eid affirmed that the United States is a sleeping giant, relatively unaffected by the wars. They argued that in order to stimulate people into action, a measure similar to the draft installed in the war against Vietnam in the late 1960s. By avoiding a draft, which in turn would provoke public outrage, they believe, American leaders could further wars without direct objection by the people.

Panelist Stephen Vincent Kobasa, journalist and political activist, said that one of the misconceptions about the anti-war movement is that people initially believe the war is wrong, which is not true. He argues that even if they reached the mutual consensus against the war, it doesn’t mean they have the power to change it.

“Prodding people into a shared sense of brotherhood and sisterhood is difficult,” he said.

GREEN PARTY OF CONNECTICUT

 News Release- November 17, 2009- for immediate release   

CONTACT; Tim McKee, Spokesperson and National Committee member, cell (860) 860-778-1304, (860) 505-8454.  Email: thebiggreenpicture@gmail.com

CT GREENS WOULD WELCOME NADER RUN FOR SENATE

Green Party of Connecticut officials announced today that they would welcome Ralph Nader into the 2010 race for U. S. Senate and think he would have a good chance to win against current Senator Dodd.

“Since the media reports began in local and national web sites last week, we have seen hundreds of responses urging him to run.” said Green Party spokesperson Tim McKee.  He added “With Dodd losing in many polls to the  Republicans who have announced,  we think Nader could be a clear choice to many who have lost faith in Dodd and his scandals with the banking and financial industries.  To win, Nader would have to raise $3-5 million, which he has done easily in past campaigns and build an army of hundreds of volunteers for the race.”

State Co Chair Steve Fournier said “We have worked well with Nader and he knows the local Greens very well. We are very excited and can supply him with many workers if he chooses to run.”

Mike DeRosa, also a State Co Chair said “Nader is America’s Public Citizen Number 1! We just want to know when to start gathering the signatures for the petitions.”

-30-

Keith C. Burris: Nader has best hope to unseat senator

By Keith C. Burris

For The Norwich Bulletin

Posted Apr 17, 2009 @ 11:54 PM

Ashford, Conn. —

A lot of Connecticut is angry at, and about, Chris Dodd. Suddenly everyone has discovered Dodd hasn’t really done that much and he’s a corporate Democrat. For years he has gotten a free pass. No more.

Maybe.

If former U.S. Reps. Chris Shays or Nancy Johnson had been as tight with the interests they were supposed to regulate in Congress, it would have been a minor scandal. But Dodd was the friend of Wall Street and of banks when he was he was supposed to be a major watchdog of same in the Senate. And no one minded — until now.

The Glass-Steagall Act of 1933 separated commercial and investment banking. Guess who engineered its repeal? Dodd’s explanation for that foul deed, now that the entire banking system has collapsed, is that he didn’t mean to.

Officially, Dodd blames the regulators. But they did not repeal the regulation. He did.

Dodd’s poll numbers reflect not only the financial crisis, but his own bad faith. Dodd always has said what he says now. He believes in regulation. But he did the opposite of what he said he believed. His bipolarity has caught up with him. People will stomach a zealot or a fool. But not a phony.

Will this be enough to unseat Dodd after all these years?

Who can do it

At least three Republicans, so far, think so. But for a Republican to beat Dodd in 2010 in this state is an uphill slog, even if Dodd gets another pal to buy him another house in another foreign land. (There is none lovelier than Ireland.)

How about a fellow Democrat? Dodd would seem ripe for a Democratic primary challenge.

The problem: There’s the lack of Democrats in this state with a certain kind of fortitude.

But there is one once and perhaps future Democrat who has the knowledge and the courage, and could give this state a hell of a race in 2010. His name is Ralph Nader.

There is no one in this nation who is more anti-corporate, who knows more about antitrust and regulatory dismantling, and surer of his own mind and quicker on his feet. And he is a Connecticut voter; has been all his life.

So come back to Connecticut, Ralph. Be the Upton Sinclair of our day. Put the premier issue of the day before the state and the nation. Who owns the country? Who makes the rules? What is the public’s money for?

Nader can run against the two parties acting as mere shills for special interests. And he might awaken some critical thought and conscience in the Democratic Party.

Run, Ralph, run. Run on the issue of economic power. Create a genuine debate.

Keith C. Burris is editorial page editor of the Journal Inquirer in Manchester.

GREEN PARTY OF THE UNITED STATES
http://www.gp.org

For Immediate Release:
Monday, November 16, 2009

Contacts:
Scott McLarty, Media Coordinator, 202-518-5624, cell 202-904-7614, mclarty@greens.org
Starlene Rankin, Media Coordinator, 916-995-3805, starlene@gp.org

Greens blast the anti-choice Stupak Amendment in the Democrats’ health care bill, predict voter anger and defections from the Democratic Party over the amendment

• Green Party Speakers Bureau: Greens available to speak on women’s rights: http://www.gp.org/speakers/speakers-womens-rights.php / on health care reform: http://www.gp.org/speakers/speakers-health-care.php

WASHINGTON, DC — Green Party leaders today called the Stupak Amendment in the recently passed US House bill on health care reform a disaster for women’s reproductive rights and a betrayal of the Democrats’ stated support for women’s rights and well-being.

Many Greens foresee growing anger among Democratic voters, especially women, and possible defections from the Democratic Party over the amendment.

The Stupak Amendment to HR 3962 states that any health care plan purchased with any federal subsidy cannot cover abortion services, even with private funds, and prohibits the public plan from covering abortion care.  The amendment will make it more difficult and expensive for anyone to purchase a plan with abortion coverage and discourages insurers and employers who provide health care benefits from affording such coverage.

The Green Party has criticized the Democrats’ health care proposal because it leaves the insurance and pharmaceutical industries in control of health care and fails to provide universal coverage: see “Greens urge defeat of the Democrats’ ‘insurance industry life-support’ bill in the US Senate and call for a rally of efforts to enact Single-Payer/Medicare For All,” press release, November 10 (http://www.gp.org/press/pr-national.php?ID=262).

The Green Party supports full reproductive rights, including uncompromised access to abortion services for women (http://www.gp.org/platform/2004/socjustice.html#998980 / http://www.gp.org/platform/2004/socjustice.html#1012830).

“Michigan Greens targeted Bart Stupak’s District One seat in Congress with the candidacy of Jean Treacy, who challenged his opposition to women’s rights, including the freedom to choose.  The Stupak Amendment is the sharpest blow against poor women and their rights since the Hyde Amendment.  It was proposed by a Democrat and passed by a Democratic Congress.  We challenge feminists, feminist and progressive organizations, and all Americans who support rights and equality for women to stop supporting candidates who retreat from these principles, and to vote Green instead,” said Candace Caveny, Green candidate for the US House in Michigan’s 10th District (http://www.candacecaveny.org) in 2010.

Greens called the Stupak Amendment a direct consequence of a public debate on health care reform that has been mostly limited to Republican ‘no reform’ versus Democratic ‘faux reform.’

“It’s urgent that advocates of universal health care and women’s rights push harder now for Single-Payer,” said Morgen D’Arc, co-founder and spokesperson for the National Women’s Caucus of the Green Party.  “If the Senate version of HR 3962 gets passed with the loss of abortion coverage for women, Americans will soon realize that, along with this serious downgrade in coverage for women, the bill offers only minimal reform overall and creates new financial burdens for many while channeling more taxpayer money into insurance companies’ already bloated profit margins.  Poor women and women of color are the least likely to be helped by the House Democrats’ plan and the most likely to suffer under the Stupak Amendment.  Unless advocates for Single-Payer reject the Democratic Party bill and continue to fight for real universal health care, the resulting frustration and disappointment among millions of Americans will lead to more power for anti-women
Republicans and Democrats.”

“I reregistered Green many years ago because Democratic Party leaders made too many compromises on reproductive rights. Greens believe reproductive rights are non-negotiable.” said Marnie Glickman, member of the party’s National Women’s Caucus and a former national co-chair of the party.  “Feminism is one of the Green Party’s key values.  Until Greens gain seats in Congress and state legislatures and we end two-party control, women’s rights face compromise and repeal.”

MORE INFORMATION

Green Party of the United States http://www.gp.org
202-319-7191, 866-41GREEN
• Green candidate database and campaign information: http://www.gp.org/elections.shtml
• Green Party News Center http://www.gp.org/newscenter.shtml
• Green Party Speakers Bureau http://www.gp.org/speakers
• Green Party ballot access page http://www.gp.org/2008-elections
• Green Party Livestream Channel http://www.livestream.com/greenpartyus

“Face it: The Democratic Party is not for women”
By Kate Harding, Salon.com, November 10, 2009
http://www.salon.com/life/broadsheet/feature/2009/11/10/stupak_stupidity

“Health Reform: Implications for Women’s Access to Coverage and Care”
Kaiser Family Foundation, October 2009
http://www.kff.org/womenshealth/upload/7987.pdf

Green Pages: The official publication of record of the Green Party of the United States
Fall 2009 issue now online
http://gp.org/greenpages-blog

~ END ~