Most of you will remember the stir over the Richmond Bridge, Vermont’s first economic stimulus project.  T. Buck Construction, a Maine-based contractor, won the job on a bid that was much lower than the two other proposals submitted by Vermont companies.  

http://greenmountaindaily.com/…

Mainstream media and the blogosphere were abuzz over whether awarding the project to an out-of-state contractor under no obligation to employ predominately Vermonters sent the wrong message when our unemployment rate stands at 7.2 percent.  

Word from folks who have visited the job site is Maine license plates still outnumber those from Vermont.  

Have any GMD’ers been by to check the situation out?

Most importantly, do the journalists who originally reported this story plan to follow-up?  

( – promoted by odum)

There are an estimated 2,000 immigrants working illegally on Vermont’s farms.  Farmers claim they cannot find American workers to meet their staffing needs.

Sen. Leahy again sponsored legislation that would put undocumented agricultural workers on the pathway to becoming U.S. citizens.  See Saturday’s Times Argus:

http://www.timesargus.com/arti…

Today’s Burlington Free Press included a feature on Nancy Sabin.  Sabin, also known as “Mama Nancy,” is apparently a one-woman referral agency for Vermont’s farming community.  See the article at:

http://burlingtonfreepress.com…

This is such a tough issue.  On one hand, the undocumented workers are simply doing what human beings do – provide for themselves and the family.  It’s awfully difficult to harbor ill will towards them for that.  On the other hand, the practice seems blatantly exploitative.

It is especially upsetting to hear Sabin and other advocates say “No American in their right mind would want to work the hours that they work, 60 to 70 hours a week.”  Americans are, in fact, working longer hours and taking less time off than folks in other advanced economies.  We all know people who regularly clock 60-plus-hour work weeks for crappy wages (some of us are probably those people!).  The argument we’re unwilling to work is wrong and frankly offensive to those who bust their asses at work, as well as the thousands of Vermonters currently unemployed.

But, I am very sensitive to what it takes to run a farm.  No doubt, it is a very tough gig that not everyone is cut out for.  And if farmers truly cannot find domestic workers at the wages they’re willing to pay, then why shouldn’t they import labor from elsewhere?

What is the answer to this tricky issue?  Are Mama Nancy and Sen. Leahy simply helping our tough-luck farmers stay afloat?  Or are they allowing them to continually play the victim role by importing cheap labor that may depress wages in the long run?  Is anyone who speaks out in opposition an all-out bigot?

Let’s talk, GMD’ers.  I can’t be the only one ’round here who is conflicted on this.

( – promoted by odum)

We did get sunburned…

but at least it didn’t Ben Stein.

“It was an unusually trying year,” Fogel said in an interview after the commencement ceremony. “There were some ups and downs and those downs entailed some sacrifice and pain that will long be with us; but it was also a year of great achievement.”

No doubt.

Yesterday I watched my son graduate from UVM .We sat in plastic chairs on the soggy grass.

It was a surprisingly chilly spring day yet, much to our surprise, we got quite sunburned.

Governor Douglas naturally spoke. “The population grows old…” droned Jim and with his sales pitch, “…  we need young people”. After congratulating the students and to some extent himself (noting some of his cleverly named state plans and initiatives, some not yet initiated) he pretty much begged the new grads to stay in Vermont .For some audiences he runs the state down, for other crowds he attempts to build it up.

Next up was Howard Dean. He spoke; well, he spoke like Howard Dean. His message quite clearly and not unexpectedly was for the graduates to stay active in politics. (Politics broadly defined as everything from office holding to library committees and zoning boards.) Community. Dean noted the role young voters played in the Obama election and very forcefully said “Don’t blow it, stay involved! ” “Find the common areas of agreement and build on them”, he said.

Best of all (beside the weather, allowing for an outdoor ceremony) was the total lack of Ben Stein.

It was with great dread, a month or two back, that we all thought we would have to listen to Stein’s unique wisdom when he spoke at commencement.Luckily it evolved into a fine day after all, good luck to the graduates.  

http://www.wcax.com/Global/sto…

Now that we’ve passed the 100-day mark of the Obama administration, I wanted to check in with author and comedian Dennis Perrin.  Last summer I interviewed Perrin for Huffington Post just after his new release Savage Mules: The Democrats and Endless War. Despite America’s love affair with Obama, Perrin’s still at it and the timing couldn’t be better.  Despite Obama reinstating military tribunals, preventing more torture photos from being released, and no end in sight for the troops coming home from Iraq and Afghanistan, liberal bloggers and Democratic Party enthusiasts still rah-rah the president’s outrageous policies. Perrin has a lot to say about that, including his latest piece at Huffington Post and a recent blog post about The Nation.

It seems like you’ve taken some heat for your Jon Stewart story. What are they not getting about your post?

Well, I like Jon Stewart. I like “The Daily Show.”  Some people seem to think I was bashing him on purest grounds or something, whether political or comedic.  That wasn’t the case at all.   I understand what Stewart does and who he works for. I used to work for Comedy Central. Of course it wasn’t as big then as it is now.  But it is part of Viacom and it’s part of a larger media conglomerate.  Like any place else in the corporate media, there are some limits and unspoken assumptions about what is consider OK and what is considered taboo.  But I think calling any president – with the exception of George W. Bush – you might get some elite liberals saying ‘Well, you know, I didn’t like Bush either.  But calling him a war criminal is a little extreme.’  I think Bush would be the only I could think of where an American comedian or satirist hosting a major comedy show could call him a war criminal and get away with it.  Truman is loved by both liberals and conservatives.  Stewart was really hitting not only a presidential legend but a towering bipartisan figure.  I don’t know if Stewart really believed going into it whether he thought Truman was a war criminal or if he did think think that, then maybe he should back pedal  because he was going to get a lot of heat.  I don’t know what his thinking was really.  Either way wouldn’t surprise me.  But it just goes to show the limits.  I don’t think Stewart he could have left it unsaid.

Bill Maher said something a little less controversial after I left Politically Incorrect.  A little after 9-11 he said “it’s more cowardly to drop bombs from 30,000 feet than it is to crash a plane.”  Which I think is a rational statement.  Whatever you think of people who crash planes – I don’t think highly of them myself – I thought what Maher and Stewart said was accurate.  I just think it comes down to perceptions and from reading some of these comments at Huffington Post – which are primarily pro-liberal and/or pro-Democratic more or less – there is still an overwhelming majority of people in the U.S. that don’t see [Hiroshima and Nagasaki] as a war crime.  In otherwords, Japan got what it deserved and it saved a million American lives, which nobody can really prove.

It’s interesting to see people so easily defend mass murder six decades later and it unsettles me in a way.  It’s like we’ve advanced and progressed in a lot of ways, but there’s a lot of other ways where we’re right where we were (with American exceptionalism and such).  I don’t think Stewart is challenging American exceptionalism.  I think he makes fun of its excesses and other areas where it’s obviously ridiculous. But when Stewart said Truman is a war criminal, I just think he got to the core of what the system really is and for a corporate financed satirist like Stewart you just can’t make those kinds of insights and keep your job.  He could have gotten away with it without apologizing.  I don’t think it would’ve hurt him terribly. But if he went on and pursued that line of questioning I don’t think he’d stay long in the job.

Stewart’s apology reminded me of the time when John McCain went on “The Daily Show” in 2005. McCain emphatically stated that “Israel doesn’t torture.”  Stewart, who is not afraid to speak his mind, didn’t respond.  That prompted Alison Weir, of If Americans Only Knew, to write an open letter to Stewart explaining there is documentary evidence that Israel tortures Palestinian prisoners.  Your response?

Oh, I mean anyone who follows the issue knows that’s a given.  You even have people like Alan Dershowitz openly defending Israeli torture. He acknowledges Israelis torture because he defends it.  But the thing is with Stewart and Israel, is he actually did a great report during the siege of Gaza.  It got passed around all over the blogosphere.  It was a great piece and quite uncharacteristic.  Because I think it was clear how aggressive and brutal Israel was on this “caged population” and there were Israelis sitting in lawn chairs watching the bombardment.  What also surprised me was a lot of mainstream liberal outlets like Firedoglake and Glenn Greenwald were criticizing Israel and U.S. support of the siege on Gaza and I think that gave an opening.  Many people in the elite press started asking questions  about what Israel is doing to Gaza.  So any time you have media questioning the official truth, that’s where you can find openings in the debate.

In the first Gulf War, there was a real split among American elites whether they should go to war with Saddam to secure Kuwait.  They were all against the invasion of Kuwait, but they were split on what they should do.  Leading up to the war, there were openings to debate the issue, even on national television.  I think that was with the case of Jon Stewart and that great piece.

But I think when you put Israel and torture together, that’s tougher for a comedian to deal with because that gets to the core of something.  Harry Truman being a war criminal is a core thing.  Israeli torture is a core thing.  It’s one thing to make fun of perceived excesses.  It’s another thing to go after core elements and it’s core elements that make up for what creates the excesses.  Stewart at his best is operating on the outer margins to the degree that the corporate media allows those openings to be pursued.

I know people who have worked with Stewart and they all say he’s a great guy, nice, and down-to-earth.  I’m sure of you got him in a bar, had a few drinks, and talked with off the record I’m sure he’s a lot better on this stuff than what you see on television and there’s an obvious reason for that.  What it comes down to, then you have to wonder how much cognitive dissonance can someone ingest before they break?  If they know one thing and can’t express it or have to edit it or tone it down, how long can that go on?

You’ve been tough on Barack Obama since he was nominated in Denver.  Now that we’re past the 100 days mark, what are some of Obama’s major flaws his supporters aren’t seeing or denying?

Well, I took Obama at his word.  There were certain things he said that I didn’t think [he’d follow through] like transparency in government.  I thought “yeah right.”  Anyone who hasn’t been president before promised all kinds of wonderful things when they get in.  But given how the system is set up and where the U.S. is at this moment in history is just not going to happen.  But I took him at his word because as I saw him as the one who’s going to fix the system after eight years of Republican excess.  This is the role Carter and Clinton played after GOP rule.  It’s almost pre-programed in a matrix kind of way.  Of course the advantage Obama has is that he’s African-American.  The cover that would give the U.S. was not unappreciated by media and political elites.  I remember Ted Koppel saying “if Obama gets elected, that’s going to show the world how we changed.”  Of course we haven’t changed and the elites are changing their tactics because they can’t go on with what those same tactics during the Bush years.

Today I was reading some reactions to Obama agreeing to block the torture photos from Afghanistan and Iraq.  Of course people were upset.  But it was like what did you expect?  This happens time and time again with anything Obama does that a lot of liberals don’t like.  It’s like they’re scratching their heads and wondering “where did this come from? This isn’t the guy I voted for.”  Well, I don’t know what you wanted to expect.  There is a change in tone and style.  I mean people were falling all over Obama at the White House Correspondents dinner.  I think the thing is with liberals and Obama is that I don’t believe there will be a significant liberal rebellion or mutiny against Obama.  Not like there was in 1979-1980 when there was a Ted Kennedy challenge to Jimmy Carter.  I mean you do have good critics going after him, like Glenn Greenwald and a handful of others doing great work on this.  But I think overall those who are critical of him come 2010 and 2012, they’ll be all ushered in under the tent to prevent president Romney or a president Palin or a president Joe the Plumber or whoever the hell gets the nomination and we’re right back where we started.  I think Obama knows this because there is no alternative to him from a progressive standpoint.  So he can continue to do what he’s doing, while soft-talking these people and knowing they’re not going to challenge his rule.

Glenn Greenwald reported the Obama administration threatened England to keep torture evidence concealed re: Binham Mohammed and he also reported on Obama’s latest effort to conceal evidence of Bush era crimes.  How is Obama hurting the state of the nation by preventing this information from coming forth?

Well, the official excuse is it’s being hidden from the Muslim world.  But the Muslim world doesn’t need more evidence of American torture and war crimes.  They live it.  This is aimed at preventing American citizens from seeing this stuff.  I don’t think people in Iraq or Afghanistan need more evidence.  How much more do they need?  There’s always going to be that dogged minority searching for the truth but for the mass majority of people if you could keep it out of their minds, it makes sense.  Obama is planning to expand these wars.  He already has.  So he needs public support. If these photos come out, it’s going to get a lot of play,  create a furor, and it’s going to result in damage control and that’s not where Obama wants to be right now, especially with his popularity figures and general lack of dissonance against his presidency.

You’ve expressed some disappointment with The Nation recently. What has The Nation done that’s gotten you so upset?

I’ve been reading The Nation since 1983.  The last great period The Nation had was during the mid to late 1980s.  They were really good back then when it came to the Cold War, Central America, and they were a much more radical magazine back then because Victor Navasky was running it.  Navasky liked to see a lot of different kinds of thought collide from Social Democrats to Marxists.  Katrina vanden Heuvel is just a mainstream liberal elite.  She’s into policy recommendations and I think she’s succeeded in making The Nation a respectable voice in the national debate.  But to be a respectable voice in the national debate, you have to tone down your anger and criticisms.  Since Obama came in, it’s like they’ve became really mystical with him.  They had an editorial about Obama’s first 100 days and they were generally supportive.  But they were worried what Afghanistan would do to Obama’s presidency.  In otherwords, his presidency was more important than Afghanistan or Afghan lives.  So I thought “Ok. This really shows where The Nation’s minds are right now.”  They’ve become a voluntary member of the state press.  I know they wouldn’t see themselves that way but I’ve read a lot of stuff in there where they really sound like they’re in Obama’s pocket.  The other thing is, like a lot of liberals online believe, that if they protest kindly enough, then Obama will listen because he’s got these good minded people pointing him in the right direction.  If they really believe that then they’re really naïve and they should not be running a political magazine in 2009.  If they don’t, then they’re cynical manipulators. Neither one seems appealing or noble to me and I think The Nation has taken a real dive as a result.  They also use to have a lot of great writers and their content has gotten really soft, centrist, and weak.  There are some good writers still.  I’m a big Jeremy Scahill fan.  Once in a while Alexander Cockburn will cough up something interesting from the archives of his mind, but it’s just become this primarily soft, white liberal organ now.

I’ve always encouraged dissidence of any kind within the Democratic Party and I would like to see that.  A lot of people say I’m a cynic, dead-ender, and a nihilist and I’m not.  A lot of things come and go but the system remains and I realize how difficult it is to make in-roads.  There are certain changes that do happen. They’re incremental and they’re important but one has to learn not to settle for that.  I know there are a lot of people out there trying to affect change and I support them.  If there’s anything I can do to help it along, then I do.  I was a big supporter of the Republic Window sit-in.  I would like to see more of that. I would like to see more direct action but I knew early on in the Obama administration that it was just not going to happen.  But I think hopefully as time goes on and he is shown to be who he really is, that will go away and people will get involved in a more direct way.  I’d like to see that and I will support it but I just have serious doubts based on my experience.  But I would like to be proved wrong.

Check out Dennis Perrin at www.dennisperrin.blogspot.com

What do you think?

“I am seriously thinking about running for lieutenant governor,” Nease confirmed Friday. “I believe the lieutenant governor has a unique opportunity to lead, to lead in the kind of efforts that are not gubernatorial, but are important to Vermonters.”

Nease said one example was then Lt. Gov. Howard Dean’s efforts to examine the causes of teen suicide.

“You need to be more than the state’s top cheerleader,” Nease said.

Nease has been the most active (at least openly active) Democratic legislator on this site (and it’s certainly great to be taken seriously). That’s very cool. It would be a shame to lose him in the Legislature, however.

I suspect his prospects (and possibly his decision?) will be mightily impacted by the result of the June 2 special session, and whether or not the budget veto can be overridden.

It’s on!

The same day Doug Racine received coverage in the Free Press regarding his appearance before the Progressive State Committee looking for support in his bid for Governor, Secretary of State Deb Markowitz fires a shot right at Racine, indicating that this primary election, much as many would like to see otherwise, will likely include Dems running straight at each other (emphasis added).

Dear xxx,

Thank you for your service to our Party, and thank you for taking the time to talk to me as I begin to organize a campaign for Governor…

…One of the issues I hear every day, especially from our fellow Democrats, is they are looking for a candidate who will not repeat the mistakes of the past and who has a real shot at winning. I couldn’t agree more. I would not have formed a committee, and begun organizing if I wasn’t confident I could run a campaign capable of defeating any other candidate in the race…

…This is also the time when we start to hear a lot of talk about what the Progressive Party will do.  I think we learned in 2008 that the Progressive party will make its own decisions about whether or not to run a candidate for governor – that is not something we can control.  Our focus has to be on building the strongest, most energetic and idea-oriented campaign possible…

…My leadership style is to welcome everyone to the table to help be a part of the solution – Democrats – Progressives – Independents. Even open minded Republicans.

Racine boosters have been complaining to me that Markowitz has been talking down Racine off the record. Pumping up the “he had his chance” and “he’s unelectable” rumblings. I wasn’t sure how much of that was simply boiler plate election grumbling, but from this letter, it seems clear that this will be part of her strategy from the get-go, as opposed to simply working through a campaign construction phase pretending she has no opponents in September ’10. I mean, one would have to be completely out of it not to see who she is referring to here, especially given the timing. There are no coincidences in politics.

The earliness of this pointed shot by one of the candidates at a rival really surprises me every bit as much as Racine’s appearance before the Prog state committee did. I’ve been in and around Democratic Party politics in this state for some time, and it’s clear we are in uncharted territory at this early date in the cycle.

Looking at this email, as well as the calendar, it’s hard not to think that this is gonna get ugly. Complete letter follows below the fold.

Dear xxx,

Thank you for your service to our Party, and thank you for taking the time to talk to me as I begin to organize a campaign for Governor. I have found these conversations very helpful and would like to continue that dialogue with you and other members of our Party. To that end, this is the first of my monthly emails to State Committee members. My goal is to address the issues and ideas that come up in my campaign and to welcome any feedback or advice you may have. As the new campaign cycle begins to unfold, and we begin to choose our Party’s candidates for elected office, I think these sorts of communication will be important to all of us.

As you know, both through my office and other activities, I speak with hundreds of Vermonters from around the state every month. Based on these conversations I believe we have a real opportunity in 2010. Vermonters from across the political spectrum are voicing serious concern over the direction of our state government – particularly the leadership of the current Governor.  They know our state can do better, and they are eager to hear fresh approaches and new ideas to address the common issues we face.

One of the issues I hear every day, especially from our fellow Democrats, is they are looking for a candidate who will not repeat the mistakes of the past and who has a real shot at winning. I couldn’t agree more. I would not have formed a committee, and begun organizing if I wasn’t confident I could run a campaign capable of defeating any other candidate in the race.

For that reason, in the weeks and months ahead, I am focused on giving Vermonters a clear sense of my vision for our state – and on building a campaign that can withstand whatever comes my way. There may be a Democratic Primary. I welcome that as a sign of the strength of our party and our commitment to electing a new Governor.

As we’ve learned from past campaigns, an early start is essential, as is early fundraising. The current Governor has a long record and deep pockets; I don’t intend to let either go unchallenged.

This is also the time when we start to hear a lot of talk about what the Progressive Party will do.  I think we learned in 2008 that the Progressive party will make its own decisions about whether or not to run a candidate for governor – that is not something we can control.  Our focus has to be on building the strongest, most energetic and idea-oriented campaign possible.

That being said, what we learned in 2009 is that working together the Democrats and Progressives can make history. Think about it:  Marriage Equality would not have passed without the Democrats and Progressives coming together. If there is a chance to over-ride a potential budget veto by the Governor and spare Vermonters further devastating cuts, it will come because Progressives and Democrats work together. And it is my sincere hope that this summer, and into next year, we can work together to make more historic, progressive changes in Vermont government.

Like the rest of the country, Vermont is facing some real challenges – and unless we are all willing to come together we will not be able to move forward.  My leadership style is to welcome everyone to the table to help be a part of the solution – Democrats – Progressives – Independents. Even open minded Republicans. I am hoping that this approach will strengthen the campaign, and of course – it is a necessary approach for leading the state. It is going to take all of us working together to get Vermont back on track.

I know these are issues that many of you feel strongly about, and I look forward to continuing the discussion in the coming weeks and months.

You can contact me at debmarkowitz@gmail.com. Please feel free to contact my staff anytime as well, Jason’s cell phone number is 802-399-7298 (email jason@debforvermont.com). Finally, I hope you’ll also take time to visit my website at www.debforvermont.com.

Look forward to seeing you soon,

Deb

Where does this quotation come from:

Seek the Lord and his strength; seek his face continually. 1 Chron 16:11.

A. Pope Benedict's blessing on the inauguration of Barack Obama.
B. Jerry Falwell's graduation address at Liberty “University”.
C. A daily defense briefing from Donald Rumsfeld to George W. Bush.

If you guessed C, you are correct.

This is part of a slide show of defense briefing cover sheets delivered by Rumsfeld to Bush to keep manipulating him in his conduct of the war in Iraq. GQ magazine has uncovered these cover sheets as part of its coverage of how Donald Rumesfeld's organizational behavior contributed to the Bush Administration's crimes and failures.

On the morning of Thursday, April 10, 2003, Donald Rumsfeld’s Pentagon prepared a top-secret briefing for George W. Bush. This document, known as the Worldwide Intelligence Update, was a daily digest of critical military intelligence so classified that it circulated among only a handful of Pentagon leaders and the president; Rumsfeld himself often delivered it, by hand, to the White House. The briefing’s cover sheet generally featured triumphant, color images from the previous days’ war efforts: On this particular morning, it showed the statue of Saddam Hussein being pulled down in Firdos Square, a grateful Iraqi child kissing an American soldier, and jubilant crowds thronging the streets of newly liberated Baghdad. And above these images, and just below the headline secretary of defense, was a quote that may have raised some eyebrows. It came from the Bible, from the book of Psalms: “Behold, the eye of the Lord is on those who fear Him…To deliver their soul from death.”

This is only the latest of exposes involving Rumsfeld, which include such things as Rumsfeld's cheating at squash against his subordinates (Hey, if you're the Second Deputy Undersecretary of Defense, are you going to call the boss on his cheating?), but this is obviously much more substantive, since it involves the failures and crimes the permeated the Bush administration.

The article is exhaustive in cataloguing Rumsfeld's bureaucratic tactics, and the entire thing is worth reading. The logical question, of course, is whether Rumsfeld's mastery of the situation absolves Bush of responsibility.

I submit the answer is clearly no. First, the fundamental decisions were made, and the fundamental lies were told, by or at the behest of Bush. Second, in Bush we had an aggressively ignorant and incurious president, who by his actions mocked the very idea of competence as a governing principle. Despite the fact that he seized power in a judicial coup, once he took office Bush had the same obligation to the American people as any president, a responsibility that, once again, we are shown that he utterly failed to discharge.

And as Frank Rich points out in today's Times, it is for this reason that we cannot afford to simply turn the page, move on, and act as though the past eight years never happened.

Sen. Mike Gravel will speak at the 6th Annual DemocracyFest, a political festival for liberal/progressive activists, July 17-19 in Burlington, VT.

Sen. Gravel served as the Democratic US Senate for 12 years during the Vietnam War Era from the state of Alaska, during which time he took a strong anti-war stand and released the Pentagon Papers into public record. Sen. Gravel ran in the 2008 Democratic Primary for President, raising much debate about the influence of media on the Primary process when he was excluded from MSM sponsored debates.

Sen. Gravel continues his work as an author and lecturer promoting Direct Democracy. He will be joined at DemocracyFest by Gov. Howard Dean and Rep. David Zuckerman, as well as other interesting speakers and entertainers.  For more information about the event, please go to http://www.DemocracyFest.net

UPDATE: VT Rep. (and comedian) Jason Lorber just confirmed. Jason will be leading a session on Justice Reinvestment during the day on Saturday, and then doing his comedy routine Saturday night.

Long time GMD readers will recall that Daily Kos blogging sooperstar David Waldman (aka Kagro X) was a front pager for the site roundabout our second year. Well, our buddy David is getting higher profile all the time, and was recently on CNN…

David pulls no punches. Great stuff.

The document continued with eight “urgent immediate demands.” These were: the establishment of a new Iraqi Army; the disbanding of sectarian militias; the withdrawal of U.S. forces from the cities; the release of political prisoners; an end to interference in Iraqi affairs by neighboring countries; pressure on the Kurds to “cease the rhetoric of separation from Iraq”; a promise that the U.S. would stop describing insurgents as “terrorists”; and, finally, a pledge to “continue political dialogue between Iraqis and Americans.”

(Heads in the Sand, Vanity Fair, 05/12/09)

Or the real story of the “Sunni Awakening”.