Big news (ht BP)… and yet it’s buried in a letter column. Former Governor (and Vermont Democratic Party Patron Saint) Phil Hoff has thrown his lot in with the Pollina campaign, and without any of the expectations of reciprocity or partnership that seemed to be the reasons the Democratic State Committee deferred a potential meeting until the summer.

For a long time I have felt that the Democratic and Progressive parties should work together for the common good of Vermont.

In the absence of a viable Democratic candidate it seems to me that the candidacy of Anthony Pollina offers such an opportunity.

I do not know Pollina well. Several Democrats that I respect know him well and give him high grades in terms of his character and devotion to Vermont. Certainly he is “right” on the issues facing Vermont.

It is my understanding that he seeks the support of the Democratic Party.

Given this situation it seems to me that we Democrats should set aside partisan politics and support Pollina.

PHILIP H. HOFF

Burlington

He’s still not on the Democrats For Pollina website, but that probably gives it more legitimacy. After all, on the DFP site, he would be joined by fellow Democrats Walt Freed and Brian Tokar (get some screeners, folks). UPDATE: Okay, at least somebody else thought this was news, too.

Crossposted to Birding New England

The first time I ever saw a Pileated woodpecker, it was a breathtaking sight.  The pair of them were feeding in the large maple in our yard and when they flew off, they were nearly silent.

It took me a few years before I managed to actually capture them in photo, but I’m glad I was able to pull it off.  Since then, I’ve managed to get photos of them with limited success.  

I think, though, that my favorite thing about the Pileateds is their range of sounds.  They have a fairly standard woodpecker “laugh” (which I think of as more of a high-pitched rattle), but unlike the hairy and the downy woodpeckers, their call is a trill which remains constant in pitch.  While the Hairy Woodpecker makes a call that you can hear trilling and then trailing off, changing pitch at the end, the Pileated’s is constant throughout, making them easy to hear from a distance if you get the knack for it.  

Then there’s another call they make which is more like a staccato slow chatter that is such a deep pitch that it rattles the bones a bit.

I’m going to close with one more photo at the end.  When Pileated’s dig into trees, they do major excavating, creating huge holes in the trees, digging out large chunks of wood.  The photo below is of a pileated in mid-excavation, with the actual piece of wood still in its beak:

As usual, all these photos are smaller versions.  Clicking on them brings you to the site with the full sized versions and more details.

in the rivers, things may be starting to run..

Former Gov. Hoff endorses Pollina

Progressive might face challenge in primary

March 18, 2008 By Daniel Barlow

MONTPELIER – Former Vermont Gov. Philip Hoff. a Democrat, endorsed Progressive Anthony Pollina for governor Monday, giving the campaign a key boost as it continues reaching out to Democrats for support.

Hoff’s endorsement came the same day that a Worcester man announced that he is “actively considering” challenging Pollina in the Progressive primary for governor. Michael Colby, a horse-logger and writer, made the “semi-official” announcement on his blog, Broadsides.org, on Monday.

Colby said he hasn’t completely made up his mind yet, but has begun assembling a campaign team and expects to soon begin raising money. He said he is in the campaign to win, not to make a point.

Lt. Gov. David A. Paterson ascended to New York’s highest office on Monday

This headline and our recent  history here in Vermont with Lt. Governors  is a reminder how the choice for that “second slot ” on occasion can prove significant for a variety of reasons. This year given the strange case of the missing Democratic candidates it will prove interesting to see who steps or pops up into the fray. The right candidate for Lt.Gov. might  bring the Pollina Progressives and the Democrats into some type of alignment , or  even a functional-dynamic-misalignment …. maybe .

Also former Gov.Phil Hoff had a letter in the Free Press today (3/17)in support of Pollina .

It ends with this :

It is my understanding that he seeks the support of the Democratic Party.

Given this situation it seems to me that we Democrats should set aside partisan politics and support Pollina.

Rep. Zuckerman’s rush to the defense of Anthony Pollina’s failure to answer Rep. Weston’s tough but essential question reads like the type of political spin we’ve all grown accustomed to – which is exactly what makes it so inadequate. It is a shame Rep. Zuckerman chose to change the subject rather than address Ms. Weston's important question.

The question (paraphrased by Odum):

If Pollina wants Dems to look past Party labels and support him based solely on the issues for the good of the greater community, is he willing to do the same? Specifically – if a Prog chooses to run against a Dem who is progressive on all the issues (and who may even support him, perhaps?) is he willing to offer his own support to that Dem even if there's a Prog candidate, given that he's asking that level of commitment for himself?

The answer, in Zuckerman’s own words (truncated by the diarist):

My first question is, can any reader name a single case where Progressives ran against a progressive-leaning democrat incumbent? Name one race and we'll start having a very different discussion.Next question, does it make any difference to learn that Rep. Weston has been active recruiting a Democrat to run against myself and Rep. Chris Pearson? (while we have not been doing the same) When Rep. Weston presented her question to Anthony, his response was to say that Progressives work very hard to avoid challenges of this nature. And it's true. … If Weston wants there to be cross support, she could start by opening the discussions before encouraging someone to run against two of the strongest labor/enviro/housing/equal rights/ votes in the House.

(Odum impressively obliged Rep. Zuckerman with a list of Progressives who have run against Democrats.)

Rep. Zuckerman’s “next question” is exactly the type of political misdirection one would expect from a seasoned politician like Zuckerman, but it does little to address the underlying issue. 

The fact of the matter is that Rep. Weston, while I suspect she would prefer not to have a Progressive opponent in the fall, is not waging a campaign to convince the Progressive Party apparatus to support her candidacy with its energy and resources. Anthony Pollina, on the other hand, is trying to do just that vis-à-vis the Vermont Democratic Party.

Thus, Mr. Pollina is attempting to convince people like Rep. Weston that he can be trusted with their support in his run for governor. But trust must be earned. And reciprocated.

Rep. Weston doesn’t owe David Zuckerman anything, nor does she owe Anthony Pollina anything. Anthony Pollina doesn’t owe Rep. Weston anything either. But he’ll have to be willing to owe something to every Democrat if he expects their support.

Rep. Zuckerman’s suggestion that Rep. Weston should throw her support behind Anthony Pollina without so much as a pledge that Mr. Pollina will support her – let alone other Democrats across the state – is absurd.

Perhaps Mr. Zuckerman thinks Rep. Weston’s youth will blind her to the ridiculous double standard he is promoting.

And I'm not talking about Galbraith. Activist “Snarky Boy” Michael Colby announced today that he's considering throwing his hat in the ring, in the Progressive primary:

The only declared candidate for governor in the Progressive or Democratic parties is Anthony Pollina, and he has been seemingly more interested in playing footsie with the powers-that-be than offering a true alternative to them. I, on the other hand, believe in the importance and necessity of building an alternative base to politics as usual amongst the dominant two parties.

I think it’s important for a progressive to be in this race to offer a true contrast to the failings of the other major parties when it comes to stopping the war, providing health care for all, addressing economic inequality and celebrating and protecting Vermont’s natural resources.

Well, this should be interesting, to say the least. It's a 180 to the 'unity' theme that has been the focus of the discussion so far. Colby is a very polarizing character, so this is definitely news, to say the least.

( – promoted by Jack McCullough)

Per reuters:

“I must say, I’m a little envious,” Bush said. “If I were slightly younger and not employed here, I think it would be a fantastic experience to be on the front lines of helping this young democracy succeed.”

“It must be exciting for you … in some ways romantic, in some ways, you know, confronting danger. You’re really making history, and thanks,” Bush said.

Words completely fail me.

First, let’s start with the notsofarback machine:

• Mission Accomplished: Jim Douglas Kills Composting in the Intervale, in which it’s discussed how the Intervale composting center is being shut down by environmental regulators.
• Good thing we’re not talking about left leaning composting operations, in which it’s discussed how a series of construction sites are not compliant with state regulations but are in “a period of education rather than enforcement.”

Now let’s fast forward to Friday afternoon, at which point VPR aired a piece on how there have been questions raised about political pressure that led compost operation to close.

Let’s take a look, shall we?

…The non-profit Intervale Center says it can’t afford to meet new regulatory hurdles for the compost operation, which handles 20,000 tons a year of organic waste.

Now questions are being raised about the political pressure on the Intervale that led to the decision to close.

VPR’s John Dillon reports:

(Dillon) …The Douglas Administration says it has been very sensitive to keep politics out of environmental enforcement at the Intervale. Governor Jim Douglas said enforcement isn’t even being handled by his administration now.

(Douglas)“And now the Attorney General has assumed responsibility for enforcing it. And if the Attorney General believes it’s something that ought to be pursued, I certainly respect his judgment.”

(Dillon) Intervale officials say they’ve tried to work out the various legal issues with the state. But there are questions about how flexible the state has been – and whether politics are involved.

Now, we pause, to draw special attention to the emphasized text below.  Apparently, the media is reading us:

On the Green Mountain Daily blog it was stated recently that Agency of Natural Resources Secretary George Crombie told the Intervale that he had the center in a — quote — “noose.” For some at the meeting, the meaning was clear: Crombie was going to tighten the regulatory vise on the compost center.

Intervale Director Kit Perkins was there.

(Perkins) “It was upsetting. But I certainly didn’t get it out publicly. This is not my initiative here. But I will tell the truth and say yes that was said at the meeting.”

(Dillon) Crombie has said publicly that the Intervale is the wrong place for a composting operation.

But Crombie said he did not use the word noose to describe his agency’s hold on the Intervale.

(Crombie) “No. No. I would not do that.”

Now, I don’t know about you, but to me, the phrase “I would not…” is not really the same sort of denial as “I didn’t.”  It’s more like an, “I can’t imagine that I’d say such a thing.”  But the thing is, we have one witness who didn’t try to use this to make political hay.

More from the VPR piece:

(Dillon) Tom Moreau is the general manager of the Chittenden Solid Waste District. He was at the meeting between Intervale officials and Secretary Crombie. Moreau didn’t want to characterize the meeting.

(Moreau) “If I get asked by anybody in authority, his boss, somebody from the attorney general’s office, I will tell the truth. And it will be very clear what I heard.”

(Dillon) Moreau said he’s been dealing with state regulators for 30 years. He said this case is different.

(Moreau) “I’ve seen less cooperation on this than I have on most every other environmental problem than I’ve been associated. And I don’t know the reason for that. I’m just not going to speculate. I just don’t know the reasoning for it.”

So really, this is interesting to me.  It seems from Moreau’s comments that this isn’t just about a guy who’s a bit of a pain when it comes to regulations.  It sounds more like someone who’s doing a political hatchet job on the Intervale.

Douglas has a couple options here.  If he wants to maintain credibility when he claims that he’s not interested in politicizing regulation, then he can see to it that this incident is investigated.  If, instead, he wants to do damage to lefties, then he can do nothing.

But the idea that, as Douglas claims, he wants to “keep politics out of environmental enforcement,” then I think he has some serious explaining to do.

After a long debate yesterday, the Democratic State Committee rejected (for now) Anthony Pollina’s request to address them and ask for some sort of endorsement. While the Pollina campaign will spin this as a rebuff only by the Party elite, the truth is the State Committee is both more liberal than much of the greater Dem community, and also represents a cross-section of muckity-mucks as well as grassroots activists – so the rejection is not good news for Pollina.

As I have stated on this site, I personally believe, as a matter of principle, that if somebody wants to address such an open-to-the-public committee, they should get to. Everyone should have the opportunity to be heard. It’s hard to condemn, though, as I appreciate that people have concerns; that an audience would just be spun to suggest some sort of support (as he repeatedly does regarding his meeting with the Barre Town Dems in his interview with Baruth), or that it might undercut a potential Democratic candidate. Then there’s simply the feeling that they owe nothing to someone who – in public over the years – has repeatedly made the point that he has higher regard institutionally for even Republicans over Dems. It’s a simple reality of human nature that such history is hard to easily shake off, due to the same psychology that causes many leftists to conclude they won’t be able to vote for Hillary Clinton in November if she is the Democratic Presidential nominee.

Still…

In any event, the same questions will keep going round and round, and some are more valid than others. There’s the whole third party concept. Some might question Pollina’s historic committment to some progressive issues (but honestly, what candidate doesn’t invite that kind of question)? But there is one big roadblock that may make all other questions ultimately meaningless – a roadblock made manifest by Representative Rachel Weston of Burlington before Pollina himself at a recent Montpelier House Party. A question – and an account – repeated again to State Committee members yesterday.

Weston is a rising star in Vermont politics; young, smart, charismatic, politically progressive – and an elected Democrat from a very left leaning district that is always a key battleground between Dems and Progs. At the house party, Pollina gave his unity pitch (which resonated with Weston), and then took questions from the group.

Weston stepped up to ask the obvious, yet heretofore unspoken one: If Pollina wants Dems to look past Party labels and support him based solely on the issues for the good of the greater community, is he willing to do the same? Specifically – if a Prog chooses to run against a Dem who is progressive on all the issues (and who may even support him, perhaps?) is he willing to offer his own support to that Dem even if there’s a Prog candidate, given that he’s asking that level of commitment for himself?

It would seem to have been a critical, even defining moment for Pollina – or perhaps a re-defining moment, as that is truly what he is attempting to do before Democratic crowds. Unfortunately for all of us, he first tried to avoid the question entirely by suggesting they hadn’t made such a confrontational run in a while. Weston pointed out that the immediacy of the question was standing right before him. She fully expected – as usual – to face a Progressive opponent herself in her battleground district.

Over the course of his evening, Pollina shifted from the response that he wouldn’t support anyone in such a conflict, to the position that he might support both, to the view that they would have to talk about it if it comes up.

But what was missing for Rachel was the clear reciprocation she was looking for. A statement that if she were to join Team Pollina, buck partisanship, focus on the issues only, and support him with her reputation, that he would join Team Weston, buck partisanship, focus on the issues only, and support her with his reputation. In attempting, in front of a crowd, to find a way to have his cake and eat it too, the message Weston received in response to her question was simple: No.

So the issue at the end of the day is trust, and the fact is, it takes two to tango. As dubious as Dems are toward Pollina specifically, its questions like Weston’s that get to the heart of the trust issue on the Dem side; when Pollina speaks of wanting to take on Douglas as a team, does he mean working together shoulder-to-shoulder, or does he have a team of horses in mind?

For those who haven’t been following any of these events, I’ve put together (largely from CNN.com, the AP, and the UK Guardian) this timeline of the past few days in Chinese-occupied Tibet.  Very inspiring to see the long-persecuted and oppressed Tibetans fighting (bravely) for their independence from the harsh Chinese government.

March 10: Hundreds of monks turn-out to protest Chinese occupation on the 49th anniversary of the Tibetan Uprising (which ultimately led to the exile of the Dali Lama to India).  Protesting the recent arrest of a group of monks who were celebrating the Dali Lama’s receipt of the U.S. Congressional Gold Metal, about 300 monks from the outskirts of Lhasa (the capital) attempt to peacefully march to the Center of the city but are stopped by the Chinese police; the apparent organizers and leaders of the march are arrested.  Then, 15 monks from Tsuklakhang Temple are joined by 2 laypeople and march to the center of Lhasa, along the way shouting pro-independence slogans, handing out literature and raising the Tibetan flag (all of which, including the flag itself, are outlawed).  They are quickly arrested and reportedly beaten.  Nearby shops are ordered closed by the police and armed troops are deployed to warn others throughout the city against joining the protests.  None of the detained monks have been seen or heard from since.  As word quickly spreads, over 130 monks in Qinghai Province (which borders Tibet) converge with over 200 laypeople outside a government building and shout pro-Dali Lama slogans.  Police stop the protest and no one is reported arrested.  Chinese officials convene an emergency meeting with monks in Qinghai Province, but 70 of them walk out carrying a portrait of the Dali Lama (which is banned) and shouting pro-independence slogans.

March 11:  Hundreds of monks from the Sera Monastery show-up to protest, demanding the release of those arrested and shouting pro-Tibet slogans.  Riot police use tear gas to disperse the crowd.

March 12: 100 nuns from the West side of Lhasa peacefully march towards the city center but police forces turn them back.  Meanwhile, 30 miles East monks at Gaden Monastery launch a protest; police surround and seal of the monastery.

March 13:  The same group of nuns attempt again to march- they have not been see  or heard from since.  Later, two monks from Kirti Monastery in Sichuan Province stab themselves in the chest, hands, and wrists.  They were said to protesting the arrest of 17 monks from the Sera Monastery on Monday (3/10).  They have been taken to a nearby hospital and are not expected to live.  Other monks at the same Monastery are staging a hunger strike.  By the end of the day, 500 students at Tibet University have been arrested.

March 14:  Monks from Ramoche Temple attempt to launch yet another protest march but police seal off the streets and prevent it.  Laypeople join in and fighting ensues.  Reports are of widespread rioting, with more than 1,000 people in the streets hurling rocks at police, and setting fire to vehicles and shops owned by ethnic Chinese who have moved to Tibet since the occupation.  CNN.com is also reporting that telephones and electricity have been shut-off in Lhasa.  Meanwhile, at the Chinese Embassy in New Delhi, India, at least one person was beaten by police, several arrested, and dozens chased away as they protested in solidarity with their friends and family of Tibet, shouting pro-Tibet slogans and waving the Tibetan flag.

March 15: 6 demonstrators have been arrested in New York in front of the United Nations building; 3 have been arrested in Sydney; at least 20 demonstrators have been arrested in Katmandu; tear-gas was used to break-up a pro-Tibet really in the Swiss city of Zurich; and un-confirmable reports suggest that demonstrations and rioting continued in Lhasa in the morning- the Chinese government has imposed strict curfews and given Tibetan demonstrators until Monday to “turn themselves in” as they “show constraint” against the protests, which many are calling the most significant (and violent) in all of China since 1989’s Tinnaman Square.  By the end of the day, pro-Tibet demonstrations were reported in cities across the world, including Washington D.C. and Chicago.  Lhasa is now said to be “like a ghost town” with thousands of Chinese troops maintaining “order” and enforcing strict curfews.

Tibetan exiles living in India are reporting that at least 100 people have been killed so far, with hundreds missing and there whereabouts unknown; Chinese officials put the number dead at 10.  Exiled Tibetans in India (primarily in North New Delhi and Dharmsala) have now been encircled in their neighborhoods by Indian police and are being prevented from leaving.  Protesters who had otherwise been planning a march from the exiled Tibetan government’s offices in Dharmsala to the border of Tibet- a march to protest the plight of the Tibetans and confront Chinese officials ahead of the upcoming Beijing Olympics- have largely been arrested or put under house arrest by Indian officials.

The Chinese State has, as is usually the case, completely censored the media.  Western journalists requesting access to Tibet have  been entirely ignored, and their Beijing offices are reporting that the vast majority of Chinese people have no idea what is happening (most all internet sites mentioning the protests have been blacked out, along with cable news channels).  Images and details have been leaking out sparingly.

How things in Tibet, and India, progress over the next couple of days remains to be seen.