We've waited “Long Enough” for an answer on how many residual troops the other
  Democratic Presidential Candidates will leave behind in Iraq. That's why the
  name of our campaigns' new TV ad is entitled "Long Enough."

Bill Richardson is changing the debate with his clear, bold, plan to end the
  war and bring all the troops home. This war will drag on as long as our troops
  are in Iraq.

If you care about ending the war in Iraq, add your voice to end the war now!

I proudly work with Bill Richardson, the only candidate committed to leaving
  no troops behind.

  Joaquin H. Guerra

  Richardson for President

 Loading ...

We’ve been involved in The Localvore Challenge this week, and it’s been an interesting experience. 

A quick summary: there are lots of reasons different communities may be interested in eating locally.  Some are environmental; others economic.  For some, it’s just about support for their own community and community engagement.

In our case, it’s a combination of factors, the biggest for me is that I like to know where my food comes from and what goes into it.  If I’m eating food that’s mass-produced in some factory somewhere who the hell knows where, how could I possibly know what conditions exist in that factory?  I still don’t know perfectly well here.  I don’t know if every worker at a farm washes their hands.  I don’t know if every worker at a local produce center is or is not carrying a contagious disease.  But I do know that the food I eat is primarily coming from nearby sources which makes the food I eat more personal and more economical.  When I purchase locally I am:

• saving the fuel cost of shipping something across the country;
• supporting local economy over destructive large-scale agriculture;
• eating foods which are pollinated by local insects which means I have more built-in immunity to local allergens;
• reducing waste and pollution by using food that doesn’t require multiple layers of packaging or chemicals designed to keep the food looking fresh over long periods of time.

More information about local foods can be found at http://www.localharvest.org/ and http://animalvegetablemiracle.com/

Per The Chicago Tribune.  McMillan is the mayor of Jena:

No sooner did tens of thousands of African-American demonstrators depart the racially tense town of Jena, La., last week after protesting perceived injustices than white supremacists flooded in behind them.
[…]
McMillin has insisted that his town is being unfairly portrayed as racist-an assertion the mayor repeated in an interview with Richard Barrett, the leader of the Nationalist Movement, a white supremacist group based in Learned, Miss., who asked McMillin to “set aside some place for those opposing the colored folks.”

“I am not endorsing any demonstrations, but I do appreciate what you are trying to do,” Barrett quoted McMillin as saying. “Your moral support means a lot.”

McMillin declined to return calls seeking comment Monday.

Barker’s father, David, said his family did not know the nature of Barrett’s group when they agreed to be interviewed, adding, “I am not a white supremacist, and neither is my son.”

But Barrett said he explained his group and its beliefs to the Barker family, who then invited him to stay overnight at their home on the eve of last week’s protest march.
[…]

Oh boy! Hooplah!

For those just tuning in: first Freyne reports that Progressive Rep. Dave Zuckerman sez “He (Peter Shumlin) came up to me at an event in Montpelier…and said we’ve really got to talk about how we’re going to get rid of Jim Douglas, and I think Anthony Pollina should really consider running.””… then I report that Shumlin sez “From his recollection, it was Zuckerman who brought up Pollina….Says Shumlin: 'I have told anyone who will listen that the best candidate, in my judgment is Matt Dunne.' (and Dunne verified Shumlin's encouragement in an unrelated conversation with me a ways back).“… then Stewart Ledbetter on Vermont This Week (in a reference to “dueling blogs”) sez “maybe the story that Shumlin was pushing Anthony Pollina is simply not true”… then Freyne sez “Maybe the Moon is made of green cheese?“… then Freyne goes to Zuckerman who sez “I respect Stewart Ledbetter… but that's irresponsible journalism.”

Ahhh, so many sezzes, so little time!

Truthfully, “irresposnsible journalism” is a whopping big charge. Especially when we're not simply talking about journalism. We're also talking about blogging, gossip and even interpersonal relationships, inasmuch as they relate to who believes whom.

But first of all, let's talk about journalism.

Let me start by agreeing with commenters at Freyne's site. Zuckerman is a totally decent guy, and I can't possibly believe that he's lying. And although I was called “naive” for believing Shumlin, I've known the guy (not well, granted, but nevertheless…) for years, and he's never lied to me, or said anything to me that I have reason in retrospect to consider may have been a lie. Does that make me “naive,” as a commenter suggested? Who knows, but I'd rather be naive than be an asshole, and I'd have to be an asshole to arbitrarily doubt his word to me at this point.
  
This is where we get to the difference between hubbub and journalism, and why “he said-he said” situations like this are dangerous to report on, especially when you only have in hand one of the “he's” doing the “saying” and no independent corroboration. IMO, Freyne was definitely on shaky ground publishing this to begin with, especially when you consider we're talking about two different people's reminiscences of brief conversations from months ago. It's as likely a scenario as any that they both honestly and earnestly remember the conversations differently.

(For my part, all I can say is what I said already – that Shumlin's “retort” to me was consistent with what I've heard from him in the past, and consistent with what I'd heard from Matt Dunne… kneejerk Shumlin-bashing should not be a replacement for objective consideration of the merits and the foundations of a tiff like this). 
  
But Freyne is not simply a journalist, he is also a blogger. And those are very different animals, playing by different rules. Bloggers can go up with rumor or hubbub, and often do. Blogs – “web logs” – are simply online diaries meant to spur discussion – and rumors are obviously a valid point of discussion for online communities of interest. You throw it out there and let the readers hash out the viability and credibility, which is the process that has – in fact – been in play between Freyne's site, this one, and the various comments at both, and what the “duel” which-is-not-a-duel is a glimpse into the process of.
  
But then, Freyne's report played out in his print column, rather than his blog. Does that change the implications?
  
Maybe, but I doubt it. After all, does anybody doubt that Freyne is becoming the human twilight zone between blogs and journalism? That role makes his media somewhat interchangable.
 
Either way, the guy's in an awkward spot as Vermont's official journalist-columnist-blogger hybrid, but he seems to generally handle it well, so I won't take him to task.
  
But there's one person I will take to task a bit, and that's Rep. Zuckerman. His suggesting Ledbetter was practicing “irresponsible journalism” was, I think… well… irresponsible.

Ledbetter is not a blogger, or a blogger-journalist hybrid, he is simply a journalist, pure and simple. When confronted with a contradiction like this, it is his job – his responsibilty even – to address it as dispassionately and objectively as he can- and that means laying all the possibilities out there. When two people say contradictory things, its always an objective possibility that one may not be right (especially when one of the suggestions seems, on its face, to defy the journalist's own experience or the prevailing wisdom).

A political officeholder making such an inflammatory charge to a journalist simply for asking one of the obvious questions for the purposes of a discussion among journalists could have a chilling effect on the practice of his 1st amendment responsibilities as a member of the press.

So, I've given buddies of Rep. Zuckerman ammunition to be mad at me if they really want to be, but the truth is, I think the “irresponsible journalism” line was just an off-the-cuff comment that wasn't meant the way someone like me might be afraid it could be. To repeat – as I already said Zuckerman seems like a totally straight shooter.

Honestly, I think we just have a cascading of off-the-cuff comments and fuzzy recollections of a months old exchange. Enough for some entertaining back and forth, but I think the story played out a while ago.

(a dKos crosspost at my request. Good stuff. – promoted by kestrel9000)

I get information occasionally from the great Senator from Vermont. Why do I call him a “GREAT” Senator, because of his outstanding work on the behalf of veterans and their families since be becoming a Senator. He is always FOR veterans and programs that HELP them, what more could a veterans WANT from an elected official.

If all Senators voted for veterans programs like Bernie does, then many of these diaries I have written about the Veterans Administration for the past two years would NO|T have had to be written. He CARES and unlike many elected officials on Capitol Hill he does not just pay the lip service as many politicians do, he means what he says, and his record of votes back him up. He “TALKS the walk and WALKS the talk.  If he says it, he means it. A rare commodity these days.

I know I don't have to reiterate this, but many of the “compassionate conservative” republicans claim to “support the troops” but there voting records for the past 7 years show this not to be true, they take photo ops and talk a good game, but the average for a Republican Senator and Congressman is less than 40% FOR veterans budget programs. To me that is not “supporting the troops.

Tomorrow Senator Sanders will be attending another session to the Veteran Affairs Committee on the status of the Research on Gulf War Issue's, you all remember the First Gulf War, the one where we truly had a “coalition of the willing” and other countries actually paid most of the cost of the war, oh and by the way, it only lasted 4 days!  Yea that one. the Build up started in the summer of 1990, and the war in February  and the troops were home by summer of 1991.

This is the war, that Bush, Cheney and Rumesfeld thought they were going to do again, remember the terms, “greeted with flowers and candy”  the “Iraqi Oil will pay for the war” the Bush adminstration guy who was fired for daring to claim the Iraq war might cost as much as 100 billion dollars.

Those were the good old days and about 500 billion ago. Many economic types say that the long term cost of the war NOW might be as high as 2 trillion dollars far into the future, counting the costs that Bush/Cheney want to ignore, health care and compensation for the veterans harmed in this war, people that are going to need decades of support, the severely maimed, PTSD that severe that veterans will never be employed at a job that can support them nor their families.

Bernie is always there for us veterans, I wish more Senators helped our government keep it's PROMISES you remember the one President Bush campaigned on in 2004 “A Promise Made Is A Promise Kept”.

Here is Bernie actually”>http://www.sanders.senate.gov/news/record.cfm?id=281959″>actually “supporting veterans” on the floor of the Senate

Here is a statement from July 16,2007 on a Vermont VA Program that Bernie wants the VA to implement nationwide as the results show fantastic results

Vermont Veterans Program a Model for the Nation — 07/16/2007

Watch photos and video of the press conference.

An innovative Vermont outreach program for troops returning from Iraq and Afghanistan is the model for a $30-million national pilot project that Senator Bernie Sanders will ask the Senate to approve when it resumes work this week on a defense authorization bill. “My hope is that increased coordination between the Department of Defense and the Department of Veterans Affairs and local and state organizations will mean that veterans and their families will be better informed and more likely to get the care they deserve,’ Sanders said.

Sanders last year secured $1 million for the Vermont National Guard working with the White River Junction VA Medical Center to visit the homes of troops returning from Iraq and Afghanistan.  The outreach workers, all veterans themselves, make certain that service members and their families know about available benefits, including mental health care and support programs under the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs.  The outreach workers also provide referral services.

“We're very appreciative of the congressional efforts to bring this ground-breaking program to Vermont,” Adjutant General Michael Dubie said. “The outreach program has already helped a number of returning soldiers, airman and their families and we look forward to the continuance of this worthwhile initiative in the future.”

“The National Guard and the White River Junction VA Medical Center continue their close working relationship to insure that Vermonters who have served in uniform and their families receive competent, coordinated and timely services they are entitled by virtue of their selfless service to our nation,” said Gary M. DeGasta, the center director.

Sanders later this week will offer an amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act that would provide $30 million for a national pilot project expanding the Vermont program to other parts of the country.

The Defense Department would be authorized to support outreach programs that support marriage counseling, services for children, suicide prevention, substance abuse awareness and treatment, mental health care, financial counseling, domestic violence awareness and prevention, and employment assistance and other services. The outreach programs also would develop strategies for families to learn how to live with a service member coping with post traumatic stress disorder or traumatic brain injuries. Sanders’ legislation also would put a special emphasis on face-to-face outreach to veterans and their families who live in rural areas, one of the unique aspects of the Vermont program.

A member of the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee, Sanders has worked in Congress to increase resources for veterans. “If anybody thinks that we have had the resources to adequately support the veterans who are coming back from Iraq and Afghanistan, plus all of our older veterans, they sorely misunderstand the situation,” Sanders said. “I intend to do everything that I can to make sure that the Bush administration, instead of giving tax breaks to billionaires, starts adequately funding the V.A. so we don't continue to have the disgraceful situation that we currently do. We need more innovative programs like this one in Vermont that bring resources together to help our veterans.

“If we go to war, what we have to understand is that the cost of war does not stop the day that the war ends,” Sanders concluded. “The cost of war stops when every service member or veteran gets all the help that they and their families deserve as a result of their service to this country.”

To listen to a VPR story on this issue click here.

 
This is a press release and he wants it read so there is no copyright rules here.

I posted this here to remind people what a great person Mr Bernie Sanders is, and how valuable he is to Americans as veterans are neither Republican nor Democratic  they are just Americans and politics should not be at play when we as a nation are taking care of them, no one asked us to serve in a Democratic nor a Republican Army they asked us to Serve the American Army.

Here is a link to Bernie's website page that deal with Veterans
Issueshttp://www.sanders.senate.gov/news/index.cfm?code=Veterans&pheader=Veterans”>Issues>

 Loading ...

Being recently added to the mighty GMD blogroll, Bosox Wally (aka Will Wiquist) was apparently so intimidated, he had to drop everything and run to DC to be Bernie Sanders' new Press Secretary.

Ah how far our little Wally-Will has come since his days as part of three person Field staff for the Democratic Party Coordinated campaign back in 2000 As I said back then, if the 2000 campaign had been a sitcom (and I actually did write a sitcom pilot script based on that experience, but lost it in a computer crash before I could submit it anywhere… and that's just as well), then Will, Spike and Mike (the Field team) would have collectively been our Kramer (and if that's not a stellar endorsement, I don't know what is – Will, I'd be happy to write that up a reference letter for you…)

And among his first official actions will undoubtedly be to send me an email expressing his disappointment in GMD over, what I suspect is an upcoming blog post from a front-pager-who-will-not-be-named that is likely to be critical of Bernie. Heh.

Have fun Will. Don't forget us little people, as Bernie's staff curently does (his office is the only member of our Washington delegation that doesn't include GMD on press lists for releases… mmble, grmble...)

It’s funny; in Southeastern Vermont, I can’t think of a single time I had a problem connected with my sexual orientation.  It’s difficult to tell, however.  It’s not like I’ll know if I got turned down from a job for being queer vs. some other factor.  And I’m sure that I’ve had students who have a problem with it.  But, still… it’s never really been a problem for me in any way I can perceive.  And yet, clearly, it’s still a fairly big problem in Vermont, in ways that honestly surprise me.  Maybe it’s more common in different areas, or maybe it’s just something that I see as so completely ridiculous to hassle someone about that it just goes right over my head these days.

It’s not like I don’t know what the dehumanization is like.  I remember college, and being harassed almost daily, with people coming by at all hours of the night to leave nasty notes on my door and sometimes just to bang on my door so I couldn’t get any sleep, and I remember the administration completely ignoring it at the time, hoping it, and probably I, would just go away.  I remember one time being harassed by a guy on the street and being scared for my life because I wasn’t sure where I could go to get away from him fast enough.  I remember having been threatened by another student once and absolutely nothing happening to stop it, even though the administration said they’d back me up if I filed a complaint.  But these things happened a long time ago, in another place and another time.

I guess I just don’t feel that way living here.  In Vermont, I feel comfortable that I won’t get harassed or hassled.  While I’m sure homophobia exists here, it’s not my experience that it’s a problem.  The Burlington Free Press, however, reports on some fairly nasty stuff:

Rachel Rosenberg knows what it’s like to feel dehumanized.

The transgender-identified University of Vermont student, who prefers male pronouns but still uses his birth name, says he has been barked at while walking with his partner on campus and has endured so many instances of sexually explicit harassment, it’s hard for him to keep track of it anymore.

Rosenberg, 20, came to Vermont from New York because of UVM’s reputation of being an inclusive place for sexual minorities. But after just a couple of months on campus, Rosenberg realized that the student body and the Burlington community do not necessarily subscribe to the same ideas of tolerance and inclusion that UVM as an institution does.

What Rosenberg learned about the university community was what many lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender Vermonters have known about the state for a long time. While Vermont as an institution seeks to promote tolerance and acceptance through policies such as civil unions and same-sex adoption, the community as a whole has a long way to go toward fostering an environment that is safe and welcoming for LGBT Vermonters.

On the books, Vermont does look really good.  But having something on the books is not the same as enforcing it, and having a school which has good principles is not the same as having good communication about those principles.

Allowing kids to get away with harassing lgbt kids isn’t really acceptable and I think UVM needs to step up to the plate here and see what they can do to support these kids who are getting harassed and to curtail the harassment that does exist. 

I just watched CBS’ “60 Minutes” for the first time in a long time.  The interview I watched was this one.

I swear, I thought I’d tuned into Fox News.  Scott Pelley is either a shill for the Bush administration, or possibly, a shill for the Vice President’s office.  What a complete farce of an interview.

Is this what happens when I don’t watch Mainstream News for awhile?  When I see how bad it becomes, I’m appalled in ways that others who have watched it slowly decline over the years wouldn’t be. 

This was just horrible.

Happy Sunday, all! Well, it had been a few weeks since the last time, so Vermont and Vermonters were overdue to be the target of Bill O’Reilly’s scorn. It was a low-grade eruption only – a mere passing mention by Bill-O’s standards, but it did remind us that we are never far from his heart.

But the truth is, there are a lot of compelling reasons why O’Reilly should consider moving beyond his “objections” with our lovely state and ponder relocating to the Green Mountains instead!

Here, then, are the top ten reasons Bill O’Reilly should pack up the loofahs and move to Vermont (after the flip):

10. Keith Olbermann doesn’t live here.

9. Wouldn’t have to pay so much to have ex-Rutland State Senator (and current Rutland City Treasurer) Wendy Wilton or True North radio host Paul Beaudry videoconferenced into your show so they can do their best to insult and smear Vermont before a national audience.

8. Burlington’s WCAX is apparently hiring, and no doubt Marselis Parsons would jump at the chance to bring in a media professional so practiced at the Fox News “fair and balanced” school of journalism (Freyne from ’04:  “Sunday’s was the fourth show since last September that featured a Dem in the guest chair… Meanwhile, 19 “Quote Me” programs since last fall have quoted Republicans…You do the math.”).

7. Your ongoing amusement with Tasers (and “Don’t Tase me, Bro” entrepeneureal bumper stickers) are a perfect match with Vermont law enforcement’s new you name it, we’ll tase it approach (peaceful protesters, dogs, whatever) and could help the push to bring them to even more of our towns!

6. With gay marriage back in the Vermont spotlight, and a lot of Vermonters feeling confused about how and why it’s being brought up now, we need you to cut through the discussions and tell us, in your words – “what this gay marriage thing is all about,” (apparently, it’s all about giving Vermonters the opportunity “to marry a goat.” Who knew?)

5. Since we’re about as far away from Mexico as you can get in the continental US, there’s less chance you’ll need to worry about Mexicans “clustering” and “changing the tempo” of your neighborhood.

4. Next time you wants to bash, er, pick a fight with Bill Lippert, you can just drive over yourself, rather than paying a lot of money to send a lackey.

3. All our permissive judges will probably go easy on you the next time you get a sexual harassment charge.

2. Thanks to all the groovy-crunchy people living here, Vermont has Natural Food stores everywhere, which means a steady supply of falafel for all your future dates.

…and the number one reason Bill O’Reilly should move to Vermont…

1. As the whitest state in the union, you won’t have to worry about running into so many of those black or brown people (even if some of them can really surprise you from time to time by acting so much like regular human beings).

Wow, this guy is feeling secure enough in his elected position to let it all hang out, apparently. From Sneyd at VPR (emphasis mine):

(Beth Robinson) “When this (same-sex marriage) bill first came into the Legislature back in the spring the governor said he didn't really like the prospect of raising a divisive issue in the state. And it turns out that the governor is taking the lead in making this a divisive issue. And I'm disappointed in that.”

(Sneyd) Douglas won't address the criticism directly. All he'll say is it's coming from someone who probably isn't going to contribute money to his re-election.

That clunk you just heard was the sound of my jaw hitting the Langdon Street Cafe keyboard. Now that's honesty. A clear statement that, in Douglas's eyes – the value of your opinion is based on whether or not you'll pay him to take you seriously.

And here's some more honesty: after that comment, I actually feel for the first time that we might take this guy down next year after all.