Some of us remember Mike Gravel when he was a senator from Alaska and he took the bold step of reading the Pentagon Papers in his committee room to get the word out. He served two terms in the Senate but he’s been out of politics, or at least out of sight, for a long time.

Now he’s back, and the main thrust of his campaign seems to be to get the hell out of Iraq.

He calls himself a maverick, not a liberal, and there are tons of ideas that I would never sign on for (for instance, his tax plan looks like a Forbes-esque giveaway to the rich and seems to be supported by right-wing Republicans), but I bet there are GMD readers out there who will be receptive to what he’s saying.

The following binding resolutions will be on the agenda of the Bennington County Democratic Committee on Monday, February 26th.  The first was passed by the North Carolina Democratic Party and taken, with the permission of the State Chair, Jerry Meek.  We, the grassroots, need to cut to the chase to save lives, whether they be our troops, Iraqis, Iranians or Vermonters.  We expect the State Committee to follow in their next meeting. We stand together or we stand alone.

Feel free to use either or both at any meetings.

Resolution:  No escalation of troops into Iraq while bringing the troops home in 2007

  WHEREAS, there is remarkable bipartisan agreement from the majority of American people that the Bush Administration’s current occupation strategy of the last three years is not succeeding and cannot ever succeed and further military efforts along these lines are politically unacceptable to the American people, as shown by the 2006 election results;

WHEREAS, the Iraqi people have the inalienable right to full economic, political, and social self-determination and to full control of all Iraqi oil, land, and other resources, and that the only legitimate American policy goal in Iraq is that the Iraqis achieve self-governance;

WHEREAS, there is no tolerance among the Iraqi people for any continuation of U.S. occupation of Iraq, and, as recently revealed by General Abizaid, not even any tolerance by the current Iraqi government nor our own top military commanders for an allegedly temporary increase of substantial American forces to be deployed in Iraq;

WHEREAS, the Bennington County Democratic Committee, in its deep gratitude and unalterable support for the dedication and bravery of our service men and women and their families, cannot stand idly by while even one more of our service men or women is killed or maimed by prolonging the senseless occupation policy of the Bush Administration.

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that:

The Bennington County Democratic Committee calls upon the US Congressional Leadership to immediately vote for any and all resolutions consistent with an overall purpose of ending the occupation of Iraq, and starting the orderly redeployment and withdrawal of troops by the summer of 2007.

We further urge the Congress to maintain its resolve not to fund any permanent US bases in Iraq.

We support resolutions such as (1) the Murtha Plan and (2) H.R. 4232 (to be renumbered in the 110th Congress), a resolution introduced by Massachusetts Democrat James McGovern and co-sponsored by nineteen (19) members of the US House of Representatives to oppose any funding not consonant with the foregoing.

==================================================
Resolution:  Deny Vt. Yankee a 20 year license

Members of the Bennington County Democratic Committee, concerned about the safety of Vermont communities under the presence of the Vermont Yankee nuclear reactor in Vernon, Vermont, ask our Governor and our legislators to deny a 20 year extension of Entergy’s license and to work with utility companies to develop safe, renewal sources of energy and make every effort to free us from our dependency on nuclear power.

The only thing that the Democrats have to say to the Bushtrash is what Leo Amery said to Neville Chamberlain in April, 1940.  “Go, in the name of God, Go.” (he was quoting Oliver Cromwell).

(Note from J.D. — I’ve posted this account of last week’s Washington protests from two of my friends (Lee Light and Robin Taylor) who were there. Hope you enjoy.)

These are some observations of two 60+ year old women, veterans of civil rights, women’s rights and anti-Vietnam movements returning to the demonstration circuit. Because the actions of this administration are so disastrous, we decided that we needed to  participate in the anti-war rally and march in Washington, D.C. on Saturday, January 27. Many friends and community members that we told thanked us for taking the trip and said that they were with us in spirit. It was a very cold night on Friday at 10pm when we  boarded one of six buses that Peace and Justice Center had chartered to take folks down to Washington. We got on the Montpelier bus and knew only four people out of the 55. Some of the others seemed to be new to the anti-war movement.  There were some families and also a church group. Everyone was eager and proud to be representing the anti-war voice in Vermont.  We heard of estimates of 500-750 Vermonters in total that went to Washington. We were a proud bunch wearing our “Vermont Says No to War” banners and stickers.

On Saturday under a bright sun and temperatures in the 50’s we listened first to church leaders, then politicians, political activists, ex-soldiers, and celebrities. For about two hours we listened and cheered. The main themes of the speakers were to bring the troops home now and not fund the escalation and the occupation. The bounty of caring for the troops, their safety, and care when they returned home came through loud and clear, as well as concern for the suffering of their families. Speakers also mourned the lost lives of  Iraqis and their children who have been caught up in a useless and unending war. But there was an underlying message coming through loud and clear through signs and chants that these Americans wanted Bush and Cheney impeached. Several signs read Pelosi in 2007!

But we would like to mention some of what the media didn’t cover in reporting this event.  There were people from all over the country:  Washington, Oregon, California, Iowa, Texas, Michigan, Minnesota, Wisconsin, to name a few.  The AP story in the Sunday Times-Argus implied that the organizers, United for Peace and Justice, hoped for 100,000 people and were disappointed. We strongly disagree. At the rally and march we believe we were about 500,000.  The park police on orders from the White House no longer give estimates of the size of protest marches and rallies.  There was also no mention in the AP story of the `Impeach Bush/Cheney’ signs that were everywhere.

After the rally, demonstrators expected to march down Pennsylvania Ave.  As folks were moving forward to start the march, people were being corralled  through a passage way to the parade route that funneled the 6 lane boulevard down to three, creating a tremendous bottleneck.  People slowly edged forward to get in line.  Once we were on Pennsylvania Ave. we were allowed to march 2-3 blocks up toward the Capitol and then the crowd was dispersed because we were blocked from going further. This action of police manipulation of the crowd successfully defused the momentum of the marchers. It was virtually impossible to see how great a number of people there were. While we weren’t herded into corrals like protestors in other demonstrations in New York City, our effort to send our message to the rest of the United States and the world was definitely thwarted.

Eventually the “march” which really wasn’t a march was over.  We wondered why we didn’t parade down Pennsylvania Avenue toward the White House. We believe we had been allowed to demonstrate under the control of a government that had absolutely no intention of listening to the people. If Congress allows the Bush/Cheney administration to continue to ignore the vote of the American people then we are only living under the illusion of a democracy.

Did the media minimize the rally by underestimating the crowd?  Did they forget to mention the outcry for impeachment?  Was the coverage of the rally and march downplayed by only minimally reporting the event in the press?  Looks that way to us! 

Lee Light farms with her husband in Marshfield.
Robin Taylor is also a farmer in Marshfield.

(Looks like this is the bill if Welch is going to rise to the occasion as Leahy has. Don’t know where Sanders is on the issue. Anyone…? – promoted by odum)

I’ve finally gotten some time to actually read the ‘Bring Our Troops Home and Sovereignty of Iraq Restoration Act of 2007′(H.R. 508) by Congresswoman Woolsey. As I see it, this is the ONLY bill that House Dems should be talking about, no more of this ‘nonbinding resolution’ crap, which are basically methods of acting like you’re doing something while doing nothing. You can read the entire text of the bill here. Some things in the bill worth noting:

“The occupation of Iraq has made the United States economically and militarily weaker, has made the United States less safe because it has enhanced the recruitment of terrorists, and has diminished America’s prestige and influence in the world.

The civilian leadership at the Department of Defense has failed to adequately support United States Armed Forces in Iraq, which were not trained to carry out an occupation and did not receive the proper equipment to achieve their stated mission.

Congress declares that it is the policy of the United States-
(1) to end the occupation of Iraq on the basis of the findings specified in section 101;
(2) to accelerate the training and equipping ofthe military and security forces of the  Governmentof Iraq;
(3) to pursue security and stability in Iraq through diplomacy;
(4) to help preserve the territorial integrity of Iraq as a nation state;
(5) to take all appropriate measures to account for any missing members of the United States
Armed Forces or United States citizens in Iraq; and
(6) to turn over all internal security activities and military operations in Iraq to the elected Government of Iraq not later than the end of the six month period beginning on the date of the enactment of this Act”

And I love this one here…

SEC. 109. PROHIBITION ON PRODUCTION SHARING AGREEMENTS FOR IRAQI PETROLEUM RESOURCES.
(a) PROHIBITION.-On or after the date of the enactment of this Act, no department, agency, or other entity of the Government of the United States and no national of the United States may enter into a contract for the development, production, or marketing of petroleum resources in Iraq.

Kinda defeats the purpose of why we went in there, huh? Now, maybe I’m repeating myself here, but it’s time for Vermonters to take Peter Welch to the mat on this, especially considering that he based a good portion of his campaign on ending the war and bringing the troops home. The nonbinding resolutions Welch supports do nothing.  Zip. Nada. So, once again, nicely call his VT office at 888-605-7270 or his Washington office at 202-225-4115, and ask Welch’s office why he hasn’t signed on as cosponsor to the Woolsey bill, if he is really serious about ending the war in Iraq. And remember, be nice.

Another thing… if Welch does sign on, let’s give him props for actually doing what he was elected to do. But if he doesn’t, it’s time to start calling for his head.I’ve already got the spike ready.

During the 2004 election season, a campaign by MoveOn.org, Arianna Huffington, and Joe Trippi implored John Kerry to "go big."

The kick-off email began…

Dear MoveOn member,

As George Bush’s poll numbers drop, John Kerry is facing an important choice — perhaps the most important choice he’ll make in his campaign. He has to decide whether, as some consultants will urge, he should be cautious, or whether he should present a bold agenda for change and rally all Americans around a common vision for our future.

Throughout his life, John Kerry has made a practice of standing up for bold initiatives to provide health care, protect the environment, and guarantee truth-telling in government. Together, we need to let him know that we want him to be his best, boldest self — to go big, ask more from us, and power his campaign on the politics of hope and progress.

MoveOn asked you to sign on to a letter to John Kerry from Huffington and Trippi that included…

You should own September 12th – the spirit of generosity and community that poured forth in the aftermath of the attacks – and the politics of hope.

Offer voters a bold moral vision of what America can be. A vision that is bigger than the things that divide us. A vision that brings hope and soul back to our politics and appeals to more than voters’ narrow self-interests. A vision that makes America once again a respected force for good in the world.

Don’t be tempted to adopt the familiar – and failed – Republican-lite swing voter strategy. You can reach out to and inspire the fifty percent of eligible voters who have given up on voting. If you do, you will win not in a toss-up but a landslide.

Senator Kerry, I’m ready to vote my hopes and not my fears. So please: Go Big, Ask More!

The fact that Trippi was a part of this "go big" push is not surprising. The early Dean campaign embraced a similar calling for something bigger, and evoked the idealism of our nation’s greatest leaders… In Trippi’s (and Pat Cadell’s) famous "Definitional Moment" memo, Trippi challenged Dean to be a transformational leader.

On June 11th, less than two weeks before Dean’s ambitious "Great American Restoration" announcement speech (read it) — delivered, on a beautiful sunny day,  to a massive crowd packing every inch of Church St. in Burlington, the memo read…

The campaign has gotten to a place no one ever thought it could get to.

A confluence of your passion, events of the country, the mood of the voters, and the conjunction of history have produced yet another moment that is with precedence in American history – the transformation of American politics.

It began with Andrew Jackson who transformed America into a Democratic Republic, then to Lincoln who saved it, and to the populist/progressive movement of Teddy Roosevelt, and Woodrow Wilson and then to Franklin Roosevelt and the New Deal.

This is another one of those moments – the place where the future happens.

You have felt this – you know that something bigger is happening here beyond conventional politics. It is what happens every time you tell people that the future of our country rests in their hands – and not in yours. The room goes silent and you feel the hunger in them and the frustration within yourself to explain something that you have yet to find the words to express.

It is the need to throw out all that is transactional and embrace the hunger to transform our country.

If the country wanted a transactional leader i.e. somebody to negotiate deals with various groups and interests, and grease the wheels of inside Washington and make things as they are run better, there would be no rationale for your candidacy – nor would thousands be joining your cause. In fact if the people wanted a transactional leader there are far more obvious choices among this field of candidates than you.

Yet young people are streaming into your campaign everyday, your supporters are energized, travel hundreds of miles, and wait for hours to cheer briefly as you go into an event that they are not even allowed to attend.

This is the thing you must recognize – the thing above all others you must understand. This campaign is not about you – it may have started out that way but you have touched something more powerful than any other force in our nation’s history. It is bigger than you, bigger than any single issue, and you can not turn away from it or your responsibility to move from a transactional leader who has a health care plan – to a transformational leader that rises to the historical moment, and leads a movement to save and restore America’s ideals – and invite – no demand that every American rise to the challenge.

You have touched a nerve of unvanquished hunger, and almost limitless need to transform our country.

With later references to Tom Paine’s "Common Sense" — amidst all the seemingly necessary appeals to the base — the Dean campaign hit upon this intoxicating "go big" invitation to participate in something bigger, something better.

Barack Obama struck the same vibe in his speech today at the DNC’s winter meeting, where, in 2003, Dean made his own splash.

And while the content of Obama’s speech today was certainly inspiring, similar to the highpoints of Dean’s rhetoric, the one striking detail to me is what Obama, quite intentionally, didn’t do [my emphasis] …

Illinois Sen. Barack Obama struck an understated tone. Unlike other candidates, he had no entry or exit music when he spoke. His campaign’s table offered no stickers, buttons or other trinkets — merely a sign-up sheet for volunteers.

In fact, one had to look pretty hard to find the table at all. Its sole identification was three tattered pieces of plain, white paper with "Obama’s Exploratory Committee Table" printed on them.

All of this was purely intentional, according to an Obama campaign official. He said it would be hypocritical to say, as Obama has, that you’re running a different kind of campaign while using traditional tactics.

Of course, a candidate like Obama, the current sensation of the Democratic Party, may not need to put on a big show. Even in his speech — interrupted by applause several times — he made little mention of himself, his story or his abilities. Instead, he asked the crowd to transcend partisan politics and embrace hope.

If the recent moves — the bold Iraq De-escalation Act, the support for universal health care, the voting fraud bill — seem to be signaling a bold agenda for Obama’s candidacy, this symbolic spurning of traditional political trappings only adds to the promise.

The themes of civic responsibility and personal humility, of course, are not new for Barack Obama. His Harvard Law years’ writings hit many of the same notes. But that one blind quote highlighted above really sparked my imagination. Maybe, just maybe, the Obama campaign can pull off what the Dean campaign could not sustain.

If Obama and his staff can avoid the internal battles that watered down Dean’s transformational message — apparently as early as the "September to Remember" — they will, in the words of Huffington and Trippi, "win not in a toss-up but a landslide."

Just when I was wondering where to get that extra bit of cash to finish out the winter, here comes the delightful announcement (covered here by the Guardian), that the American Enterprise Institute (Bush’s other brain, and funded by big oil) is offering $10,000 to professionals who will refute the findings of the newly released, definitive international document laying the blame for climate change at humanity’s feet

Finally some easy money!

So I am wasting no time firing off my own piece to collect my $10,000 bounty. I’ve posted it below for your perusal. By all means, give me your feedback (and you might wanna consider penning yer own and gettin’ a piece of this – I understand profits are up, so there’s…er… money to burn – which is a good thing, since we’re running out of oil…)

My proposal:

Dear Sirs,

It is with great enthusiasm that I present to you my response to your call for papers discrediting the newly released international scientific report on climate change. I eagerly anticipate the $10,000 reward promised to those of us who author such papers.

Now, you may ask “has he actually read the report?” Don’t worry, the answer is no (who am I, Al Gore?). Given that your $10,000 bounty for writers to knock the piece was issued before the report was published, I can see that you have an appreciation for removing the middleman and wasting no time. But I got all I need to know from Yahoo.

Also, you need have no concerns about my credentials. I am most certainly NOT a scientist. I am, in fact, a political hack – making me among that class which has the ultimate authority and wisdom on scientific documents. Again, as a believer in smaller government, I’m sure you appreciate that by going with MY piece, you are in fact, streamlining government.

So, here is my refutation:

The latest nonsense from the watermelon crowd (you know, green on the outside – but red on the inside…heh…get it? heh…) purports to definitively prove that so-called “global”, so-called “climate”, so called “change” is a product of modern industrial society. That it’s all our fault. I offer below five arguments that show definitively that the document in question is flawed, and should be recycled for use as Presidential signing statements.

1. The document suggests that low lying countries such as Bangladesh may be threatened by rising sea levels. this argument is irrelevant for the following reason. Americans cannot see Bangladesh with the naked eye. It can therefore have no possible effect on us in America. It therefore does not exist.

(NOTE: This statement is a reflection of established, historical scientific methodology, as the same argument was used to refute Galileo’s supposed discovery of Jovian moons.)

2. The document was released in France, and the head of the UN Climate Council is German. This is clearly a European document, which opens it up to European cultural biases. For example, if the Europeans are starting to feel too warm, it’s probably because, as we know, they don’t wash enough (and their women are overly hairy).

3. The document states that the environment is endangered because the worldwide temperatures are expected to rise between 3.2 and 7.8 degrees Fahrenheit over the 21st Century.

As is typical of anti-American, United Nations bureacratic nonsense, the paper misses the reality that’s staring it right in the face. The temperature has in fact already risen that much this very day – from about 3 AM in the wee hours to noon today (source= the Weather Channel). But don’t worry, it will go back down tonight – as it does every night. It’s not pollution’s fault, it’s the sun, which, as we all know, revolves around the Earth (along with the planets and stars) once every day.

4. The document fails to consider that we are, all of us, made in the image of God, and would God do anything to hurt the Earth?

5. Finally, it is beyond all scientific dispute that Global Warming is cyclical. Purely cyclical. I have included a chart below that clearly explains the cycle:

Please send me my $10,000 check ASAP, as my Hummer is currently low on gas.

Sincerely,

John Odum
Green Mountain Daily

Here is the place to send yours:

ADDRESS:

Kenneth P. Green
1150 Seventeenth Street, N.W.
Washington, DC  20036
United States
Phone: 202-862-4883
E-mail: kgreen@aei.org

…and by all means, post here with your own versions…

( – promoted by odum)

What’s that you say? You’d like another diary criticizing the media and guaranteed to stir up heated debate? Why, say no more…

It’s all over the news this morning, but in case you haven’t heard, here’s the vt buzz version:

Ross Sneyd of the Associated Press asked the governor if it had been a rough week and was he being a bit defensive about the crises at hand. Sneyd was, in fact, putting words to the very thought that was in my mind.

That’s when things turned strange. Douglas blamed his political opponents:

“There are obviously people who are not interested in my political success, and
they’re certainly exercising every opportunity to try to act on that belief this year.”

Then he blamed the media: “Some of the questions I get from the media sound an awful lot like some of the e-mails that come out of the other party headquarters.”

Huh? I was speechless. Was he saying that questioning the technology security breaches or the delays at the Bennington office building was somehow political? Which Democratic memo had I been unknowingly following?

Fortunately, Sneyd was not entirely speechless. He asked if Douglas was accusing us of carrying the Dems’ water.

“I would never make that assertion,” Douglas said.

“I think you just did,” Sneyd responded.

“Things turned strange?” A bit, I suppose, but not that much.

Quick background. The Governor is having a bad week for two reasons. One is the hack of bank records at Human Services and the subsequent revalation that it could have been prevented by a software patich the department had been sitting on for a while.

The other is the lingering concern over the health of state workers in a Bennington state “sick building.” A few days ago, Douglas made the peculiar decision to go talk to the workers about it personally, a decision that left workers feeling no less cynical about the pace and timing of the Governor’s involvement:

Douglas and Smith met with employees Tuesday but refused to provide a date that workers would be out by. Neither were able to provided many answers to employees, but Smith said he would try to get back to them by Thursday. The memo was the result of meeting with workers and trying to address their concerns, said Smith.

“Yesterday, I got a group of cross-agency people … together in one room and said, ‘we need to move,'” said Smith. “What you’ve got to realize … is that mountains have been moved.”

But workers, although grateful to see action from the administration Thursday, still questioned why it took so long for the governor to call for such drastic measures.

The state was first notified that six workers had been diagnosed with sarcoidosis last June. A decision was made last October to move workers out and Buildings and General Services Commissioner R. Tasha Wallis said it would happen within 30 to 45 days. Eight months later, workers are still showing up to work in the building that they say has made many of them sick.

Some employees said they were thankful that the Senate bill appeared to force the governor’s hand.

But back to yesterday’s excitement. Here’s more of Hallenbeck’s account of the press conference saga from vt buzz:

Not long afterward – while I fumed about the accusations and Democratic legislators held a press conference of their own on the farm aid issue – Douglas spokesman Jason Gibbs told us the governor wanted to see us again.

There, Douglas apologized for his comments. “It’s not characteristic, as I think you know,” he said.

I believe he’s right; not that it’s not characteristic, but in that the press corps “knows” it’s not. The fact is, the display was only surprising in it’s degree, not in it’s quality.

The reporters seem very taken aback – as all of us are – but for different reasons. The press corps is acting as though this was a split personality moment; something completely out of character. It goes completely against the narrative they’ve developed for him over the years.

But those of us who pay attention see this as quite consistent. In anything that hints of conflict or politics, Douglas gets nasty. Whether it’s off the cuff (click here to listen again to a debate with Scudder Parker), or after greater consideration (tagging Parker as “Mr. Property Tax” or Clavelle as a communist when he was so far ahead in the polls, nastiness could serve no imaginable purpose). Sometimes it seems he goes nasty every chance he gets.

This proclivity is a real electoral liability. The reason it hasn’t come into play is twofold; one, that the Vermont electorate still doesn’t check in until late in the election cycle, so they don’t have time to see and really engage with the pattern, seeing examples instead as anomolies.

And more importantly, two; that the Vermont media have decided he’s “Mr. Nice Guy” so his frequent petulance gets little coverage. That may change with the high-speed turnover in the Vermont press corps, especially with the absence of Douglas apologists such as Chris Graff and Darren Allen.

Back to the explosion above, though. Of the two thorns in Douglas’ side, the Bennington sick building is definitely the most serious. It affects him in an area he has electoral strength and casts him as the uncaring bureaucrat. There likely could (and should) be lawsuits to come. And the more Douglas tries to cast it in political terms (that it’s all a big plot of the Democrats and the media), the less able he seems to be to be to understand that these are actual human lives that are at play, not figures on a political chessboard.

In fact, the only reason we witnessed this display is Douglas’s colossally poor judgement in going down personally and talking to state workers on site. Douglas is at his best when he’s at the ribbon cuttings – where he can just smile, laugh, shake hands. This is when he comes off as really pleasant and downright chummy. But when an issue is involved, he can’t control his nasty streak. He blames others, makes snide remarks and puts people down.

And this meeting wasn’t a ribbon cutting. These people were scared for their health and angry that the state didn’t seem to care. When Douglas went into defensive mode, it was like gasoline on the fire – and that fire was still burning at yesterday’s press conference (and no, the public records hack certainly didn’t help either).

A perfect storm, maybe. A big surprise? Not so much.

So folks in the media may be shocked,shocked at what they’re characterizing as a Jekyll/Hyde moment.

But to those of us who’ve been paying attention, it’s just a matter of degree.

Just when you thought there was nothing funny about the Global War on Terror, these guys come along.

You’ve heard the basic story, right? Around Boston they find these panels with blinking lights, they immediately determine they must be bombs, they spend almost a million bucks to disarm the threat, and then they catch and arrest the miscreants who planted these destructive devices.

It turns out they weren’t bombs, though, they were promotions for a cartoon on TV, so rather than look stupid, they charge these two guys with intentionally causing panic. (Did you know that was a crime? Me neither, and I’m a lawyer.) Apparently they’re all over the place, and nobody anywhere but Boston even looked twice at these things.

The judge clearly isn’t buying it, and it does sound as though he’s looking askance at the prosecutors.

The two guys seem to be living it up, and they get a link to their web page just for that. (Actually, when I just tried to go there it hung up, probably because it’s too busy, but it’s worth a shot.

So they get out of court, the press are all there, and their lawyer tells them what any smart lawyer would tell them: Don’t talk to the press. They say, no way, we’re going to talk to the press, but we’ll only answer questions about 1970’s hair styles.

You have to love it! “Sure, we’re idiots, but what does that make you?”

Watch the video

New legislation is circulating in the Statehouse calling for Bush’s impeachment under Section 603 of the Jefferson’s Manual (a la, the Rutland Resolution). From vtimpeach.com:

The bill needs as many co-sponsors as possible, so the call is out to contact your own state Representatives and ask them to sign on. Last year’s bill had about a dozen signers – most of whom are still in the legislature. Clearly these folks should be contacted again, but we shouldn’t stop there.

BIll Lippert (D-Hinesburg) is the Judiciary Chair, so its of particular importance that he be contacted by constituents. Leadership should hear from their voters as well.

Please check out the full piece for details on how you can help out. There will be a lot to say on this over the coming weeks (and Kagro X will want to chime in, as one of the national leaders on this effort), so I’ll hold off on any more for now.

Don’t trouble your beautiful minds, the federal government says Vermont Yankee is nothing to worry about. Don’t you feel better now?

Another new blog with anonymous “insiders” appears. This one’s a bit skimpy on the content, but it’s good – and the folks involved actually are plugged in. Check it out at www.vtscrapwood.blogspot.com.