Bob Giaquinta for Congress

Opening Presentation

[The following is a transcript of a live presentation]

Welcome. I am Bob Giaquinta. I am running for congress representing the 3rd district of Nevada. I am running as a member of the Green Party of Nevada. First my disclaimer or it may be considered a claimer. I am not a politician, I have no ties to big business, and I am not controlled by a political machine. I am not a great public speaker, my Brooklyn accent shows its head far too often. I don't have speech writers who advise me to be politically correct. I am not a lawyer. The Green Party is a grassroots organization, and our guideline disallows donations from corporations, and political action committees. And even though you may not live in my district, I would consider you as part of my constituency.

With that said, I would like to tell you what we'll be discussing today. I will break this presentation into three parts. I will first speak about our dysfunctional government, and show how both major parties participate to make it so, with the help of big business. Secondly, I'll share with you the philosophies of the Green Party. And thirdly, we will discuss what is important to us with a little brain teaser, in which I hope you all will participate.

Let's start out by saying the word Republican, what comes to mind… small government, private investment, low taxes, strict interpretation of the constitution. Say the word Democrat… entitlements, civil liberties, concern for the masses. It's all bulldinky. Hopefully I'll show you they are basically the same party, only looking out for their own elections, and are controlled by large corporations. If our government were writing the Declaration of Independence now, one phrase, that we all know, would definitely would be changed to " of the corporation, by the corporation, for the corporation".

Statistics show that 50% of eligible voters do not vote. The subconscious comes into play. We know that it really doesn't matter, because of the choices we are given. Two of the best illustrations are; In the 2000 Presidential elections, Florida was the swing state. We all remember the chads. Well, the Supreme Court could have had a say in its outcome. Our rules provided for them to be accessed. In a joint session of congress there were many Floridian congressmen who appealed for one Senator to ratify their proposal to have the Supreme Court decide the legality of the vote. There were over 40 Democratic Senators present. Not one would back up the congressmen, even if it meant the President could possibly have been a Democrat. It was better not to overturn the applecart, business as usual. In the 2004 Presidential race, in reality we had two people to choose from. They were both from privileged families, went to Yale about the same time, were members of the Skull and Bones fraternity, did not differ on our war in Iraq, or spending. The major differences were on smokescreen issues, such as abortion, gay rights, Intelligent Design, and so forth. These personal issues need to be rectified, but the killings in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the bankrupting of the United States were non-issues. This time the swing state was Ohio. There were many voter irregularities, which have been documented. Again the Democrats didn't spill the applecart. We are controlled by a two party dictatorship. When you have the choice of the worst of two evils, you still end up with evil.

Talking about bankruptcy. Every man, woman, and child in the United States is in governmental debt of over $25,000. If you want I can collect you portion as you leave today. The government is in debt for 9 Trillion dollars. One trillion of this is because of our useless and mismanaged war in Iraq. And what do our Presidential candidates want to do about it? Nothing but prolong the occupation. Where was congress when we went to war? That's right looking out for their jobs. There should have been some oversight and inspection. But they gave in to the politically correct atmosphere, which was the fear that the public had after 911. It would look like they were unpatriotic if they didn't give their approval. We live in a great country, and we are a privileged people, but our governing system is broken. The two party system is not working. Our incumbent Congressman is nothing but a "yes" man for our, to put it nicely, controversial President. The politicians spend more time collecting money for their next campaign than they do governing. Do we want people in congress that "sleep" with corporations? Do we want candidates that are hand picked by powerful political machines? Is it time to choose citizen legislators rather than career politicians?

I will prove to you that I am not a politician. I will not tell you that I will lower your taxes. I will not tell you that I will increase your entitlements. I will not tell you that I will get "earmarks" for our district to build an Oscar Goodman monument or such. I won't even kiss babies, even though I love kids. We are in too deep a financial and moral hole to do that. I have been in business for over 35 years, and I know how to balance a checkbook.

In 1947 President Truman and Secretary of State Dean Acheson, along with National Security Council devised a plan for the New World Order. Its design was to keep the United States on a wartime economy. About that time, the War Department was changed to the Department of Defense, which is a more politically correct name. Those in power were pushed by the military/ industrial complex to this end. Prior to World War II we were in the Great Depression for 12 years, and they didn't want to go back there. Millions of soldiers were returning and the war factories were set up to handle them. It would also enhance our control of our economic empire. But they needed a fear to keep the public under control.

"It's the leaders of the country who determine the policy (war), and it's always a simple matter to drag the people along…All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to greater danger." That's a quote from Hitler's right hand man, Herman Goring, at the Nuremburg Trials.

Communism was the fear, and it lasted until 1989. Every administration since 1947, whether Republican or Democrat, has used this ploy. President Eisenhower was subdued when the plan was in its infancy. However, in his farewell speech he warned us to keep an eye on the military/industrial complex. After the threat of communism ended we needed a new threat. The War on Drugs was then used, but this was self-limiting, and the arming of South American and other dictators, world wide, was not using enough ammo. In 1989 our puppet in Panama, Noriega, helped us use some ammo in the drug scare.

Thank heavens for our boy in the mid-east, Saddam, overstepping his boundaries and invading Kuwait in 1990. Corporation profits soared and we used a lot of ammo. Our next ally, from the Russian/Afghanistan War, Bin Laden, gave the United States Government an open ended fear, terrorism. Terrorism is as nearly omnipresent as genocide. I doubt there will ever be an end to it. The defense corporations have been drooling ever since.

These fears have been the reasons that for the past sixty years we have spent ½ to 2/3 of our taxes and money borrowed on the military. From 1915 to 1985 the United States was the largest creditor nation, now we are the largest debtor nation, with close to 50% of our treasury notes owned by foreign nations. The mean United States worker has to work into the second week of July just to pay taxes. And we have little or no say as to how it is spent. Why do we have 30,000 nuclear weapons? It costs millions every day just for upkeep. We could wittle it down to 1000, and still destroy every major city in the world. Why do we have 700 military bases in foreign countries if not to keep our imperial state safe, and protect our "economic" regime. Imagine how much money that we could save.

Most of you have heard the word Corporatocracy. Believe it or not, this is what rules the world. With the advent of multinational corporations, a fascism of the world has taken over. Every aspect of our lives is controlled by the corporations. Their goals are short-term profits, and its byproducts are the subjugation of the peoples of the world, and destruction of our environment.

The "preventive" war in Iraq, which couldn't be "preemptive" because they weren't preparing to attack the United States, thus prevented a war with Iraq. We went to war to prevent a war. Does that make sense. It did to Bush! When the weapons of mass destruction were not found, and it was shown that the Iraqi were not involved with 911, the reason for war was Democracy. We all know that the real reason was to use some ammo, and that four letter word, oil. (In Brooklyn it's pronounced earl). I'm not too sure that the Democrats, had they won in 2000 would have done things differently. In 1997 Clinton's defense secretary, William Cohen, warned that Saddam had enough VX to kill everyone in the world. Secretary of State Albright said Saddam was "Hitleresque" and would use his weapons of mass destruction. Clinton's national security advisor, Sandy Berger, warned Saddam would use WMDs. In 1998 Clinton said Saddam had stockpiles of chemical and biologic weapons, and the capacity to quickly restart production of WMDs. This "fear factor" was being used by the Democrats before 911, and helped set the stage for Bush's invasion.

The really frightening aspect of this war is its privatization. The corporations, although still in the shadows, are now coming out front and center, with little concealment. No bid contracts for Haliburton. No rules of law for the 30,00 armed mercenaries, mostly from Blackwater. Billions of dollars missing with no paper trail, both our money, and 20 billion dollars of Iraqi money, since we were given stewardship of their assets. War is getting even better for big business.

I'll be talking about billions and trillions of dollars. To get a feel of what a trillion dollars is, lets do a little mathematics. There are

• 60 seconds in a minute
• 3600 seconds in an hour
• 86,400 seconds in a day
• 31,536,000 seconds in a year
• 157,680,000 seconds in five years, about the amount of time that we've been in Iraq

Let's divide 1,000,000,000,000 (1 Trillion) dollars, the amount we have spent there by the seconds in those five years
Equals $6341.95

That means if we didn't eat or sleep and you gave me 6341.95 dollars every second since March of 2003 we would total the amount we have spent on this occupation. Let's drop the 95 cents, it takes me one second to say 6341. By the way the 95 cents that I dropped would have totaled $149,796,000.

We have lost around 4,000 soldiers, with about 30,000 wounded. Iraqi dead total close to one million. Two million Iraqi have left the country, and two million are refugees. These totals over the past five years are more than Sadaam's record over thirty years. There have been over 120 American veteran suicides in 2007, and thousands suffer from post traumatic stress syndrome.

Domestically our policies are just as pitiful. Our government subsidizes the rich and taxes the masses. The 516 billion dollar omnibus bill, which is our budget excluding the Defense Department budget, include:

• Farm subsidies of 288 billion dollars. Farmers can collect subsidies if they earn less than 2.4 million dollars.
• The oil companies get billions of dollars of subsidies, at he same time they are recording their greatest profits.

12 billion dollars for 9,000 pork projects, better known as earmarks. It seems the politicians can always agree to spend taxpayer's monies to buy votes back home. At the last minute they did have time to revise the Alternate Minimum Tax, which was put in about 30 years ago so that the 2,000 top wage earners paid some taxes. The AMT now would have affected 20 million middle-income families. But, because of this revision and the loss of $50 billion this would have produced, the Democrats had to go back on their short lived " pay as you go" policy. By the way, those top income families, which earn close to 200 million dollars in income, pay about 17% in taxes. I had a very successful practice, for many years, and I was in the top tax bracket, 35%-50%. I worked hard and lived well, but I do resent how the government spent my money on the war machine and subsidizing people who earned hundreds of times of what I earned.

Where are the discussions of windfall taxes on the oil companies? Exxon Mobil, for example, reported the largest annual profit on record for a U.S. corporation in 2006, bringing in $39.5 billion, which was better than 10% of its gross sales. Exxon CEO Lee Raymond received $400 million severance pay. A majority of Americans across the political spectrum want an energy policy that emphasizes renewable and alternative sources of energy. Where are the discussions on the 15% tax that hedge fund executive's pay? Political action committees, lobbyists and executives do not give money to politicians or parties out of an altruistic support of the principles of democracy. They are astute investors expecting a return on their investments. Politicians routinely deliver on campaign contributions that are provided to them by giving goodies to their respective industries.

Our current form of government (politics) does not work and we will not survive with the irresponsible inattention to our needs. Especially how politicians are rated by their respective parties; by how often they voted with the party, how much money is raised for their colleagues, and how they stood up for their team. The current system accentuates differences rather than bridging them. Elected officials are supposed to be civil servants, not party servants. The formation of a viable third party could help.

The money spent on the Defense budget has recently been overtaken by the entitlements of Social Security and Medicare, both of which are the hidden ghosts that are ready to pounce on us, and definitely bankrupt the United States. Where is the discussion of this looming giant? As long as the problem does not explode on "their watch" politicians sweep it under the carpet. The answers are not going to appeal to anyone, and most will have to sacrifice, or accept total failure of both systems. Yet no discussion!

The environment and global warming are also things that we have to discuss. In the recent past other environmental problems have been resolved after studies by scientists. When scientist discovered a hole in the ozone over the Antarctic, the research showed that the use of choro-fluro carbons were the culprits. These were manmade chemicals that ate up the ozone. The Montreal Protocol, in 1987, banned these substances globally. Guess what no more hole

In the 70's we were threatened by acid rain. This condition was mostly caused by coal burning industry, which put Sulfa in the atmosphere, which turned into sulfuric acid, which precipitated to the earth as an acid rain. This was ruining the soil, rivers, etc. Government regulations helped by putting cleaning mechanisms on the smoke stacks. There was a steady decrease of this hazard until 2003. It is rising again due to the inattention of Bush's regulatory agencies.

Even if one doesn't believe that industrialization, clearing of forests, or production of carbon dioxide are causing global warming, what is the difference. Don't we all want clean air to breath, clean water to drink, to be able to visit pristine areas, to swim in clean oceans? Don't we want to eliminate possible causes of diseases such as cancer? We can reduce emissions, conserve tropical forests, and make the world a better place to live. How can this be accomplished when our current government is not responsive to our wants? There are probably other factors to global warming, but why not try to eliminate our portion of the problem, and have renewable energy before it is too late?

The government must regulate big business, they will not regulate themselves. Why don't we learn from the past. In the 1980's the Savings and Loan deregulation cost the country billions of dollars, now we have the sub-prime fiasco. We are still reeling from the Vietnam War, and we invade Iraq.

We are being stymied by our government! Do we think that there might be some collusion when the heads of regulatory agencies are headed by people who are from the industries they are supposed to be regulating. In the new energy bill the average miles per gallon standard will have to be 35 MPG in 2020. Hopefully it won't be too late. EPA Administrator, Stephen Johnson, denied California's request for a waiver on raising auto emissions standards, against the recommendation of his agency.

An example showing how ludicrous corporate control can be follows. We've all heard of the "Urban Legend", that years ago someone invented a car that would run on water, and that big corporations stifled it. I don't know if this story is true, but I do have a documented tail that is true. In the early 1990's the California Air Resources Board (CARB) enacted a law that said by 2003 ten percent of autos sold would have to be Zero Emission Vehicles, or the individual automakers could not sell autos in that state. General Motors, Toyota, and Honda responded by producing electric vehicles in 1997. GM's EV1, electric vehicle 1, is a great story. The first autos were powered by lead/acid batteries, which could be plugged in and recharged overnight. They had a range of 70 miles, and there were some initial problems with the batteries. In the early 1990's an inventor, Stan Ovshinsky, invented the Nickel Metal Hybride battery, which was a far superior battery, and could go 160 miles before recharging. In 1994 he sold controlling interest to GM, hoping that they would mass produce these batteries. In 1999 GM installed these batteries in the EV1. They worked great. In 2000 GM announced that it was selling the rights of the battery to Texaco, which a few weeks later was taken over by Chevron. In July 2001 Chevron owned the rights. The leases for the EV1 did not have buy out agreements. GM collected the EV1s and spent $600 to destroy each auto, rather than sell the autos for $25,000 to the public, who almost unanimously wanted these autos. With pressure from the automakers, the federal government's Interstate Commerce Commission disallowed the California law. Now Chevron, an oil company has control of the patent until 2014. Guess what…they are not producing batteries! They are not licensing the patent to other companies. They also sued Honda and Toyota for using these batteries, thus driving them out of production of electric cars. The automakers really didn't want electric cars, which have one moving part. They make a lot of money on parts, seals, etc. These autos could have been recharged from solar electricity, and be on the road today, but instead we $3-4 per gallon gasoline, and all its polluting by products.

Here in Nevada there are three proposed coal-burning power plants, two of which will totally sell electricity to other states. You only have to be here a few weeks to realize that Nevada has two things in abundance. That's right sunlight and wind. Doesn't it make more sense to use them. Instead of financing huge projects that will pollute, why not help finance individual residential renewable solar and wind electric production. It will reduce consumer costs in the long run, they may even be able to sell some electricity to the utility company, and eliminate pollution. Does that make sense?

Congress agreed to the ethanol solution. It seems immoral to me to use ethanol from corn to fuel cars when there are people starving. The rise in cost of corn is severely affecting the Mexicans, who depend on this staple for most of their nutrition. Add to this that producing ethanol from sugar is eight times as efficient, and that it takes one gallon of petroleum to produce one gallon of ethanol. Food prices in the US are already rising, and there are food riots throughout the world. What is congress looking at?

The issue that I am most apprehensive about, in the short term, is our liberty. Since 911 our freedoms have been imperceptibly been eroding. All three branches of our government, executive, legislative, and judiciary, are involved. They are using the treat of terrorism to cloak these events. There are several steps that are common to all societies whose freedoms are withdrawn. These steps happen concurrently and slowly. Here are some of them with a few examples.

First you need external and internal treats. 911 is the legitimate threat, and our first reaction was the Patriot Act. How could any legislator not sign this act in the furor of that moment, and the name itself is omnipotent. Most legislators hadn't even read it. Does anyone question how a 400 page legal document could be written in eight days, and confirmed in a few weeks? It seems that many of these statutes were on the shelves of various departments of the government, waiting to be implemented at the proper time. People are willing to relinquish some freedoms for security, we fear violence above all, but it is unusual for a stable (other than 911), vibrant nation to give them up so quickly. The internal threats are you and I.

Then there is the establishment of secret prisons. Habeus Corpus is the cornerstone of freedom. A secret prison system without Habeus Corpus and above the rule of law is the cornerstone of a dictatorship. The first casualties are terrorists and radicals, slowly others are swept into the lair, many being innocent. People believe that it can't happen to them, so there isn't much dissent. The name calling of critics and dissenters then starts, "traitors", "spies", "enablers of the enemy", "enemies of the state", etc. These labels desensitize the public. A decade ago who would have thought that there would be a discussion about torture? The discussion makes it seem that torture may be permissible. How do we feel when our soldiers are tortured, or executed. Torture is against US law and the Geneva Convention, which we signed many decades ago. How can we negate "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you"? Can we justify humiliation, stress positions, sleep deprivation, waterboarding, extreme temperatures, or solitary confinement? President Bush recently (March 2008) vetoed a bill that forbad torture, and the legislature couldn't over ride the veto. That means that more than one third of our legislators think that torture is OK!

In 2002 top legislators, including Nancy Pelosi, were told that the US interrogators were going to go beyond the limits of our laws. There should have been an outcry at that time. There was none. In 2007, how could the Senate, with the Democrats in control, confirm the new Attorney General, Mukasey, when he wouldn't admit that waterboarding was torture. With the discovery of "extraordinary renditions", arresting noncombatants and sending them to prisons in countries that are known to be lax in their control of torture, the US took a further step into depravity. Prisoners were never charged with anything and many are and were held for years, while undergoing torture, and many have broken no law.

The 2006 Military Commissions Act was approved just before the 2006 elections. It states that an "enemy combatant" is anyone that the President, or his representative, deems an enemy combatant. There doesn't have to be any proof, or suspicion, just his say so. That means you and I can be arrested at his whim. How could any legislator vote for this act? Could it be that they didn't want to look "soft" just before elections?

Indiscriminate surveillance is a means of control of the populace. Citizens turn a bind eye when the surveillance is on the " evil doers", but when everyone is under this scrutiny it casts a fear on everyone, and they are less likely to act as freely against that which they feel are injustices. Just knowing that you might be watched does emote a sense of fear. Maybe the opposition politicians are so silent because they know that they are definitely being monitored. Look what happened to Governor Spitzer. Within days of 911 the surveillance corporatacray took over. Disasters and wars are extremely profitable. Within a few weeks of 911 there were almost 600 registered lobbyists for Homeland Security. It is now a $115 billion a year industry.

In 1978 the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) was enacted. It allowed surveillance of foreign communications to be tapped, but a warrant had to be obtained within 72 hours. A secret judiciary was able to consider the reasons for these warrants, and denied only a handful of the 2,000 that were requested prior to 911. President Bush has ignored FISA, and indicates that he can tap anyone he chooses, without a warrant, because he is a "war president", and is the Commander in Chief. He doesn't realize that he is Commander in Chief of the military, not of the people.

AT&T and other large communication companies have admitted their cooperation with the National Security Agency, NSA, to tap into all of their communication operations. This is against the law without a court order. If it weren't for some " whistle blowers" this conspiracy would have been undetected.

Restriction of the press. There is a distinct difference in releasing news in complete freedom versus having someone looking over your shoulder. Richard Clarke, Mike Douglas, and Dan Rather were smeared when they crossed the Republic administration. The most famous incident occurred when diplomat Joseph Wilson wrote an editorial stating that the information that Niger was selling materials aiding Saddam's weapons program was false. The Bush administration "outed" his wife, Valerie Plaime, who was a CIA operative. "Scooter" Libby, Cheney's chief of staff, was convicted, and then pardoned by Bush.

Although not an overt restriction of the press, the use of the press to disseminate false information is a manner of psychological intimidation. Putting "spin" on a news article is flirting with truth, using outright lies and false documents is a betrayal of democracy. When the public is force fed lies, the truth becomes clouded, especially when there is no other source of information. Bush's landing on the aircraft carrier, dressed like John Wayne, with a huge "Mission Accomplished" sign in the background, leads us to believe that the war is over. That was over four years ago. The Niger documents, the mobile chemical weapons vehicles, the meeting of Al Quaeda and Saddam, were all lies that brought us into the Iraqi war. The wounded "Rambo" girl who fought until she ran out of bullets, Pat Tillman who died charging up a hill towards enemy fire, the Iraqi death toll, all lies to add to the governments propaganda story. They deny the lies even after they have been proven to be lies. The public is confused with the different views of issues, and is forced into a state of apathy. Truth and accountability are two of the pillars of democracy and this administration lacks in both.

Reporters, who expose unlawful actions by the government, even if the information is classified, are being called treasonous. The 1917 Espionage Act, which states that unauthorized possession of information regarding national defense is a crime, is being revitalized. One of the problems with this is that the Bush administration is constantly reclassifying documents, documents that were previously declassified are being classified as confidential again. Joe Wilson, of the Niger affair, and Seymour Hirsch, of the Abu Ghraib scandal, could have been prosecuted for revealing classified information. I don't know about you, but I am grateful for these revelations.

The Justice Department is supposed to be a nonpartisan agency. In 2007 eight US attorneys, who were appointed by Bush, were fired because they weren't prosecuting Democrats for voter irregularities. In testimony before Congress, Alberto Gonzales, the Attorney General, consistently said he couldn't recall relevant information. Unfortunately the Justice Department controls the elections. Bush "stole the election in 2000 in Florida. He probably stole the election in 2004 in Ohio. I hate to think what is possible in 2008.

Bush has used more "signing statements'" than any other President. Basically after he signs a bill from the legislature, he notes that he feels the bill is unconstitutional, and that he may not enforce it. This puts Congress in an advisory position, which is not the power vested in it by the constitution.

The US Fiscal Year 2007 Defense Authorization Bill basically allows the President to declare martial law and to mobilize the National Guard of any state in case of emergency, without the consent of the Governor, which the President alone is able to define. He can send National Guard units of one state into another. Can a peace rally be considered a national emergency? Probably, if he says so! The state National Guards (militias) were created by the founders of our country to be the armies of the people, to thwart an authoritarian threat. Now the threat can have control.

The heads of some of his regulatory agencies are going against both agency recommendations and public dissent. EPA Administrator, Stephen Johnson, denied California's request for a waiver on raising auto emissions standards, against the recommendation of his agency. FCC chairman Martin pushed through cross ownership for newspapers and radio/television stations against congressional and public objections. In every public discussion that was held on the issue the public almost unanimously were against this action. Eighty percent of the media is owned by a handful of corporations, which can now control the media with a tighter fist. Many of Bush's regulatory appointees have worked for the industries that they are supposed to regulate, both before and after their terms. We have foxes guarding the chicken coop.

The blatant arrogance, the cronyism, the secrecy, the distortion of facts, the derogatory name-calling, and the outright lies will mark this administration, and it is not being opposed by the Democrats. Presidential supremacy stands in the way of an open society. His supporters refuse to answer congressional committees, exercise executive privilege, or don't recall specifics.

I would now like to recite a poem;

First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out -
because I was not a Socialist.
Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out -
because I was not a Trade Unionist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out -
because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for the Catholics, and I did not speak out-
because I was a Protestant.
Then they came for me - and there was no one left to speak for me.

This poem was written by pastor Martin Niemoller, a protestant reverend, who spent years in a Nazi concentration camp during World War II.

The founders of our country risked their lives so that the common man could both be entrusted and have a chance to rule themselves, and not be harmed arbitrarily. Do we want to live in a society where liberty is weakened, dissent and criticism is muted? Where information is withheld or censored? Where opposition parties are called traitors? It is during times of stress that our rights are most valuable, and should be protected. This is the time when we should have a free market of opinion. In 1936, as Hitler was becoming a totalitarian figure, he said, "I am not a dictator, I am just simplifying democracy". History tells us of a person who, as Naomi Wolfe says "… was a political prisoner seized by a powerful state, convicted without a fair trial, and tortured by military who were just doing there jobs", and then, executed. His name was Jesus. The Declaration of Independence suggests that government is an artificial entity, and that if it does not protect its citizens rights should be altered or abolished. My humanity is being badly misrepresented by this government, it is not doing this for me, although I am helping pay for it, it does not speak for me, but is doing it in my name.

We had our revolution 200 years ago, we have the means to change things, and things have not fully hit the fan yet, but when it does it may be too late. America's strength is rooted in its most stable asset, our values. Democracy is not a spectator sport. The ball is in our court. Votes may count….for a while. There are several essays and stances on issues that I have written on my web page, Which is bgcongress.com, if you don't have access to the web give me a call and I'll send you copies

Now to the Green Party. What popped into your mind when I said that? Maybe whale lovers, tree huggers, commie hippie potheads. What else?…………..

Let me ask you some questions:

1. Would you like to have a government that is fully accountable to its participating citizens?
2. Would you like to live within our ecological balance so that future generations will benefit?
3. Do you believe everyone should have the rights and opportunity to benefit equally?
4. Do you believe we should explore other alternatives rather than violence, both globally and personally?
5. Do you believe that big government and big business hinders the way you want to live?
6. Would you like to have an economic system that provides you a decent living, providing meaningful work with dignity?
7. Do you believe that women should have the same opportunities to succeed as men?
8. Do you believe that it is important to value cultural, ethnic, sexual, religious, and spiritual diversity?
9. Do you believe it is your responsibility to help improve personal and global harmony?
10. Do you believe that our actions and policies should be motivated by long term goals?

I f you answered yes to these questions, you should consider joining and becoming active in The Green Party! That's because the answers are what guides the Green Party, which we call our Ten Key Values:

Grassroots Democracy

Social Justice and Equal Opportunity

Ecological Wisdom

Non-Violence

Decentralization

Community-Based Economics and Economic Justice

Feminism and Gender Equity

Respect for Diversity

Personal and Global Responsibility

Future Focus and Sustainability

Quality of Life

I will abide by these values, the challenge is to make people aware and implement legislation that will achieve these goals.

Now for the brain teaser. Which of the following is most important to us?

Survival of humans and humanity

• Oxygen- depletion of forestry and plankton/algae, pollution of air
• Water- global warming, climate change, pollution, privatization,
• Food- pesticides, hybrid plants, preservatives, transgendering
• Shelter- polyvinylflourides, New Orleans dikes, earthquakes, fires, subprime lending
• Security- terrorism, Iraq, Iran, undocumented aliens (?)
• Rule of law- Patriots Act, loss of Habeus Corpus, torture, rendition, Blackwater, black sites, Freedom Group (producing language for war in Iran)
• Health- universal health care, pharmaceutical costs, "cure" rather than prevent
• Energy- pollution, reusable energy, oil dependency
• Education- teaching for tests, focus on money rather than occupation,
• Liberty- Taxes, multimedia takeover, executive powers, abortion, gay rights, corporate control of government and subsidies, illegal surveillance,unbridled spending and borrowing, computer voting machines, decriminalization of recreational drugs, redistricting
• Religion/mythology/Intelligent design
• Procreation