Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
🙂 I would be happy to cosponsor this as we need to enlist registered Greens is supporting the party and its candidates.
The Tibet issue is a valid one. It helps to illustrate the Palestinian one by taking the issur of “anti-semitism” and the Jewish holocaust off center stage and putting the matter clearly in a more neutral–human rights/Universal Declaration of Human Rights arena. When the UN legitimized the State of Israel in 1948 it did so with the understanding that the right of return would be recognized, or so I understand and that Palestinians would have self determination rights as well. Israel has always insisted that any resolutions passed by the UN General Assembly to resolve these issues are inspired by anti-Semitic attempts to endanger Israel's existence. The US has supported Israel in its position against the votes of almost every other civilized nation on the planet.  It has also contributed heavily to arming Israel to the teeth, something it has not done in Tibet. It would, of course, or would have been better to pressure China with economic means when that was possible but that didn't happen either. Too bad the US has always failed to strengthen the rule of law at an international level in preference to keeping its imperial options and its Cold War options open.
Unless Victor clearly and immediately and publicly repudiates the remarks he made implying that the Jewish Holocaust was not a reality, and which contained a slur against all Jews in the state of Israel, identifying this statement as merely an unwise hyperbole born of anger at the most recent crimes against humanity commited by the leadership of that state and our gutless President's support of them, I AGREETo clarify, the Denver Greens were of the understanding that Victor was going to so repudiate his outrageous statement but apparently he has changed his mind. And I do not want the Green Party of Colorado represented by a person who operates out of the framework that the events of the 20th Century that led to the establishment of the Israeli State were the result of a conscious conspiracy of Jewish bankers and Zionist ideologues who manufactured the myth of the holocaust among other things. From other material he has circulated he appears to so operate. It grieves me that we would have to reject anyone from participation who claims to operate out of the10 Key values. But how else can we educate people that part of such operation is to be responsible about historical truth and respect for diversity.
Information request: How much money is in the treasury and re: Claire's note, have we ever spent that money for a local activity before. I would support spending it per their request because it might help grow the green party in Jeffco/Adams. I think some of the advertising might say they are looking for candidates for 2014 for County Commissioners and State Legislative seats. How about a Green Sheriff? I ran as a D in 1974 for Sheriff. A Green Assessor? Â
I have contributed my limit to Stein and also raised a small amount in door anonymous donations as well in CS.  If every active green and the council on the council or attenders at local meetings contributed $50 would we not hit the $5000 mark? This should not be impossible goal.
I fully support this proposal with this wording regardless of other suggestions I have made along the way to preparation including the one I posted on the Test Forum. I hope we can get it approved by consensus or vote —sooner the better.
Both Eric and Jonsey seem to believe that changing the bylaws is something we can do when we want to. I would be happy to wait till the Convention where it takes a supermajority vote to change. Then I won't have to write the cumbersome proposal and since we have no agreed upon method by which the Council can make a decision anyway, after a year with this Forum, I guess Art is right that we can't do it prior to the Convention even though our bylaws give the Council the power to do so. Unfortunately we are a year into this process and have effectively made ourselves powerless rather than more effective. Of course, I could write a Proposal as Jonsey did. And like I did for several years prior to this non-system. Personally I find that proposal format to be pretty bureaucratic, redundant and just plain cumbersome rather than more grass roots democracy. Yes cosenator is Bob Kinsey. Nobody else criticized my using in on the several posts I have made. If I had a clue how to change it I would. Remembering how to log into this is my major block to using it.
I think that the issue of a major party not being able to change the bylaws is so that it cannot favor one announced candidate over another in the Primary Process. Since we don't have any such challenges–wouldn't that be amazing, we should not be intimidated by all the formalities. We can just interpret the bylaws as having the purpose being that any candidate for office must be registered as a Green prior to the State Convention. Or even a month before as would be the case if the State Convention were held as it was in 2010 in early June. It would seem to me that the party parliamentarian or the council could issue a statement that the intention of the bylaws is met so long as a candidate is registered as two months prior to the previous June Convention Date as that was the case when they were written and before the State changed the date of the Primary and thus the Convention. I see no reason why a Republican or Democratic Secretary of State can override the original intention of our bylaws shown clearly by saying that a candidate must be a registered Green Party voter six months prior to the General Election. That would be around May 2.  Bob Kinsey303-949-4073'Unlimited Growth is the Ideology of a Cancer Cell"
Original Message
From: ericfried@comcast.netTo: R. JonesCc: Tanya Ishikawa , Bill Bartlett , Art Goodtimes , daniel sage , misha lizov , Bob Kinsey Sent: Thu, 01 Mar 2012 00:08:05 -0500 (EST)Subject: Re: request for waiver....well, maybe there is a way for late-blooming greens to runI think maybe Jonesy is right after all!The SOS election calendar says:6-February (Monday) Last day for state central committees to file party bylaws or rules with the Secretary of State. (No bylaw or rule may be filed or amended after the 1st Monday in February) 1-3-103(9)(a)so now I looked deeper, and the actual state statute 1-3-103 (9) (a) references the major political parties, and the definition section in 1-3-100.3 says "political party means a major political party." In Article 1 (Elections), the definition of "political party" is a major political party or a minor political party. It differs from Article 1 to Article 3 (Political Party organization) but since the limiting factor here is article 3, it does not apply to us by the article 3 definition. Nowhere do I find a definition of "state central committee" to clarify whether those are only major party state central committees. Geez, you have to be a lawyer to understand this!Minor parties are mostly governed by Section 1-4-13, which sets deadlines but then overrules them saying "unless otherwise provided" by the minor party constitution or bylaws. If we change our bylaws, so the newer greens candidacies are in accordance with them, they should therefore be legal under state law. That must be how the American Constitution Party changed its rules to allow Tom Tancredo to run on their line in the last election. It would be good for someone to check with the ACP and also the SOS office just to make sure. If the party as a whole agrees - and the council is empowered to change bylaws between state meetings - we can make it possible for our CD5 candidate to run for Congress and our Gunnison County Commissioner candidate, which would be splendid.
