GVConsulting

CounterCurrents | OpEdNews | Political Context | RSN

Dear Sarah,

You and I first crossed paths on a fairly pleasant day in Ketchikan, Alaska, during the lonely part of your effort to unseat the deplorable Governor Frank Murkowski in 2006. Like you, I had a booth at the Ketchikan Blueberry Festival – and neither of us were very busy. You were the “outsider” tracking down the hometown boy, Murkowski, and I was the “radical” environmentalist undermining his work. The conservative town on Revillagigedo Island didn’t care much for either you or me at the time.

Sarah Palin in Ketchikan, Alaska

I approached you on your stroll of solitude around the festival, and you saw my approach out of the corner of your eye. If the signs and the t-shirts and the postcards at my booth didn’t label me a “greenie” right away, I know my introduction did: Gregory Vickrey of the Tongass Conservation Society and Alaska Conservation Voters, how do you do?

I knew why you were there, but you told me anyway. You knew I hated the Bridge to Nowhere scheduled for my town, but I told you anyway. And because you noticed I was wearing an Illinois Fighting Illini shirt both of us were more than capable of changing to a lighter topic of discussion. This would not be the last time we’d talk college hoops.

The world now knows you steamrolled through a primary with the aforementioned Murkowski and John Binkley, and overwhelmed the obsolete former governor Tony Knowles (Eric Croft would have been a better challenger, and we both know it) as well as independent nemesis Andrew Halcro in the general election. You had a campaign for change, and our beautiful state was prime for implementing it after the failures of King Frank. You had the wherewithal of keen foresight, and left the established network of good-ol’-boy politics behind. You had the will to challenge, and harnessed the brand of independence to achieve.

What happened?

Looking back, I see the Sarah Palin I knew in Juneau – the Sarah with a presence of mind to recall our debates about basketball; the Sarah who worked with the aforementioned Croft to remove corrupt individuals from the intertwined network between state government and the oil and coal industries; the Sarah who challenged the federal government and its continued effort to pillage Alaska’s natural resources.

The Sarah Palin who was approachable.

The Sarah Palin who helped our small environmental group kill the Bridge to Nowhere.

The Sarah Palin who couldn’t say for certain that humankind was the culprit behind climate change, but knew we had to mitigate and adapt to reality anyway.

We didn’t agree on a lot of things, Sarah. But when we did, you or your staff knew, and the “outsider” Republican and “radical” environmentalist made a go of it, sometimes quietly and other times not so. Bridge to Nowhere. Village erosion mitigation. Fire Island Wind Project. A calculated refusal to bow down to establishment Republicans over that oh-so-sensitive provision in the state constitution (you remember: they didn’t like you and wanted to expose a hypocrisy in you that didn’t exist at the time). Alaska Marine Highway System. University Lands. Oil tax reform.

What happened?

In 2008, I supported the ticket of Ralph Nader and Matt Gonzalez. I would do so again, because I know and admire both men and believe the views they hold and the work they do are desperately needed on this planet, and in this country. And I know what I am about to share with you in public will likely cause recoil amongst some of my colleagues and allies (no doubt this entire letter does!). But it should be clear in my writing: I have an agenda. And the following email snippet I sent to a rather conservative friend in 2008, after your nomination to Vice Presidential candidacy, serves that agenda.

“She is (was?) a really solid governor for Alaska, and a good person. I was quite lucky to get to know her, and had a good working relationship with her and her administration (as her cancellation of the Bridge to Nowhere in Ketchikan attests). She is extremely popular among the people of the state, and not so much amongst the legislature, which – to me – is great.

“I did not vote for her in 2006. I did not vote for the Democrat Tony Knowles either (and preferred her over him). I actually voted for Andrew Halcro, the Republican turned independent that is leading the charge of the Troopergate scandal. (I respect Andy deeply, and am glad he brought up the question of abuse of power, but I believe he has gone too far, and has done so for the sake of political ambition – it is obvious to me that he has a personal problem with Sarah.)

“My biggest fear of her prior to her victory was that she would be far too evangelical once in power. That concern was overblown, frankly. She is smart and savvy, and during her first two years she did a wonderful job of picking her political battles (the Bridge, budget vetoes, gasline, oil taxes, transportation), allowed state agencies to actually do their work, and enforced a sound fiscal policy while challenging corruption at every level of state government. She stayed away from social issues even though she had opportunities to push her evangelical side, and that was brilliant of her (Republican Lyda Green, our Senate President, can’t stand Sarah and tried to force an abortion debate – for the purposes of creating derision in the state and to loosen the support of Dems and independents for Sarah on non-social issues – over 6 different potential law changes – Sarah wouldn’t bite).

“It goes without saying that I did not agree with her on all things (like aerial shooting of wolves and ANWR), but I wouldn’t agree on all things with anyone, and she proved herself to be prudent once elected to the point where I am actually happy with her work, overall.

“I thoroughly enjoyed talking with her on the occasions we got together. We’d always talk basketball (she is a big fan) before getting down to business, and she was always kind, funny, and as open as she could be under the circumstances (radical vs. governor haha).

“I am surprised she accepted the role of VP, given the circumstances with her newest child, but I think the pick was brilliant. My immediate reaction was as follows:

“1. As long as she doesn’t totally bomb and embarrass herself, I think McCain improved his election chances with the pick of Sarah (barring any extenuating circumstances, inclusive of not letting her be herself). I knew social conservatives and the Christian right would love her (even though she never pushed that agenda in Alaska) and she could certainly garner more than a few Hillary voters.

“2. I fear for Alaska. Should they win, there will be a vacuum in the state, and that vacuum is most likely to be filled by the good ole boys she cleaned out and the oil companies she reigned in. The old guard Republicans – the corrupt ones – are quite pleased with the thought of her being gone, as are the oil companies she whipped into shape. If you want, I can detail more on the whys of this. They are specific.

“To conclude, the Sarah Palin I know I support. I like her, and I would even work for her on some issues. I hope the national stage and DC cronyism don’t change her too much. If they do, I will revisit this statement.”

(Gasp! The horror of it all! How could a “radical” leftie actually support anything Sarah Palin has ever done, uttered, or represented?!?)

It should be obvious to anyone: I have revisited this statement many times. I’m haunted by it, in innumerable ways. And not because I was wrong about you, then, Sarah. I wasn’t. Rather, I am haunted because I am right about you, today.

Some combination of fortune, fame, limelight, soundbite, ego, and inner circle of advisers has corrupted you and your approach to the point where your effective reality is no better – and in some cases, worse – than the shanty Republican you replaced (Murkowski) and the inept Democrat (Knowles) you demolished back home in Alaska more than four years ago. Misguided counsel, the parade of Johnny’s-come-lately, and cronyism have reduced you to a caricature of your character, and undermined your abilities (yes, I said abilities) to change the world for the better, and I’d like to understand why, and what you are going to do about it.

I don’t need you to see everything the way I see it, Sarah. I don’t expect you to publicly echo my alarm over methane feedback loops from melting permafrost in Alaska. I won’t beg you to forcefully acknowledge the climate catastrophe we have on our hands today as the world rapidly approaches states of peril in food security, clean water sourcing, and economic collapse. I can’t fathom a day when you will recognize the imperative of a zero carbon world.

But I know your real character – the one that still exists behind the cartoons and the cut-outs. I have seen your recognition of the state of the world and your ambition to affect it positively for the sake of the next seven generations instead of the next seven figures. I have witnessed your hands dirty with the earth of a dying community in Southeast Alaska. I have watched you manipulate with knowledge a massive budget so the imperative mitigation and adaptation could begin.

Don’t you think it is time the world sees?

Let me know.

Fast Ongoing – More Protests Planned

Intercontinental Cry Story

For Immediate Release
Contact:
Alaska – Carl Wassilie 907.382.3403 carlwassilie.acyn@gmail.com
Lower 48 – Gregory Vickrey 202.487.1201 gregory@gregoryvickrey.com

Anchorage, Alaska – On February 8, 2011, Alaska’s Big Village Network (ABVN) affiliate Desa Jacobsson began a fast in protest of the comprehensive violation of subsistence rights and continued de-humanization of Alaskan Natives by Governor Sean Parnell, Calista Corporation, and the Federal Subsistence Board.

Ms. Jacobsson began the fast in order to raise awareness of archaic and repressive policies implemented and contrived under Governor Parnell and Federal program managers, as well as to press for sweeping measures that will formally recognize the inherent right of Alaskan Natives to live as sovereign Nations. Policies dictating the management of fish and game have been particularly onerous in removing Tribal government authority from the role of public trustee and the provisions of customary use of Alaska’s vital subsistence resources.

In a letter hand-delivered on February 17, 2011, to the offices of Governor Parnell, Calista Corporation, Federal Subsistence Board, and Alaska Federation of Natives, Jacobsson stated, “A fast has been initiated in protest of the following: Federal and State subsistence policies and management; Calista Regional Native Corporation’s extraction of toxic mercury at the Donlin Creek Mine; and violation of the United States Constitution by the State of Alaska and Governor Sean Parnell through its ‘Choose Respect’ program.”

Jacobsson continued, “The fast will continue until the following are resolved: tribal members resign from the Federal Subsistence Fisheries Management Advisory Councils and return to strengthening their own federally-recognized tribal governments for the management of fish and game; Calista Corporation ceases extracting mercury at Donlin Creek Mine and reconstitutes mining efforts; and a lawsuit is initiated against the Office of the Governor and the State of Alaska for its failure to provide Constitutional protections for all of its citizens.”

Jacobsson provided several examples of Alaskan Native rights being violated. Of note, Alaska House Bill 405 required Alaskan Natives to complete twelve steps, per species, with the approval of three boards, acting jointly, in order to harvest fish and game. Later, former Governor Tony Knowles introduced a “State/Tribal” plan for subsistence co-management. This “knit one-pearl two” strategy meant the state managed and Alaska Natives cooperated. The plan had the same elements as House Bill 405 and Tribes were limited to act in an advisory capacity to the State of Alaska.

These state and federal policies reduce the dignity of the Elders and minimize the culture, customs and traditions of Alaska’s Indians, Eskimos and Aleuts. To devastating effect, the Bureau of Indian Affairs, Bureau of Land Management, US Forest Service, and US Fish and Wildlife Service take on the role of Elders and Traditional Council, and actual community Elders are forced to become no more than advisers to their families and tribal members.

The situation is untenable and inexcusable.

With delay and a lack of action expected from the notified parties, ABVN and other entities are planning an array of actions meant to raise the call of change and equal rights. Meanwhile, Desa Jacobsson will continue her fast until the assault on Alaskan Natives ceases.

Reporters are encouraged to contact Jacobsson through Carl Wassilie.

For Immediate Release
Contact:
Cindy Sheehan  cindy@cindysheehanssoapbox.com
Gregory Vickrey  202.487.1201  gregory@gregoryvickrey.com

On February 6, 2011, Peace of the Action (POTA) and renowned activist Cindy Sheehan held a planet-wide conference call to begin the process they are calling Re-Creating Revolutionary Communities (RevComs).

The conference included more than 150 participants working to pursue an egalitarian approach for global paradigm shift. The intent of the meeting was to lay out general steps for creating localized community efforts to serve the needs of people, place, and planet outside the parametric status quo of the modern, failing, corporate-controlled state.

During the interactive presentation, Ms. Sheehan stated, “We have raised awareness and we have changed people’s minds (to some degree), but now we need to change the empire. So my vision of revolution is a truly grassroots groundswell of communities, wresting control, money and our children out of the hands of what I call the robber class.”

Sheehan continued, “We can do this by appropriating for ourselves what should already be under our control: community banking, community farming, farmers markets, electing progressive revolutionaries to local school boards and city councils, a barter economy, and every cooperative one can think of.”

Participants submitted questions via email and twitter during the course of the conversation, and many participated in a live chat with Sheehan and other Peace of the Action Board members directly following the conference.

Re-Creating Revolutionary Communities will officially embark down its path the first week in March 2011, when several communities around the United States, Canada and elsewhere will bring people together locally for discussion of decision-making, logistics and next steps. Peace of the Action continues to build appropriate tools for integration of, and connections between, community efforts, and maintains a diverse resource list for strengthening this grassroots effort to overwhelm empire.

Media and activists alike are encouraged to contact Cindy Sheehan and Peace of the Action board member Gregory Vickrey for more information, and to engage.

Cindy Sheehan’s oldest son Casey was killed in Iraq on April 4, 2004. Since then she has been working to make the world a more peaceful and just world. Sheehan set up Camp Casey outside of George Bush’s Crawford, Tx., ranch in 2005, was nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize that year and ran for Congress against Nancy Pelosi in SF in 2008–receiving 50,000 votes. She is currently National Director of Peace of the Action and has her own blog and radio show: Cindy Sheehan’s Soapbox.

Peace of the Action is dedicated to fostering actions that lead to peaceful revolutionary change.

For the Want of Three Votes

The vote in the House of Representatives last Thursday (July 1, 2010) approved $33 billion more for Barack Obama’s escalation of the war in Afghanistan. Most accounts of the vote in the progressive media viewed the vote positively, focusing on the various anti-war amendments that failed, but got sizable votes. The one with broadest support (162 “Yes” votes) would have required Obama to produce an exit plan. Its sponsors included Democrats David Obey (WI) and Jim McGovern (MA). Another would have funded the exit of the troops. It was sponsored by Democrat Barbara Lee (CA) and got 100 “Yes” votes. An even stronger anti-war amendment, however, got only 25 “Yes” votes.

But these progressive media accounts looking primarily at the breadth of support for the exit plan amendment have overlooked a couple of key numbers that reveal an entirely new view of the votes on the bill and its amendments.

The first key number is the vote on the main bill itself. Because all of the GOP voted against it in order to reject the domestic spending sweetners added by Nancy Pelosi, this vote was much closer. It passed by 215 to 210. If only 3 more “Yes” voters would have voted “No”, the funding bill would have failed (by 212 “Yes” vs. 213 “No”). Failure of the bill to pass would have been an earthquake in US politics.

The other key number overlooked by most progressive media accounts of the vote was this: enough leading anti-war Democrats voted for the actual funding bill that they could have defeated it had they voted “No”. Among leading anti-war Democrats, which ones voted for the war funding?

First, Barbara Lee voted for the war funds. She represents Berkeley, California, and part of Oakland. Being from this heavily anti-war district, many anti-war activists assume she votes against all war funding bills. She has been a heroine-of-sorts of the anti-war movement for years.

Next, we have the Out of Afghanistan Caucus, started in May 2010 by John Conyers. In the morning on the day of the vote, the caucus held a press conference to urge a NO vote on the war funding. Five of the eight Democrats conducting this press conference actually voted for the war funding that evening, after participating in the press conference about voting “No”! Conyers, Bob Filner (CA), and Alan Grayson (FL) voted “No”; voting “Yes” were Sheila Jackson Lee (TX), Maxine Waters (CA), Mike Honda (CA), Judy Chu (CA), and Barbara Lee.

Next, we can look at the Democratic sponsors of the various anti-war amendments to the bill.

We would expect these Democrats to not only sponsor their anti-war amendments, but to also vote against the final war funding bill itself. But all three of the Democrat anti-war amendment co-sponsors mentioned above voted for the final war funding bill: David Obey (WI), Jim McGovern (MA), and Barbara Lee (CA).

Finally, we should mention Pete Stark, another San Francisco Bay Area Democrat. While he tends to keep a low profile, he often actually casts more progressive votes than Barbara Lee.

(For example, he was one of the few “No” votes in the House vote on heavier sanctions against Iran, which passed by 408-8 on June 24. Barbara Lee voted for those sanctions.) Even Pete Stark voted FOR the Afghan war funding last week.

If just three of these leading anti-war Democrats had switched their vote to “No” on the Afghan war funding bill, it would have failed. This would have given the anti-war movement a huge boost, even if war-funder-in-chief Nancy Pelosi had organized another vote and courted Republican support to guarantee its passage. Such a scenario would have exposed the Democratic leadership as co-equal pillars of the war (which they are), along with the GOP and the Democrat in the White House. Instead, when they had a golden opportunity to defeat the war funding bill, our leading “anti-war” Democrats betrayed us.

Notes:

1. The roll call vote on the war funding bill which passed by 215-210 is here; check to see how your representative voted: http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2010/roll428.xml .

We know that there are likely more, but these are ones Karyn Strickler and I have personally vetted. Please help them by any means necessary. This list is in no particular order.

PLEASE SHARE FAR AND WIDE. Help one, help all:

http://www.Peaceoftheaction.org

http://www.southernenvironment.org/about/top_10_2010

http://www.facebook.com/pages/Gregory-Vickrey/40416433278?ref=ts

http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=219721254423&ref=ts

http://climategroundzero.org/about-us/

http://www.ohvec.org/join/index.html#donate

http://www.climatestrategies.us/support.cfm

http://www.forestcouncil.org/join/

https://salsa.democracyinaction.org/o/476/t/1173/shop/custom.jsp?donate_page_KEY=761&track=w9home

https://secureusa.greenpeace.org/securedonate3/index.php?from=donatenav

http://www.commondreams.org/donate

http://www.easycartsecure.com/CounterPunch/Donations.html

http://www.actforclimatejustice.org/n30-day-of-action/donate-support-funds/

https://secure.avaaz.org/act/?r=donate〈=en

https://salsa.democracyinaction.org/o/1312/t/6849/shop/custom.jsp?donate_page_KEY=3630

http://gregoryvickrey.com/

http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=159256783275&ref=ts

http://www.singlepayeraction.org

http://www.biologicaldiversity.org

http://www.seashepherd.org

http:/www.tongassconservation.org

If there are any groups you should be added, please let us know. If there are groups you believe need to be more scrutinized, let us know that as well. Your wishes to add to this organic list to improve it is paramount as a source for change.

(and I will add more direct links later)

Thanks,

Karyn and Gregory