About the GPCA Organizing Resources Take Action Elections and Candidates Issues and Platform Latest News Home
Green Focus home


Inside Green Focus

  Latest Issue
Elections & Strategy
Green Issues
Local Greens
Elected Greens
Opinion & Reviews
News Clips & Letters

About Green Focus

Submit Articles, Photos, Graphics
Link to Us
Fall 2005 (current) [PDF] [HTML]

Back Issues

  Fall 2005 (current) [PDF] [HTML]
Summer 2005
Spanish Version [PDF]
Spring 2005
Winter 2004
Fall 2004
Winter 2003
Fall 2003
Summer 2003
Spring 2003

Letters to the Editor

In this issue:

Green City, Part I: Remedial environmentalism is so 20th Century!
California faces a fiscal and political crisis
California enfrenta una crisis política y fiscal
Dear Dennis Kucinich
Prop 54 is racist and dumb
Tom Hutchings runs for Assembly
Form and Function
On the "Progressive Democrat", and their threat to progressives
Military Recruiters: Stop marketing war to our children
Stay Green!
New Way of Thinking Needed
Book review: "The Candidate's Handbook"
Book review: Once upon a time in the future
Recall FAQ
Letters to the Editor
News Clips
Any Democrat will do - Criminal in the house - One party fo ideas - Run against 'blue dog'

by California Greens


I am responding to an article in the Spring 2003 Green Focus called "Greens explore running anti-war candidates."

As a Green Party member, I think it is time we admit that any of the Democratic candidates will be better than George Bush. The Green Party should throw all of its support behind the Democrats for the Presidential, Senate and House elections. If we are smart we might be able to convince the desperate Democrats to make some concessions to third parties. If Bush gets another four years, the media most Americans get their information from will be controlled by right-wing extremists, our rights to dissent will be abolished, the Supreme Court will be packed with right-wing extremists, voting will become a waste of time and all dissenters will be considered terrorists. It's time to realize who we are dealing with.

-Douglas C. Estes, San Francisco

There's a criminal in the house


The Green party should not run a candidate for president in 2004. I do not say this in light of what occurred in 2000, nor its many possible interpretations. The fact is that we are faced with an unexpected and dire situation.

Imagine that you and your significant other are having an argument about arranging the furniture, paying for your child's college tuition or even a dealing with a serious gambling problem. At that moment, a large, armed man enters through the side door. He is a desperate criminal hiding from the law. He moves through the house toward the room you're in. I don't need to continue the story. I'll just ask one question. What are your priorities? Are you still concerned with where to put the new big-screen TV?

This is the situation Americans face. The criminal must be removed from the White House-period. I will not hear arguments that a Democrat would be, essentially, equivalent to George W. Bush. Such arguments are ludicrous at their face.

What the Green Party must do in this urgent situation is to get behind whatever candidate the democrats put forward. Yes, I know very well that, when it comes to how to arrange the furniture, the Democrats are hardly (if at all) better than the Republicans. It doesn't matter. We have a burglar in our house. He must be removed. It's as simple as that.

How will Green Party members feel if they vote their conscience only to see Bush get re-elected? What if, this time, we clearly could have made a difference? Especially if one realizes that we would fire not only the big W, but also Cheney, Ashcroft, Rumsfeld, Rice, Wolfowitz and many others. And we would prevent further Bush appointments to this nation's highest courts-the courts that make this country's law as surely as the legislature does.

It is my sincere belief that what I advocate is exactly what many, if not most, Green Party members as well as "Greens at heart" will do regardless of what I or other amateur pundits say. Greens are notoriously individualistic and, as such, will resist any attempt to corral them into anything they see as pointless or counter-productive. I certainly won't be doing that. It's time for us to set our priorities and get our most important and urgent job done.

-Tom Rossi, Redlands

Dear Green Editor:

I am writing in response to our dilemma about running candidates (Spring 2003 issue). An underlying problem seemed to be missing from the discussion: the minority vote is becoming too "minor", split too many times, losing its impact and effectiveness. A letter to the editor in a newspaper was labeled "GOP loves the Greens", probably for this reason. The vote for justice and change is strong, but individual party numbers are low, and the overall movement seems divided and diluted by many similar competing political parties.

One answer is to have one party that stands for the liberal cause, one party that receives all the progressive votes and can seriously challenge the establishment. This one party would then he strong, unified, and respected enough to earn its place in the Presidential debates, hence receive national exposure. It may he un-PC to say this, but the Green Party is not the solution. Our ideas are, and we do not have a monopoly over them. Would it he heresy to suggest merging with one or two other like-minded groups? It might translate our ideals to reality more quickly.

A personal note here: to become involved, I participated in two Green meetings in Sunnyvale earlier this year, and was not impressed. I speak English but had difficulty understanding, since it seemed people were speaking a different language, and wouldn't define special terms or explain specific names. The second time I went, they were endorsing people and issues for the upcoming elections. I hadn't received anything in the mail, so I didn't comment out loud or vote. I did ask a note-taker a brief question during a pause and she promptly shushed me. I left shortly after, liking neither the people. nor the spicy food served.

-David West, San Jose

Run against "blue dog" Democrat

Dear Editors,

I live in the 18th U.S. Congressional district which includes parts of Stockton, Modesto and Madera. My Representative is Dennis Cardoza who replaced Gary Condit. He proudly calls himself a fiscal conservative "blue dog" Democrat, i.e. a neo-Republican. In a glossy self-promotion prior to his appearance in the district; Cardoza asked his constituents to contact him with their concerns. That's empty rhetoric.

I have sent numerous emails asking him to support the DeFazio Anti-war resolution; vote against Bush's tax cut; etc. I have asked for his position on Corporate Patriot Enforcement Act and urged him to make those crooks pay their share. I stated it was common knowledge that AIPAC had bought most of the members of Congress to support the Likud Party's genocide and lebensraum in Palestine and asked if he received any money from them. I haven't had a single reply to any of my queries.

I urge the Greens to come up with a viable candidate for the 18th to replace him; preferably a Latino/a. He doesn't represent the people living here anymore than Condit did, in fact, Condit might have even been better, which isn't saying much.

-Robert Franklin, Stockton

> Green Focus Home
> Subscribe to Green Focus