List, Most of the campaign volunteers are out -- well campaigning -- rather then responding to Dyna's outrageous posts.
1. The Unsupported Accusations The Samuel's campaign is in no way "playing loose with the rules." Dyna is making leaping assumptions based on partial information at best. We have printed no where near 70,000 literature pieces. Simply because Dyna, as a likely primary voter has received 5 mailings -- she assumes everyone in the ward has. Nothing could be further from the truth. Simply because Dyna doesn't know who the Samuel's donor list is she assumes it must be coming from illegal or illicit sources. Is it so hard to believe that a professional African-American man without a party endorsement would have the resources to raise money to run for office? When the campaign finance reports are filed the list of donors and expenses of the campaign will be appropriate, responsible, legal and moral. To imply otherwise is completely irresponsible. 2. Don supports GLTB civil rights Don Samuels as an individual and as a candidate is pro-choice and supports GLTB civil rights. He would have supported the Domestic Partnership ordinance which recently passed the City Council. He would work closely with the Minneapolis delegation to advocate that the city be allowed to extend domestic partnership benefits to Minneapolis City employees. Don was never invited to screen with Stonewall DFL prior to the endorsement, and their endorsement of the DFL-endorsed candidate after the DFL endorsement was a foregone conclusion. As Stonewall DFL's leadership has expressed on this list before they are obligated by their organizational charter to support only the DFL-endorsed candidate. Don is not that candidate. 3. The dark-side of the DFL I can not close without responding to this comment of Dyna's: " If Don Samuels had any real community values he'd respect the choices of his neighbors and join them in supporting the DFL endorsed candidate, Olin Moore." As a Democrat I find this offensive and the exact sentimentality that is justifiably driving voters from the DFL in droves. With this philosophy we wouldn't have a single statewide elected Democrat. Both Mark Dayton and Mike Hatch ran against the DFL-endorsed candidates on their respective roads to victory. Even the party "heroes" like Rodger Moe and Skip Humphrey have run against the DFL endorsement. The idea that 60% of 72 people, no matter how representative, should solely choose who the candidate should be to the exclusion of other choices is utterly undemocratic. If the party is going to be revived, and re-earn a majority either in Minnesota or nationally -- the idea that it is disrespectful to run against a DFL-endorsed candidate must whither away. We need the new faces, the new ideas, the new constituencies, and the new voices that non-traditional candidates offer. We do not need more of the same party insiders propped up by organizational loyalty -- we need to reach out and lift up authentic community leaders. 4. A viable alternative Fortunately there are many Democrats, both in the 3rd ward and around the city that felt it was in the best interest of the DFL, the best interest of the city, and the best interest of their neighbors in the Third Ward to provide an authentic community voice -- someone who may not have played all the political games -- but someone with diverse, unique experience and a well developed moral and political compass -- a real chance to be considered by all the voters in the Third Ward. We don't choose, they don't determine, only some will vote -- but we have tried to create a level playing field where the best candidate will emerge from the will of the people. On Monday night we will learn the voters choices. Proud to be working hard to give amplification to an authentic community voice, Joseph Barisonzi Lyndale _______________________________________ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
