I have been following the discourse on both the Doug Grow column: DFL
Stonewall endorsement with interest. Especially as a former State DFL
Party Chair.
I had a more amused reaction to the Grow (or should I say the Michael
Krause) column. First, Grow again did not do his research. As a
journalist he should
have gotten reactions from both sides, not just the complainers!!!!
Plus, he should have waited until the full Board meet to make their
recommendations (which as of last night found all three mayoral
candidates acceptable).
But, maybe his reply would be that it is an opinion column, so that
isn't needed. He would be better served if he did. As a original
founder of the DFL Gay and Lesbian Caucus in the seventies and a member
of the now called "Stonewall DFL Caucus", I know first-hand that the
issue of abiding by the endorsing process is not new. And, yes, the
Caucus has recommended or found acceptable at times candidates who say
they won't abide by the endorsing convention decision. That is the
right of the participants who take part. As to the participants, I
attended and I can say that I didn't know about 80% of those in
attendance. Many new young faces--so much for the insider
argument!!!!!! In addition, in the voting for the Sixth Ward race, I
moved a motion that would have found all three candidates that screened
"acceptable". Unfortunately, a slim majority disagreed with the
motion. So this "insider" was the the opposite side that the previous
posters have said stopped "acceptable" for some candidates. Back to the
Grow column, I have a long memory, and I really found it amusing that
Michael Krause was so upset with the position some at the Stonewall
screening placed on voting for those who will support and abide by the
DFL Party's very open endorsement process. If Mr. Krause were honest he
would have told Mr. Grow that he, himself, argued for this position many
times in the past. Unfortunately, this time Mr. Krause is supporting a
candidate that is not holding to that position, so it now unfair. One
other interesting note, based upon a conversation overheard between Ms.
McDonald
and Barb Lickness, a former Republican, would be Ms. McDonald's and
Lickness'
reponse to an open question about who they supported in the last
presidential election.
I don't think it was the Democratic or Green Party candidate!!! One
finally note to the DFL
Stonewall screenings involved the number of individuals who clearly
stated
that their allegiance was the "Green Party" and not the DFL Party. I
challenge a couple of them as to why they were here as this was a DFL
Party meeting, not the Green Party-- now a major political party in
Minnesota.
There reply was "I can be wherever I want to be". What this reflects is
a bigger problem. Many have lost sight or don't understand what the
role of a
political party represents and why it is formed. Mr. Grow clearly has
forgotten or didn't pay attention to his high school civics lessons.
Rick Stafford, Ward 9, Powderhorn Park
_______________________________________________
Minneapolis Issues Forum - Minnesota E-Democracy
Post messages to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest option, and more:
http://e-democracy.org/mpls
