I have been arguing about the Green Party candidate's stance on the stadium. I'm saying that if the Green Party wants to separate itself from the two-party system, it can't just say "We will support the stadium IF there are living wage jobs for 'social justice' concerns". Heck, there have been DFLers taking that stance. What the Green Party has to remember is that we are talking serious CUTS in basic programs. There was no stadium money when we had billion-dollar surpluses. How in HECK can we claim there is stadium money with whopping deficits and the threat of serious property-tax increases? Where is the "social justice" when Medicare is going up year after year because of deficit concerns but somehow we CAN support a sports stadium "if there are living wage jobs"?
I'm saying the Green Party is totally free to stand for living wage jobs, but not cuts in basic programs alongside subsidies for pro sports and then somehow claim their party stands for "social justice". I'm sorry, mainstream candidates pull this dance and we expect it. But if we get third party candidates pulling it, that'll be pretty much the end of their attempt to grow. I would suggest the city council candidate take a firm stance against ANY us of public funds unless property taxes are held steady. ===== ===== Jim Mork----Cooper Neighborhood "Blessed are the peacemakers for they will be called children of God"--Matthew 5:9 United for Peace http://www.unitedforpeace.org/ __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com _______________________________________ 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
