David sure paints with a broad brush. Unfortunately, many who
participate in the political arena do the same. The fact that Chris
Coleman supported "every" position the Chamber had, may be true.
However, the point that the position of the Chamber only benefits
the rich and cost the poor is not even close to true.
I certainly am not an expert or even knowledgeable about the
Chamber's position on anything. Its only intuitive that the
Chamber's position would provide some benefit to the community as a
whole. If it didn't there would be no benefit for the Chamber..
If some relationship exists where the Chamber and its supporters
have an "in" to the taxpayers pocketbooks like the relationship
between Haliburton and the President, er Vice President, I am not
aware of it.
If you have ever participated in any discussion of political
positions, you know that both sides start from a position where they
get everything their wildest dreams can think of. Obviously this
creates a great disparity between positions. In reality neither
side thinks they will get everything. But they know they now have
give aways to help the negotiation process.
When you really dig out the opposition, its my belief that much of
its is NIMBY. In fact, in some cases the neighbors wouldn't even
know there was a problem until some activist knocked on their door.
Why? Because most people just don't care.
Mike Fratto
Payne Phalen
>>> "David Shove" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 03/02/2005 5:47:14 AM >>>
On Tue, 1 Mar 2005, M Charles Swope wrote:
> My sense was that a majority favored Coleman, mostly because of
a
> perception that he was more capable of raising the money required
to
> beat Kelly.
This is very disquieting and discouraging. As a council member,
Coleman
was a Chamber of Commerce mouthpiece. Lots of money there; the more
like
the Chamber your views are, the more money you can get. The rich
have the
money; the rich spend a tiny bit of their money to buy government;
then
that government pays them back a thousand-fold with thefts from the
public
property and welfare. Worse when the non-rich victims of the rich
fall
into line for the patsy who has the most similarity to their
exploiters,
just because he can get more of the stuff -money- they use to
exploit
everyone with.
How about BETTER views? Better RECORD? Better for the city? Oh, no,
let's
not ask those questions; let's ask just ONE question - the one
where the
rich and the chamber win.
I find it also discouraging that Lantry and Helgen have endorsed
Coleman.
There's be a honeymoon period where they would move right to help
Coleman
ram thru Chamber of Commerce deals.
The Chamber got beat bad (huzzah!) this last 2004 election; they
want to
get it all back, and then some! Ready for a stadium or two?
Corporate
welfare? More/expanded freeways and big boxes? Huge TIF ripoff
projects?
I don't know all Ortega's positions and record; I wonder if they
could be
as bad as Coleman's.
At one point Ortega talked of a sales tax; they are always
regressive =
bad, no matter what the "good" purpose.
Is there a candidate who stands on all issues with the bottom 98%?
If not,
why not? If not, our democracy is fatally flawed by allowing a few
people to have too much money.
--David Shove
Roseville
-------------------------------------------------
JOIN the St. Paul Issues Forum TODAY:
http://www.e-democracy.org/stpaul/
-------------------------------------------------
POST MESSAGES HERE: [email protected]
To subscribe, modify subscription, or get your password - visit:
http://www.mnforum.org/mailman/listinfo/stpaul
Archive Address:
http://www.mnforum.org/mailman/private/stpaul/
-------------------------------------------------
JOIN the St. Paul Issues Forum TODAY:
http://www.e-democracy.org/stpaul/
-------------------------------------------------
POST MESSAGES HERE: [email protected]
To subscribe, modify subscription, or get your password - visit:
http://www.mnforum.org/mailman/listinfo/stpaul
Archive Address:
http://www.mnforum.org/mailman/private/stpaul/
