Solar power at Little Earth

I attended this wonderful event at Little Earth yesterday, where solar panels were installed to offset energy expenses. The plan is for the entire community to have a panel on each home.

The keynote speakers were Van Jones and Winona LaDuke. What I found interesting to note here is that both were adamantly opposed to the Midtown Burner proposed by Kandiyohi Partners ( R.T. Rybak no doubt felt uncomfortable). Both also feel we can change course nationally on energy policy, putting forward initiatives like this one.

Van Jones observations that our younger generation need better alternatives than they currently are receiving. He stated that many are entrepreneurs and leaders already, but are doing the wrong things. Selling the wrong resources in a society that needs what it does not and that our society needs to move from a wasteful pollution-based economy to a zero-waste green one.

Winona discussed how White Earth would be setting up a 250 kilowatt wind-turbine with the help of SMSC. Hugo Chavez is supporting this project more than they are, but she isn't concerned with this. Winona is quick to point out that over half the potential wind-power in America is on Native American reservations. These tribes have more potential power than they can currently use, making them potential exporters of their local energy resource. I also appreciate that she used the word "relocalization" as this is what we need more than a corrupt top-down system that Americans consider as standard.

Jason Edens of RREAL spoke briefly. His organization brings solar-heating systems to families on energy assistance. His analysis is that we are subsidizing the oil and gas companies with these programs and not focused on long-term energy assistance. Local energy production would alleviate low-income families more than fossil fuel dependency does. Jason also believes we are going to face Peak Oil, and should have local solutions that do not leave the poor frozen in their homes.

I can't help but remember seeing SMSC Vice-Chair Glynn Crooks sitting next to Annie Young, Minneapolis Park Board - At Large - Green Party. I do not know where Glynn stands politically, he's more of an investor. I do know that SMSC donates large sums of money to the major two parties. They hedge their bets like any large business would. But if the new eco-jobs are to have any meaningful expansion in this century, they will need more individual investors. Government grants, be it from the US or Venezuela, should not be seen as the basis for a future society.

Glynn did not stay for the food, music, or visit the booth for supporting organizations. He's quite busy and I do not blame him. But for the sake of "green jobs" in the future, we will need investors like him engaged in the communities through projects similar to this. Peak Oil is a serious matter for those unable to hold jobs during the chaos that it will entail. Those with jobs will find they are "priced out" of a middle-class lifestyle. The American way of life will change or die, and conscious investment in our future will determine a more positive outcome.

Regressive Ron - Progressive Greens

If I were a die-hard Republican and against the Iraq war, my only choice for President would be Ron Paul. He is an old school politician known as a Libertarian. To someone of a liberal mind, he doesn't make a lot of sense: let states decide major issues not in the Constitution. And also income tax is "unconstitutional" even if authorized by the 16th amendment.

This is a very defining moment for the Republican party. I believe it marks the take-over of their party by the Neo-Conservatives. 9/11 illuminated this wing, and brought it fully public. The Project for the New American Century had ideas, including the spreading of democracy globally, starting with Iraq. Republicans have embraced these ideals, including many liberals. The anti-tax and fundamentalist wings were disregarded for the most part, as government spending outpaced economic growth. Our national debt is now over $9T, and even Hillary can't remember what Ross Perot was grumbling about.

The major issues that no party wants to discuss are Peak Oil, the National Debt, and the inherent racism in our society. We can pretend these are not issues, as both parties currently are. Oil production most likely peaked in 2006, the National Debt is out of control, and we have not yet dismantled the tools of discrimination. How can we move forward as a nation when these threaten our economic and social security more than terrorism ever will?

Ron Paul does deal with these issues, but not with the intent of a progressive or Green. He envisions an America far different - even if he dismantles our militant empire. I cannot live in an America that varies so drastically from state to state. Paul still thinks we are a nation of nations, but the Civil War ended that utopian vision. We need to be a progressive rather than regressive nation.

There is only one party that vigorously takes on these issue: the Green Party. We already know what the major two parties will do: nothing or exacerbate these problems further. The Libertarians and Constitution Parties would move our nation backward, and allow the magical "free market" solve these problems. Unity08 is still in conceptional stages in creating a new party. The only one left standing and capable of change are the Greens.

Cynthia McKinney, Elaine Brown, and Jared Ball are all running for the Presidency within the Green Party. The average amount each American will donate to a Presidential candidate is less than $3. Small donations by a committed group can sway an election, unlike how the media portray big donors as the primary catalysts for change. Any amount you can assist them with or the Green Party is more than most citizens care to give. You can participate in changing the direction of America, or you can sit on the sidelines and watch others do so.

And sorry Ed Felien, I will not attend a Republican caucus next February. Thanks - but truly no thanks to this particular invite. The Republicans need to find who they are in this century. America needs a party to stand up to them, and we know the Democrats will not cut military obligations or funding so as not to appear "weak." Therefore I support the Greens adamantly. Let's debate the purpose of American militarism and whether it really makes us more secure long-term.

Hate Crimes Laws in America are spelled W-E-A-K

According to statistician Caroline Harlow, an ordinary crime becomes a hate crime when a perpetrator chooses a victim because of a particular characteristic. It can be skin color, sexual orientation, physical disability or religion. And there must be evidence that hate prompted the crime.

I would argue that we should not base hate crimes solely on physical attacks. The psychological damage is as bad if not worse than physical violence. Intimidating and threatening others through symbols or language of hatred are intolerable. How would you feel if you were attacked for who you were, and then when you tried to do something about it were told to "keep quiet" or "not to worry about it?" Would you not feel and intense mix of outrage and helplessness? To have these situations exist anywhere is intolerable. We cannot be called a civil society unless we confront them directly.

Let's say someone displays a noose in front of African Americans or says all Jews should have died in Auschwitz. What this person saying is that something is inherently wrong with these groups of people. Somehow they are inadequate or inferior. It may just be pure hatred, all of the above and more. Either way, to have this communicated is violence. It is the same as holding a gun to someone's head and saying "you must die today because you exist." But it is worse because currently, you really cannot do much about it.

Would punishing someone in America for these types of hate crimes go against the admirable First Amendment? Many would say neo-nazis and skinheads have freedom of speech, and I agree. But everyone must be held accountable for their actions. You can't go into an airport and start talking freely about bombs and hijackings. You can't even joke about it - terrorism is a serious matter. No one disputes that. But when you talk about race relations or homophobia, people think minorities are whining or asking for special treatment. White Americans frequently get angry about the perceived "special treatment" because they have no personal experience on the receiving end. White Americans consider the vague threat of terrorism more a priority than the immediate fact of hatred permeating throughout our culture.

The outrage over this issue in White America is quite pronounced, the unapologetic apathy that is. Few seem to think that the remarks by Don Imus were much to worry about. Please forgive me for repeating them, because they illustrate this situation more clearly. He called women from a college basketball team "nappy-headed hos." Not only did he degrade them for being women, but also for being of African descent. And White America remained mute, until asked by the media what they thought. Then a majority simply said they did not care, a majority of 90%.

Polls show that when Don Imus was fired over his remarks 48% thought MSNBC was too harsh, 47% thought it was about right, and 4% thought they were too lenient. Imus attacks the existence of African American women and all he loses is his job. Gabriel Keith displays a noose to fellow college journalists, and only loses his job. Don and Gabriel and start working on something else, but their actions have left wounds and scars that they refuse to acknowledge.

America's hate crime laws do not stand on their own. They are simply attached to existing laws that threatens a persons physical existence that are no less important (i.e. threats,assault,rape, ). Are we really supporting a person's right to exist? Intimidation - AKA criminal threatening - is defined as fear of imminent bodily injury. Displaying a noose is not within the current parameters, unless we include mental and emotional disturbance. These explicit changes are necessary, lest we ignore the elaborate system of racism inherent in our society. And by ignoring them, we are complicit in allowing them to continue.

Racism is defined as prejudice plus power. One measures racism in society by results, the facts and statistics that give us a portrait of where we are. The polls of Americans clearly show we consider hatred to be a non-issue. We must confront the fact that we are essentially a society that is filled with hate and have yet to confront it. America is in denial of the problem, and therefore cannot face it.

So when you see acts of bigotry, hatred, and bias in yourself and others - make it known to as many as you can. Confronting such acts have a ripple effect in a nation like ours, still basking in ignorance. Shine a bright light on the wrongdoings and wake our society up from its complacency, in what capacity you can.

Segregation still exists in America

My husband and I retired and were looking for a warmer climate and better cost of living. Ashburn is the best of everything - small town charm, friendly people, inexpensive living, and a great place to raise a family.
-Sue Mastrario moved from New jersey in 1992


This comment was taken from the Ashburn Chamber of Commerce website. Yet for 15 years after their prom remained racially segregated. Small town America has a sense of charm - primarily if you are white and Godly. Hicks are quite prevalent oustide of metropolitan areas, but the backwards mentality must be challenged. They can be 21st century hicks, with a more conscious perspective.

I hear from many male caucasian friends and acquaintances that "equality has been reached already for everyone." It isn't always stated overtly, but often it is. If that were the case Social Conservatives would have no reason to exist. Obviously we need to continue the progressive social agenda of true equality and opportunities for all beings. The argument is always about to what degree. Obviously I feel 100%, but most Americans feel we don't need that quite yet.

Here's the AP article:

ASHBURN, Ga. (AP) - There have always been two proms for students at Turner County High School in Ashburn, Georgia: one for whites and one for blacks. But not this year. The students have decided to hold one prom, with every junior and senior invited. The theme for the April 21st dance is "Breakaway." About 55 percent of students at Turner County High are black and most of the rest are white. Senior class president James Hall, who is black, says it was time for a change. Ashburn, which is located about 75 miles south of Macon, has about four-thousand residents. There also was another big change this year. Instead of a white and black homecoming queen, there was just one, a mixed-race student.

Chris Stewart - Racist comedian or just Racist?

The newest member of the Minneapolis School Board thinks it funny to attack Tammy Lee with racial-based comments on a mock website.



I am rather sickened by the site, but perhaps many feel the same about white candidates. Race should not determine who one votes for, but issues. Some choose to identify themselves in a particular race ( or religion, class, party) rather than on the side of humanity. I consider myself a Minnesotan first, an American second, but interconnected to all beings on Earth.

There is always bias, be it subtle or glaring, in everyone for those outside our limited experiences and knowledge. Personally, I would like to see more community activists in general who fit better the communities they serve. But more often than not, community and political organizations in Minneapolis appear whiter than the areas they represent.

Chris Stewart has already shown us his perspective. Perhaps he made the "satire" page because Sabo didn't endorse Keith Ellison, and assumed it was racist. He claims to want a better Minneapolis, and I hope we all truly do in Minnesota. Our city has residents of all races and backgrounds, most of which Chris seems clueless about. Our democracy is more than about ones skin color or other such tribalism mentality. A better Minneapolis would include the perspective of all these citizens, not solely a racial-based viewpoint.

Comment has come from neither the Stewart campaign or the DFL.
( I thank the Lloyd Leta blog for posting about this and further information )