Comments on: Richard Carroll – Sticking with the Green Party

By: Cheap LV Damier Azur

Cheap LV Damier Azur — Mon, 13 Dec 2010 11:09:41 +0000

Ic no style sack hand, Cheap LV Damier Azur no need to free online articles directory Replica Damier Geant LV Why give articles you Monogram Watercolor Louis Vuitton Top Authors Top ArticlesAB R Answers FAQ Louis Vuitton Ver public if you pla t Articles Monogram Watercolor replica . Browser. var ie_version parseInt browser version if .Monogram Watercolor cheap.; Hello Guest ie_version Log Famous Recorded cheap Monogram Watercolor Hello My Home Sign Outmail Lost your replica Monogram Watercolor LV password me Password Home Shopping Fashion Bags hand symbol of style.

By: Steve Kramer

Steve Kramer — Mon, 17 Nov 2008 22:34:36 +0000

Unfortunate but hardly unexpected. This is the “change” and “hope” of the “new” Democratic Party. Absolutely, Greens should be organizing now to raise fund for Carroll’s run in 2010.

@Richard: Understood that the line for the Dems is open in 2010, but surely as a spokesman for the Democratic caucus in Little Rock, Mr. Harrelson is in a position to determine which races will receive priority. That he chooses to mention District 39 before Mr. Carroll even takes his seat for the first session is extremely telling.

By: Mike Indiana

Mike Indiana — Sun, 16 Nov 2008 15:58:10 +0000

If Carroll were to caucus by himself as a Green (instead of with the democrats) would he be eligible for additional staff and office space, like John Eder was in Maine.

I have been unable to find any information regarding caucusing rules for the Arkansas house, if anyone knows the answer please post it on this thread.

By: Wes Rolley

Wes Rolley — Sat, 15 Nov 2008 17:13:07 +0000

This is better than the California experience with Audie Bock's election was heralded even in the NY Times, but she soon changed to Democrat and only lasted one term.

By: Eric Prindle

Eric Prindle — Fri, 14 Nov 2008 18:26:23 +0000

Instead of a “Victory Fund,” let’s establish a “Values Fund” to give financial backing to candidates who actually agree with the Green Party platform on important points like the rights of women to control their own bodies.

By: Ronald Hardy

Ronald Hardy — Fri, 14 Nov 2008 16:55:12 +0000

But they couldn’t talk anyone into running against the “unopposed” Republican Congressman. Same goes for the Republicans, who didn’t run anyone against any of the Arkansas Democrats in Congress.

One could call it a coincidence, but stacked next to the standard practice of Dem-Rep conspired gerrymandering it looks more like coordination.

By: Richard Winger

Richard Winger — Fri, 14 Nov 2008 16:48:33 +0000

Of course, it really isn’t up to the Democratic Party to determine whether someone will file in the Democratic primary in this district in 2010. Even if the state Democratic Party leadership didn’t want to injure Richard Carroll, that leadership couldn’t prevent any Democrat from running.

By: Gregg Jocoy

Gregg Jocoy — Fri, 14 Nov 2008 13:39:39 +0000

Ultimately we can’t force anyone to remain a Green, but I believe Richard Carroll is a man of character, and the fact that the Democrat’s first overture to him was “Join us or we will run against you next time” strikes me as the sort of bullying tactic that just might back-fire.

I hope that the Green Party can find a way to establish some sort of “Green Victory Fund” to begin now to save up cash so that folks like Richard can have some financial backing.

But, ultimately, the decisions are in hands in Arkansas, Richard’s and the other Greens. Personally, I don’t believe that Richard is power hungry, and that he won’t be intimidated or bought off.

By: Green Ferret

Green Ferret — Fri, 14 Nov 2008 11:17:12 +0000

Well, it fits in with what I’ve heard about Arkansas politics, that there is only one big business party with Democrat and Republican heads. Their top priority is ensuring the Wal-Martization of the American economy and getting their piece of the pie.
For the people to see a crack in the Republicrats’ armor, especially in the form of a longtime labor organizer like Richard Carroll, is much more of a threat to the Democrats than the Republicans are.

From Tragedy and Hope by Carroll Quigley, pp. 1247–1248:

The National parties and their presidential candidates, with the Eastern Establishment assiduously fostering the process behind the scenes, moved closer together and nearly met in the center with almost identical candidates and platforms, although the process was concealed as much as possible, by the revival of obsolescent or meaningless war cries and slogans (often going back to the Civil War). … The argument that the two parties should represent opposed ideals and policies, one, perhaps, of the Right and the other of the Left, is a foolish idea acceptable only to the doctrinaire and academic thinkers. Instead, the two parties should be almost identical, so that the American people can “throw the rascals out” at any election without leading to any profound or extreme shifts in policy. … Either party in office becomes in time corrupt, tired, unenterprising, and vigorless. Then it should be possible to replace it, every four years if necessary, by the other party, which will be none of these things but will still pursue, with new vigor, approximately the same basic policies.

By: GreenCutip

GreenCutip — Fri, 14 Nov 2008 06:44:46 +0000

It looks like CNN has listed all the AK federal races as “ran unopposed”!

This is outrageous!

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/results/state/#val=AR