Comments on: Bloomberg-Paul Ticket in Virginia Won’t Happen

By: Phil Sawyer

Phil Sawyer — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 00:35:45 +0000

Richard Says:
August 21st, 2008 at 7:27 am
The Virginia Independent Green Party holds itself out as a conservative ecology party. Its candidates have generally been pro-life. It doesn’t follow logically that just because a party is concerned about the environment, that it belongs on the “left”. In fact we would all be better off if the concepts of “left” and “right” would fade away.

Richard’s logic is correct. I consider myself to be a Left Conservative (a la the late Norman Mailer), for example.

By: bolshevik-leninist

bolshevik-leninist — Fri, 22 Aug 2008 01:01:42 +0000

Petra Kelly was a socialist, arguably a Marxist. Joshka Fischer was a Marxist and is still at the very least a social democrat.

By: Joseph Oddo

Joseph Oddo — Thu, 21 Aug 2008 22:48:51 +0000

David’s assertion of no link between the conservative wing of Green people and the Greens of the US does negate the actual smaller government, fiscal conservative approach advocated by the German Green founder Petra Kelly. I’d venture to say this is a template that Mr. Campbell follows having lived in Germany and directly involved with Petra and Joshka Fischer.

By: dddienst

dddienst — Thu, 21 Aug 2008 21:43:25 +0000

Yeah, Chuck Baldwin… I am going to vote for him.

By: Darel

Darel — Thu, 21 Aug 2008 19:43:16 +0000

Well I have supported Ron Paul and assited with Paul’s run in VA. Chuck Baldwin would be a great president.

By: Trent Hill

Trent Hill — Thu, 21 Aug 2008 17:17:48 +0000

“That was during Grant’s tenure
and no-one can say that he was liberal in any sense of
the word politically.”

Um,yes we can. Grant was EXTREMELY liberal. He deployed the Navy to solve a foreign conflict, he participated in the anti-federalist Reconstruction.

By: Deemer from California

Deemer from California — Thu, 21 Aug 2008 17:09:28 +0000

In previous elections, the Constitution Party has run
Vice Presidential candidates in individual states who
were not the ‘National’ nominee. So placing Ron Paul
on the Virginia ballot would not be out of character.
That assumes Ron Paul decides to not actively act to
have his name removed. Should he leave his name on the
ballot it would prove interesting to see in which of
Virginia’s Congressional seats the ticket would fair
the best in relation to Ron Paul’s vote in Virginia’s
Republican primary last March.

Now as to Green being Progressive. That is a modern
idea imported from Germany where for many years the
German Green Party has run on the typical platform
that is associated with the Green Party USA. Remember,
the United States is the first Country in the world to
establish a specific National Park to preserve nature
for future generations. That was during Grant’s tenure
and no-one can say that he was liberal in any sense of
the word politically. The American Consevation move-
ment was never aggresively political which allowed the
European Greens to seize the mantle of “protecting &
preserving nature”. Before the 1960’s California’s
Sierra Club was much more focused on preserving the
California Sierra’s in a far more balanced manner than
is their current practice of trying to restrict all of
the people from ever seeing any of our Natural Trea-
sures.

By: Trent Hill

Trent Hill — Thu, 21 Aug 2008 16:33:38 +0000

“It doesn’t follow logically that just because a party is concerned about the environment, that it belongs on the “left”. In fact we would all be better off if the concepts of “left” and “right” would fade away.”

As a generality–I agree that “Green” means ecologically concerned or environmentally conscious,and doesn’t neccesarily imply Progressivism. But in the political realm…Green = Progressive.

Im glad they’re placing Baldwin on the ballot, just a bit confused is all. I do also hope they’ll place Baldwin/Paul

By: David Gaines

David Gaines — Thu, 21 Aug 2008 16:04:44 +0000

Richard: I’m sorry, but that libertarian analysis is just plain wrong given the total and complete bent of the Green Party of the United States to the left (and I spent about ten years before that in the Libertarian Party). After about nine years in the Green Party I have yet to meet one single person in the party, aside from Carey Campbell and his minions, who thinks that “Green” as the name of an American political party implies anything other than flat-out, left wing progessivism. “Pro-life” as the term is used in this country is not a Green position. “Conservative” is not a Green position.

The plain and simple truth is that Carey Campbell uses the word “Green” to confuse people and latch onto whatever name recognition it carries. His group signed on with the national Independence Party many months ago, so why don’t they simply use that name? Because it doesn’t carry any controversy, publicity, or recognition with it. The IGP simply gloms onto whomever will work with them, and it is usally a case where the people involved have no clue who Carey Campbell — a very facile and charming talker — is or what the history of his group involves. Based on his staff’s comments in the media yesterday, Michael Bloomberg apparently falls into that category. A short conversation with anyone in charge at the Green Party of Virginia or the Green Party of the United States would quickly disabuse him of any desire to be placed on any ballot as an IGP candidate.

By: Richard

Richard — Thu, 21 Aug 2008 15:27:49 +0000

The Virginia Independent Green Party holds itself out as a conservative ecology party. Its candidates have generally been pro-life. It doesn’t follow logically that just because a party is concerned about the environment, that it belongs on the “left”. In fact we would all be better off if the concepts of “left” and “right” would fade away.