RE-ELECTING HERBERT HOOVER

13 12 2020

Suppose that, in 1932, in the depths of The Great Depression, a fascist demagogue had contested Herbert Hoover’s re-nomination as the Republican Presidential candidate, and succeeded, thrusting Hoover aside? Suppose, in 1932, the Democrats had decided that, with the country in such perilous shape, New York Governor Franklin Roosevelt’s proposals for social programs and some kind of pie-in-the-sky “New Deal” seemed just a little too, well, socialist? So, instead of nominating Roosevelt, who was wildly popular, the Democratic leadership smeared him as “Moscow’s favorite,” and gave the party’s nomination to Hoover, endorsing his conservative strategy of stimulating the economy by offering financial stimuluses to banks and large businesses, and avoiding large-scale government handouts to impoverished families and individuals. Suppose that, in spite of their disappointment with this choice, a majority of Americans voted for Hoover over the demagogue, even as they hoped that Hoover, once in office, would see the wisdom of Roosevelt’s approach? Does this scenario sound at all familiar?

(Photo by William Thomas Cain/Getty Images)

I’m not going to take that metaphor too much further, but what I will do in this essay/talk is lay out some of the many ways Biden has always had fairly Republican policy goals and intentions,look at the conflicts this will engender and whether they might cause any kind of reassessment, and try to lay out a scenario or two about where all this could be leading us.

So, here we are. We’ve just re-elected Herbert Hoover, er, elected Joe Biden. In  either case, we’re looking at a President whose policy priorities are Republican. I’m not the only one who sees that–there’s a whole website devoted to demonstrating its truthThat website starts with his record on Social Security, and goes on from there:

  • 1983 Joe Biden floats the idea of raising the retirement age.

  • 1984 Joe Biden partners with Republicans to co-sponsor a freeze on social security.

  • 1995 Joe Biden says he’s tried four times to freeze Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and veterans’ benefits.

  • 1995 Joe Biden votes for Balanced Budget Amendments that cut Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and veterans’s benefits

  • 1996 Joe Biden floats the idea of chained CPI cuts to Social Security.

  • 1997 Joe Biden votes again for Balanced Budget Amendments that cut Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and veterans’ benefits.

  • 2007 Joe Biden brags that he’s proud of his support for a Social Security age increase.

  • 2007 Joe Biden tells NBC’s Meet the Press that cuts to Social Security and Medicare should “absolutely” be on the table.

  • 2018 Joe Biden says Social Security and medicare “still need adjustments.”

So, we have a President who, while spouting rhetoric about making things better, seems firmly committed to doing things that will make matters worse. The country is incredibly polarized, not just between the privileged few and the dis-empowered many, but between those whose response to our difficulties is to retreat into authoritarianism (as long as the authority shows some deference to them), those who envision a better way, and those who want to stick with what we’ve got because it would work if you ne’er-contents would just stop your complaining and drop your perfectionism and be grateful for what you get. Yes, that’s a three-way polarity. American politics tends to be extremely bipolar, but reality does not, which may help explain why our political system seems so poor at figuring things out. Read the rest of this entry »





CURIOUSER AND CURIOUSER

18 10 2020

Last month I concluded with these words:

Survey after survey reveals that the peoples’ wishes are far more radical, and fair, than what our corporate parties are willing to enact. These tensions, and others, are building to a pitch in the US, and I am not the only one who sees our current situation as tending towards a civil war, if not an outright revolution. The November election this year, far more than in most years, is looking more and more like a doorway into unknown territory rather than a solution to the national debate, no matter whether Trump or Biden wins, orif  the outcome is debatable. That’s a complex topic, but I’m out of time for this month. Unless something breathtaking occurs between now and mid-October, let’s take that as the starting point for next month’s show.

Well, here we are, five weeks later, two weeks and a few days ahead of Election Day, and sure enough, yet another black swan has landed, introducing a twist I, and others, are calling “The Republican Party’s Masque of the Red Death.” If you are not familiar with Edgar Allan Poe’s 1842 tale, it’s the story of a prince who, with a large contingent of his uninfected friends, isolates himself while a plague ravages his country. In the midst of a big costume party, an infected individual breaks into the castle and, with incredible stamina, lives long enough to infect, and kill, the prince and all his friends.

Our current version of this tale has two twists–the first being that the plague involved is rarely fatal, although it does seem to come with debilitating long term effects in many cases. The other is that, in our case, it is the prince himself who is infecting his friends, as he tried to bully his way through  a dangerous, highly infectious illness while promoting his Supreme Court nominee, who has exactly three years of judicial experience and who seems to have stepped out of the pages of Margaret Atwood’s A Handmaid’s Tale. She has also already had covid, meaning she is unlikely to be reinfected, but Trump succeeded in infecting enough of the Republicans involved in her nomination process to slow it down, but not to stop it–unless there are further unforeseen developments, of course.

There’s a lot going on here. In the last year of the Obama government, Mitch McConnell, the Republican Senate Majority leader, declined to move forward on Obama Supreme Court nominee Merrick Garland, “because it’s too close to an election.” But, when a Republican President makes a Supreme Court nomination right before an election which it’s starting to look like he could lose, it’s vitally important to damn the torpedoes and ram the nomination through, even knowing that it’s enraging millions of voters (who weren’t going to vote for Trump anyway) and possibly contributing to a Biden victory in November.

The Trump regime’s notably inept handling of the virus in the US has been a world-wide scandal that, unlike many of his violations of common sense, seems to be turning some voters off on him, but his egregious carelessness in infecting members of his own staff and the leadership of the Republican Party  may well have cost him dearly in the eyes of voters. And, win or lose, there is a good chance that he, as an older, overweight, high-blood pressure coronavirus victim, may encounter, according to The Mayo Clinic, “organ damage to the heart, lungs, and/or brain,” “blood clots and blood vessel problems”, and “problems with mood and fatigue.” They warn

Even in young people, COVID-19 can cause strokes, seizures and Guillain-Barre syndrome — a condition that causes temporary paralysis. COVID-19 may also increase the risk of developing Parkinson’s disease and Alzheimer’s disease.

So, our bull elephant of a President is now a wounded bull elephant. If he dies, or becomes obviously incapacitated, and Mike Pence becomes the GOP standard bearer, before or after the election, win or lose, we’re looking at several different uncharted territories. To deal with this, the Democrats have been playing “war games” as part of what they call “The Transition Integrity Project.”  According to Microsoft News, Read the rest of this entry »





TRUST ISSUES

9 08 2020

One of the big headline stories  recently is that Dr. Anthony Fauci and his family now need bodyguards because there are people making credible threats against them. The covid epidemic has sparked a lot of distrust and division. Some people call it “the planned-demic,” a tool that the Democrats are using to make Trump look bad, that Dr. Fauci and others are inflating the danger in an attempt to demoralize the country (thus the death threats), and thus the right thing to do is to ignore all the warnings about wearing a mask. “It’s killed 0.04% of our population,” one commenter on my Facebook feed wrote. “Yeah, this is getting serious.” Yeah, it’s only about four times as many Americans as got killed in the Vietnam War, but instead of being drawn out over a decade, it’s in the last five months. Nothing serious. But the point is, a whole lot of people don’t trust that the government and the media are telling them the truth about what’s going on.

Their distrust is both irrational and rational. First, here’s the irrational part. If you step back far enough to take in what’s going on all around the world, it’s clear that covid is a real threat, and that our government has botched its response, and that botched response has been amplified by the skepticism of so many Americans. But their distrust is also rational, given that the American medical system and its advocates in media and politics have told us that it is the best medical system in the world, even though it’s clearly failing us right now. Even before the current crisis, there was widespread awareness of the many faults of our system–wildly inflated prices, overtreatment and overbilling, misdiagnosis, a tendency to focus on minutiae and miss the big picture.

At the same time, America’s medical system is the most expensive in the world, and has used its wealth to prevent any kind of universal health insurance coverage, let alone a national health system that would lower the cost of that health coverage by removing the profit motive. The US is the only “developed country” in the world where one of the most common side effects of a cancer diagnosis is bankruptcy. Indeed, this is the only country in the world where “medical bankruptcy” is even an issue, and where chronic disease is a pretext for the extortion of wealth from the sick person and their family to doctors, pharmaceutical companies, and other already fabulously wealthy “health care providers,” such as, here in Tennessee, the Frist family and Phil Bredesen.  So gee, why would anybody distrust the word of the medical establishment?

Along similar lines, there is strong bipartisan support among the people of this country for some kind of universal-access public health system. The Democratic Party has had to pull out all the stops to prevent an advocate of universal single payer health care, and a lot of other very popular reforms of our society, from becoming its Presidential candidate. So, does the Democrats’ platform acknowledge this incredibly popular, demonstrably helpful idea? No, in large part due to the influence of money from for-profit medical businesses. The Dems nominated a candidate who is not afraid to state publicly that he would veto “Medicare for All” if Congress, by some miracle, passed it. And Bernie Sanders, the guy who campaigned so valiantly for “Medicare for All,” says he will support that vetoer, the burned-out husk of Joe Biden, for President. Yet another reason not to trust the medical establishment or our political system–or even alleged “insurgents” in our political system.

If you are African-American or otherwise of non-European origin, or if you are a low-income Euro-American, you know you can’t trust that the police will not, at any moment, swoop in and kill you. There was a story on the news as I was writing this about an African-American family that included an autistic young adult, Kobe Dimmock-Heisler.

Kobe Dimmock-Heisler

Kobe’s mother

His grandfather called 911 for help because Kobe was waving a knife around. By the time four police officers showed up, he had calmed down, and the family told the police they didn’t need their help and asked them to leave. The police didn’t leave. They forced their way into the house, which got Kobe agitated again. In response, the police shot him a total of six times, murdering him in the presence of his horrified mother, grandfather, and other family members. Read the rest of this entry »





POLICE AND THIEVES

14 06 2020

A couple of months ago, I was talking about “black swans” coming in for a landing here in America, and, since then, lo and behold, one I didn’t mention has come in for a very splashy landing, as the police murder of George Floyd, an unarmed, co-operative, African-American suspect in a misdemeanor case proved to be the straw that broke the camel’s back and unleashed a flood of anti-police, anti-racism protests around the country and around the world, protests that frequently turned violent, resulting in major damage to several US cities.

floydmurder

Is this the way to treat somebody over $20? That’s the police in the street, but George Floyd was not a thief.

The violence, as it turns out, was mostly initiated by police and police-supplied provocateurs, as well as by right-wing armed resistance groups who decided that the police riots at demonstrations against police oppression of African-Americans was a good cover under which to step in and institute their own brand of anti-state violence, in hopes of sparking a widespread armed uprising. An article on Bellingcat noted:

On the Facebook page, Big Igloo Bois, which at the time of writing had 30,637 followers (when I checked, it was up to 32,000+), an administrator wrote of the protests, “If there was ever a time for bois to stand in solidarity with ALL free men and women in this country, it is now”.

They added, “This is not a race issue. For far too long we have allowed them to murder us in our homes, and in the streets. We need to stand with the people of Minneapolis. We need to support them in this protest against a system that allows police brutality to go unchecked.”

One commenter added, “I’m looking for fellow Minneapolis residents to join me in forming a private, Constitutionally-authorized militia to protect people from the MPD, which has killed too many people within the last two years.”

These exchanges offer a window into an extremely online update of the militia movement, which is gearing up for the northern summer. The “Boogaloo Bois” expect, even hope, that the warmer weather will bring armed confrontations with law enforcement, and will build momentum towards a new civil war in the United States.

I think that “the Boogaloo Bois” are missing an important point. The main thrust of the demonstrations  is not about fighting the police, it’s about the much more radical demand that American cities end policing as we know it, so there’s nobody to fight. More on that a little later.

Screenshot_2020-06-13 Convulsing in protest, US cities brace for more unrest following George Floyd death

Police defending their right to murder as they see fit. Note heavily armed protestor. Another thoroughly appropriate response from our law enforcement officers. Police in the streets, alright, but the young man with the flowers is not one of the thieves, who appear in our next illustration, but rarely in the streets…

As the protests grew and spread, things reached such a pitch that Our Dear Leader threatened to declare martial law, although everybody was careful not to call it that. In yet another surprising development, so many of our country’s top military officers publicly disagreed with that call so that the Trumpster had to walk it back. A near-coup?

One result of such widespread police violence against people who were peacefully protesting police violence is that the United States no longer has any moral authority whatsoever to criticize other countries over their handling of anti-government protests.

Read the rest of this entry »





“PLANET OF THE HUMANS” –IMPERFECT, BUT VITALLY IMPORTANT

13 05 2020

Depending on who you’re reading and your own viewpoint, “Planet of the Humans,” the new movie from Michael Moore and Jeff Gibbs, is either a bomb or a bombshell.  Numerous prominent, well-respected climate activists have characterized the film as “BS” and called for it to be removed from circulation, saying  the film contains

“various distortions, half-truths and lies” and that the filmmakers “have done a grave disservice to us and the planet by promoting climate change inactivist tropes and talking points.”

Others, such as Richard Heinberg, offer a more nuanced view of the film, writing that it doesn’t always do justice to its subject, a critique of our response to the climate change we have provoked, but that, while

Planet of the Humans is not the last word on our human predicament. Still, it starts a conversation we need to have, and it’s a film that deserves to be seen.

So far, over seven and a half million people have seen it since it debuted on YouTube on the day before Earth Day, and it is, indeed, starting some conversations. I had an overall positive response to it, and have been surprised at how many, and who, among my friends have not shared my appreciation. This post/broadcast will be devoted to why I think it is a valuable contribution to the ongoing discussion about how, or perhaps whether, we are going to keep the planet’s climate within bounds that will allow human beings to be part of its ecosystem, along with my criticisms of it, and my response to others’ criticisms of it. Read the rest of this entry »





TECHNICAL DIFFICULTIES

10 05 2020

As you may be aware, Nashville was hit with two major storms last week. They knocked down trees and electric poles, leaving some people without electricity for several days.

That disruption put me behind on writing the post that would ordinarily have appeared today, a review of the Jeff Gibbs/Michael Moore film, “Planet of the Humans.” The coup de grace came when I learned that WRFN, the station on which I broadcast, was struck by lightning. While the transmitter and backup computers were spared, the mixing board was destroyed, making live broadcasts impossible for the time being. I will have the blog post finished in the next day or two, record it, and it will likely be featured on next Sunday night’s “Green Hour.” I’ll let you know.

The expense of replacing the mixing board comes on the heels of the station’s Spring fundraiser being cancelled because of the Covid quarantine puts the station in a difficult financial situation, and so I am taking this opportunity to ask my readers to consider donating to the station. I am a regular financial supporter, and am making an additional donation to help the station recover from this disaster. Here’s a link to the station’s “donate” page:

http://www.radiofreenashville.org/

Thanks for your help in keeping free speech alive!

m





COME YE AMATEURS OF WAR

12 01 2020

I want to start with The Green Party’s official press release about the murder of  Iranian Major General Qassim Soleimani.

Greens joined demonstrations in at least 80 cities in 38 states over the weekend in response to the assassination of Iranian Major General Qassim Suleimani on Iraqi soil, which the Green Party has called an act of war and an unconscionable escalation of hostilities in a region where the U.S. has already wreaked immense devastation over decades.

Lisa Savage, seeking the U S Senate seat from Maine and Bruce Gagnon, Coordinator Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space, spoke at a demonstration on Saturday in Portland, ME.

“U.S. military aggression serves war profiteers, not the people,” said Savage in a recent statement. “We cannot bomb our way to a peaceful resolution of the conflict zone our nation has created in Iraq, nor is deliberately provoking Iran in our best interests as a nation. Diplomacy and the restoration of congressional authority over the president’s use of the U.S. military are urgently needed. We need senators and congresspeople willing to stand up to the Pentagon and the executive branch of government to say no to more warmongering.”

Suspicion among peace advocates that the drone attack was designed to move Iran, Iraq and the U.S. even further to the brink of all-out war has since been borne out by President Trump’s abhorrent threat to destroy Iranian sites that are “important to Iranian culture.”

Greens are also alarmed by reports that the Department of Homeland Security has ordered Customs and Border Protection to “’report’ and detain anyone with Iranian heritage entering the country who is deemed potentially suspicious or ‘adversarial,’ regardless of citizenship status” (source: Council on American-Islamic Relations).

Several state Green Parties also issued statements and calls to action.

The Green Party categorically opposes measures ‘authorizing’ preemptive or illegal military actions, or delegating to the president sole power to commit acts of war. Greens have called for the repeal of the Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF) 2001 to restrict the president’s ability to direct more attacks.

A great deal has already been written about this, much of it pure dissembling. The Democrats are outraged, not so much about the murder and the effects it is likely to have, as about the fact that they weren’t consulted first. Only few deeply principled Dems have denounced it wholeheartedly–Bernie Sanders and his deputy Ro Khanna, Tulsi Gabbard, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, and Ilhan Omar, mostly. Some of the more libertarian Republican–Mike Lee and Rand Paul, f’rinstance–are also not pleased.

Corporate media have mostly framed Soleimani as a “terrorist with blood on his hands,” conveniently ignoring the fact that part of the job description for “general” is “being wiling to get ‘blood on your hands’ by ordering the soldiers under your command to risk their deaths in order to kill other people.” Every general in the world–Iranian, American, wherever, has blood on his, or, these days, her hands, or at least has indicated a willingness to do so. Disparaging a general for having “blood on his hands” is like criticizing a farmer for having dirt under hir fingernails. It comes with the territory.

Generals are willing to “get blood on their hands,” but generally recognize that it’s better not to–it’s better to outmanoeuvre your  opponent, and better still to find a way to make peace. That, in fact, is what Soleimani was doing in Iraq on the day he was murdered. According to the Prime Minister of Iraq, Soleimani was on his way to meet with him about getting together with the Saudis and de-escalating tensions in the region, and the US government knew it–in other words, all those top US government officials who are braying that Soleimani was “planning the deaths of more Americans” are either lying, or haven’t done their homework. The US has given the rest of the world yet another in the long list of reasons not to trust Uncle Sam.

Read the rest of this entry »





“I, THE LORD THY GOD, AM A JEALOUS GOD.”

8 12 2019

 

Let’s start with a disclaimer. What I am about to say is not based on any position debated, adopted, or endorsed by The Green Party, which takes no position on the existence, let alone the disposition, of Jaweh or any other deity. The only statement the Green Party has made about religion, as far as I know, is in the Ten Key Values, under the heading of “diversity,” where you can find this sentence:

We believe it is important to value cultural, ethnic, racial, sexual, religious and spiritual diversity, and to promote the development of respectful relationships across the human spectrum.

It is my view that having “a respectful relationship” involves knowing not only how any given belief system, and its believers, view themselves, but also having an understanding of the context of that belief system. This essay/talk is part of my attempt to understand the full context of the three “Western” religions–Judaism, Christianity, and Islam.

I call my blog “Deep Green Perspective” because I do my best to take the long view on the events of the moment. My intention has always been to focus on the deep roots of those events, rather than getting caught up in the push and pull of the short term. I don’t think it gets much deeper than looking at a culture’s conception of the divine. Even if you don’t think there is any such thing as “the divine,” it’s like Russiagate. Enough people believe in it so that our overall culture’s concept of Russiagate, or God, is a “real” thing.

jealousgod

Yaweh, jealous

The phrase “I, the Lord thy God, am a jealous God” occurs six times in The Old Testament, a book I read repeatedly as a child. I was not being “Bible-banged.” I was genuinely interested in knowing what that book had to say. The “jealous god” phrase has been floating around in my mind ever since. Yaweh’s warning has been a central meme in our culture for the nearly two thousand years since the Judeo-Christian/Muslim world view attained dominance over the earlier, more tolerant, pantheistic cultures of Greece, Rome, and  the Middle East. Read the rest of this entry »





ASKING INCONVENIENT QUESTIONS

14 07 2019

As long-time readers of this blog know, I ran for an at-large seat on the Metro Nashville Council in 2015, mostly in an effort to publicize the long-term concerns I express. I received a couple of thousand votes and came in second to last. I said I’d be back, but when this election cycle came around, I didn’t file papers to run, for several reasons. First, somebody asked me to run last time, and nobody asked this time. Second, as I ran last time and got a better understanding of what was involved, it seemed that, if I ran again, I would have to run with the pledge that I would hire somebody as a legal consultant to help me translate my somewhat radical proposals into Legalese, the language in which our governments do business. From there, I concluded that it would be more efficient, and more credible to the voting public, if I, or the “we” that constitutes the local Green Party, simply found a lawyer who shared my/our values, and offered to help her or his campaign. And that’s as far as that got.

A few weeks ago, after attending a Mayoral candidates’ forum in which my concerns for Nashville’s long-term stability were not addressed, I wrote the following letter to all four major Mayoral candidates, and to the ten at-large council candidates I think have the best chance of winning. Here’s what I wrote:

Dear Candidate:

I ran for at-large Metro Council in the last election. For a variety of reasons, I’m not in the race this time, but I still have the concerns I ran on four years ago, and I am still writing my blog and doing my radio show, and that is why I am writing you now. I would like to hear from you about “my issues,” and I would like to share your response (and comment on it) as my next radio show/blog post, which will air/be published in mid-July, so I am also asking your permission to publish your response. If I need to do any editing/condensing, I will share my proposed edit with you, to make sure that I have preserved your intentions. Here’s what I’m asking:

The way I see it, Nashville is currently enjoying an extraordinarily prosperous period, especially compared to a great many other cities in this country, and regions of the world. However, the same crises that have overtaken them loom over us—a runaway climate crisis, an increasingly fragile national economy, and the rapidly approaching exhaustion of many of the material resources our civilization depends on, from fossil fuels to rare earth metals to fish, forests, fertile soil, and clean water. To what extent do these factors inform your political agenda?

To what extent do you share my concerns? What do you think the city should, could, or is likely to do in response to them?

Thank you for your time and attention.

No mayoral candidate wrote me back, although Facebook Messenger informed me that John Ray Clemmons opened my letter–at 7:30 in the morning. I hope that some day we will find out that it served as a wake up call for him.

I did better with the council races, with six responses to ten letters sent. Three of the candidates who didn’t respond are the ones who are generally identified as Republicans, although technically Metro Council races are non-partisan. The fourth non-responder was Gicola Lane, one of the organizers behind the initiative that established a Police Review Board here in Nashville.

I can understand why a political candidate would be inclined to handle my questions very gingerly. Al Gore nailed it when he called climate change “an inconvenient truth.” It’s easy to see human history as an increasingly rapid spiral into greater wealth and technological complexity. By and large, people don’t want to imagine that things might move some other way– a spiral of decreasing resources, complexity, and expectations. As Bill Clinton is rumoured to have said, “Nobody ever got elected by promising the American people less.” When Winston Churchill told the British people, “I have nothing to offer but blood, sweat, toil, and tears,” he wasn’t running for office, he had just been elected, and the Germans were taking over Europe and saturation-bombing Britain as a prelude to invasion.

It’s difficult to get people to see that we are in a “blood, sweat, toil, and tears” situation with climate change. Instead of an invading army, we are threatened by the way our own actions are skewing the planet’s climate into a “normal” that is far less human-friendly than the climate in which we have evolved as a species. So far, for most Americans, that change is nibbling at daily life, rather than devouring it wholesale, and so, for most of us in America, and especially here in Nashville, it is possible to live as if nothing has changed or is going to change. City election issues can be restricted to budgets and taxes,  infrastructure, zoning, education, policing, and similar daily life issues. These mundane issues offer almost infinite details to keep us occupied and keep us from looking at the longer-term questions I have been asking. When our community governments do address these questions, they will tend to do so in the context of the short-term, daily-life issues they are used to dealing with. With that in mind, let’s go through the responses I received, with some commentary from me, and then I will suggest a few things the city could do that would tend to steer the city, just as it is, into an entity that is better prepared to deal with the financial and material shortages and extreme weather events that we are likely to see in the mid-term future. Read the rest of this entry »





GREENER PASTURES

9 06 2019

The recent European Parliament elections were very heartening for Greens, with the Green Party frequently being second or third in total number of votes in any given country.  There is some chance that the next President of the European Commission will be a Green. Tonight I’ll be looking at what I consider the three most important contexts of this victory. The first is as it relates to the general growth and maturity of Europe’s Green Parties. The second is the differences between European democracy and American democracy that have enabled the rise of Europe’s Green Parties, while the Green Party in this country has unfortunately remained little more than a footnote. The third is how the Green Party’s ascension fits into the overall context of European, and American, politics.2019-MEP-results

Green Parties are deeply involved in the governance of many countries in Europe. While the Green Party of England and Wales isn’t well represented in England’s Parliament, it has a strong local presence, and elected seven out of Britain’s seventy-three representatives in the European Parliament, including one who had been the Mayor of Sheffield, England’s third-largest city. The Green Party of Ireland has maintained a Parliamentary presence for much of its history and been part of the ruling coalition at times. Read the rest of this entry »








%d bloggers like this: