« MN GOP: INDEPENDENT LEADER TIM WALZ SUPPORTS GAY MARRIAGE | Home | BLOGGERS ON “ALMANAC” TONIGHT »
MARK RITCHIE CONSIDERED “THOUGHT LEADER” OF WTO PROTEST IN SEATTLE
By Michael Brodkorb | July 28, 2006
Click here to read Paul Hawken report on the protests of the WTO in Seattle. He lists DFL-endorsed candidate for Secretary of State Mark Ritchie as a “thought leader” of the protest.
This is a from an article Ritchie wrote about the Seattle WTO protest:
“Seattle will be remembered for a lot of things, including the courage of the mostly young people who stood solidly and steadfastly in the face of a furious assault. My hope is that it will also be remembered as a watershed event — a time and place where ‘we the people’ confronted dysfunctional and oppressive global institutions with new ideas and new energy. I hope I will be able to look back someday soon and be able to say that this Battle in Seattle helped jolt the world onto a new path, one leading towards a just and truly sustainable system of global governance and world peace.” Source: Mark Ritchie “Beyond Seattle”
Wow.
Tags: Uncategorized
Topics: Uncategorized | 41 Comments »
41 Responses to “MARK RITCHIE CONSIDERED “THOUGHT LEADER” OF WTO PROTEST IN SEATTLE”
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
July 28th, 2006 at 11:32 AM
Is Mark Ritchie the one who “tought” you how to spell?
Also, what makes you think this will drive anyone away from him as a candidate? Ihe republicans who enjoy the benefits of opressive labor and environmental practices in poor countries brought about by WTO practices probably weren’t going to vote for him anyway.
July 28th, 2006 at 11:48 AM
Thanks for the tip on the spelling mistake…
July 28th, 2006 at 12:08 PM
Mark Ritchie is the new Keith Ellison, and Roving is helping to highlight that.
I am anxious to see if Ritchie has the sense to get out in front of his radical, Communist problems or if he will sit back and let them consume his campaign like Ellison and Entenza to the point where these issues destroy his candidacy.
Are you going to step up to the plate Stalin?
July 28th, 2006 at 12:16 PM
Rover, if you support the terrorists who rioted in Seattle, well, I guess that wouldn’t surprise me. So if the National Dems hold their convention in St Paul in 2008, you would be fine with conservatives burning the businesses on Wabasha? Maybe through a firebomb into Dunn Brothers Coffee? Smash the windows in Candyland? Climb up and tear down the Marshall Fields sign and throw it at the St Paul police?
That’s what DFL and Labor endorsed Ritchie supports.
July 28th, 2006 at 12:59 PM
“I hope I will be able to look back someday soon and be able to say that this Battle in Seattle helped jolt the world onto a new path”
Yep, in 1948 Humphrey kicked the communists out of the Minnesota Democratic party. I’ll look back at 2006 and say “they’re back”.
July 28th, 2006 at 1:21 PM
Another smear campaign that avoids issues! I can’t wait!
July 28th, 2006 at 1:32 PM
Did Mark Ritchie loot any buildings? Did Mark Ritchie attack any cops? Did Mark Ritchie start any fires?
If you have proof of that, bring it.
Otherwise, I encourage you and your candidates to campaign on the idea that a government free from dissent or constitutional protection runs better. George Bush never speaks to an audience that may disagree with what he is about to say, and he sets up protest zones to make sure that he never has to see any dissent when he whisks from his car to his destinations. Our civil liberties are being erroded at the altar of the nebulous “Homeland Security” and the very freedoms that make up the fabric of this nation are being shredded by republican greed.
If you think this is a winning topic for your side, by all means, keep running it up the flag pole. I bet you will be surprised by how few people salute.
July 28th, 2006 at 1:50 PM
Roving, I really am not living in a USA where I notice an unbelievable lack of dissent.
July 28th, 2006 at 1:51 PM
“George Bush never speaks to an audience that may disagree with what he is about to say,”
The reason they have to limit access to events is because your side is full of rude asses. I’ve been to various political events over the years where Democrats showed up to try to shout down the speaker. Have you ever been to a Democratic event where several Republicans showed up to try to shout over the speaker?
July 28th, 2006 at 1:53 PM
“Did Mark Ritchie loot any buildings? Did Mark Ritchie attack any cops? Did Mark Ritchie start any fires?”
Mark Ritchie said “I hope I will be able to look back someday soon and be able to say that this Battle in Seattle helped jolt the world onto a new pathâ€.
It seems to be that he supports the rioting a distruction. What do you think he meant by “the Battle in Seattle”?
July 28th, 2006 at 2:16 PM
The Battle in Seattle was much like the Battle for civil rights.
There was some violence on the preiphery of what was otherwise a terribly important message. People like you who support the subjugation of others can try to distract discussion by focusing on the violence, but the rest of us see each of these movements for what they actually are. The people breaking free from tyrany and taking a stand for equal rights.
If you want to know why the poor and minorities are not very well represented in your party, it is because your big tent has a whites only sign on the door, and a $10,000 minimum donation at the table right inside the front flap.
July 28th, 2006 at 2:26 PM
“Another smear campaign that avoids issues! I can’t wait!”
So being a leader in this —
“new path, one leading towards a just and truly sustainable system of global governance and world peace”
— is a “smear campaign”? He should be proud of his communist beliefs.
Conservatives have been mocked by lefty loonies for calling them “commies”. The truth is, we’ve been right. Libs like Richie are just starting to feel more comfortable in their commie skin now that the lunatic left owns the DFL.
RICHIE FOR ULTIMATE LEADER!
July 28th, 2006 at 2:28 PM
“The people breaking free from tyrany and taking a stand for equal rights.”
All I saw bunch of spoiled white kids burning businesses in Seattle. But I guess they are just like Rosa Parks.
“and a $10,000 minimum donation at the table right inside the front flap”
You may want to do some research and see what the average donation is to Democrats vs Republicans.
July 28th, 2006 at 2:37 PM
“All I saw bunch of spoiled white kids burning businesses in Seattle.”
Thank you for proving my point.
July 28th, 2006 at 2:47 PM
Roving – If you are so sure about how great your stand against government and big business is, then try having the same protest in China. Every one of you DFL commies seem to love the idea of the communist system so much, see how long you can get away with you crap there.
July 28th, 2006 at 2:55 PM
I’m saying that focusing on issues of the past instead of relevant issues of the day is a smear campaign. We should be talking about what their vision for the future is and whether that’s right for America.
July 28th, 2006 at 3:03 PM
We have plenty of freedoms here that the Chineese don’t. The only problem with your theory is, in China, they are becoming more and more free. In this country, we are going the other way.
July 28th, 2006 at 3:08 PM
You’ll have to forgive Roving “STRIB”Reporter and
Jose. It’s been a very bad week for the DFL and with the extremely hot weather their KOOLAID consumption has been higher than NORMAL !
July 28th, 2006 at 3:34 PM
Jose. I agree with you on some of the threads that have been on MDE. I thought they were rather trivil issues that don’t mean much to how the person would perform in office.
This is a case that I feel is important to discuss. Is Ritchie a supporter of violent leftist groups? Or even non-violent leftist organizations? If the Republicans endorsed someone who was thought to be a supporter of a right wing para-military organization, I would want to know and have a discussion about it.
July 28th, 2006 at 3:39 PM
Jose, I agree with you that some of the threads on MDE lately have been on rather trival issues that have little to do with how the person would perform in office.
But I think we need to discuss if Ritchie is a supporter of violent leftist organizations. Or even non-violent leftist groups. If the Republicans endorsed someone who is thought to have ties to a right wing para-military group, I would want to know have it discussed now.
July 28th, 2006 at 3:40 PM
Damn, it showed up twice (and I hit “submit” three times before anything happened).
July 28th, 2006 at 3:47 PM
“I’m saying that focusing on issues of the past instead of relevant issues of the day is a smear campaign.”
Without studying someone’s past history there’s no way of knowing what their future actions are likely to be. It’s not like Richie flirted with communism in the 50′s, this is his recent history. It’s what he is all about today. And that’s not a smear, it’s relevent.
“We should be talking about what their vision for the future is and whether that’s right for America.”
Are you suggesting that communism is “right for America”? That appears to be the candidate for General Secretary’s vision.
July 28th, 2006 at 4:16 PM
“A communist is someone who reads Marx. An anti-communist is someone who understands Marx.” Ronald Reagan
July 28th, 2006 at 4:50 PM
You know, if I were wealthy, I would create a newspaper called “The Commie Nazi Times”. It would consist solely of reprinted articles from Republican candidates for office. I would then pay bloggers to write about these Repbulicans, saying “Look at how The Commie Nazi Times has a special relationship with this Republican! What a Commie Nazi!”
July 28th, 2006 at 6:36 PM
Roving has it right. The WTO had done lots to hurt the working man and woman. The protests in Seattle were an important action to challenge the WTO’s methods and actions. The police overreaction caused the violence, from what I’ve read.
The arguemnts used here are black and white. Either you support the WTO or you are a filthy communist. Either you support the WTO or you support violence. Either you stay a home and watch the official story on TV, or you a dangerous left-wing wacko China-lovin’ communista.
Dave (another anonymous poster, apparently afraid to post under his real name) claims Republicans donate more small donations than Democrats. But of course, he presents no proof.
The “communist boogeyman” is still hiding under the bed for a lot of these right wingers. No doubt there were many a night they were terrified that the Russians were going to drop the big one.
The spectacle of McCarthyism isn’t dead by a long shot: public ridicule of anyone questioning the government is clearly the activity of choice amoung the corporate- controlled media, right-wing bloggers, and their hangers-on.
I think the important thing to remember here is that America is a land of freedoms, and if we lose those, we lose America itself. Doesn’t matter if they are squelched under a Republican or a Democrat – when they are lost, they are likely lost for good.
Who can we elect that will reinforce our Constitutionally guaranteed freedoms here in Minnesota?
Who can we elect that will put pressure on to get our National Guardsmen (very much overextended) back home?
Who can we elect that will really focus on our true national security needs: first responders, coordination between agencies, emergency response, antiviral stockpiles, border patrol, crime prevention, energy independence?
This farce of calling Ritchie unfit because he’s a commie is ridiculous, not just because it is painfully juvenile, but because it misses the important issues before America today.
July 28th, 2006 at 8:35 PM
Wow, you’re all a bunch of glittering jewels of colossal ignorance, either that or a family of skunks who show up at the picnic. Honestly, it amazes many of us the lengths you people will go to justify all of the f**ked up things your side does. Roving, Seattle is not like Civil Rights. To say that belittles the Civil Rights struggle. It’s like taking a dump on Rosa Parks’ grave.
MN Politics Guru, if Ritchie doesn’t like and agree with commies, maybe he shouldn’t submit his shit to their newspapers. That’s a pretty simple problem to solve.
Once again, you people prove that the Democrats have the perfect mascot for their party.
July 28th, 2006 at 9:57 PM
Brian,
You are proving out more and more each post that you are the premier glittering jewel of colossal ignorance (sorry Roving, you get second prize).
Billionaires like George Soros (of Securities Fraud fame), Rob Glaser (of Real Networks Fame — thank God I use Windows Media Player), Steve Bing (Hollywood Media Mogul), Haim Saban (of Power Rangers Fame), Peter B. Lewis (an insurance mogul), Steven Kirsch (InfoSeek founder) et al. have given millions and millions and millions of dollars to Democrats via both hard and soft and unregulated money.
Don’t lecture the rest of us about the Democrat Party being the party of the downtrodden after looking at the current cast of billionaires running the show.
July 29th, 2006 at 1:26 PM
I must admit to being confused.
There were morons supporting several radical idealogies as well as your garden variety walking pharmacies involved in burning Seattle.
Does Ritchie support Anarchy, Communism, Hedonism, all of the above or does he just enjoy a bit of looting and arson for the fun in it?
July 29th, 2006 at 8:16 PM
Chris (afraid to post under his own name) claims a few rich donors control the Democratic party.
However, he fails to provide any evidence of such a conspiracy.
Nor does he compare the number and quantity of rich donors on the Republican and Democratic side.
In other words, he believes deeply in something, but has no idea how to prove it.
Another baseless accusation from the right fails due to lack of evidence.
>plonk
July 29th, 2006 at 8:21 PM
Swiftee says Ritchie must be a radical, since there were some radicals protesting at Seattle. He also says Ritchie must be a drug addict, since some people were using drugs there.
First, he provides no proof of the presence of radicals or drug users.
Then, he makes the colossal blunder of assuming that the presence of those people implies anything about anyone else there.
Another baseless accusation from the right fails due to lack of proof and idiocy.
-plonk-
July 29th, 2006 at 9:14 PM
Brian,
To even question that many, many billionaires haven given to Democrats proves my theory that you are the premier glittering jewel of colossal ignorance. It’s been in the news for years. But since you’re so uninformed, see below:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A24179-2003Nov10?language=printer
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2001988508_glaser26m.html
http://www.opensecrets.org/527s/527indivs.asp?cycle=2004
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A23283-2004Jun7.html
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5747838/
http://www.boston.com/news/politics/advertising/articles/2004/09/21/rich_activists_hoping_to_sway_voters_give_vast_sums_to_527s?mode=PF
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/news/archive/2003/12/08/national1618EST0655.DTL
If you’re not a complete imbiscle, you should be able to follow the point that I made.
July 30th, 2006 at 2:51 AM
Yes, Democrats gave to 527 groups more than Republicans gave to 527 groups. But that’s not the whole picture.
From your own quoted stories, which don’t back up your conclusion:
// Overall, pro-Democratic 527 organizations have raised at least $106.6 million, according to PoliticalMoneyLine, three times the $33.6 million raised by pro-Republican groups in this election cycle.
The Democratic advantage disappears, however, when these figures are added to the amounts raised by the national party committees and the presidential campaigns. Then the GOP pulls far ahead, $557.6 million to $393.6 million. //
Why didn’t Republicans give to 527s? Probably because Rove said no, and everyone obeyed like good little boys, that’s why.
// One mystery of the 527 groups is why Republicans have been so laggard in organizing them.
Independent analyst Stuart Rothenberg said last week, “The Democrats got a terrific head start.â€
Mitchell provides one explanation. “For some reason, particularly true with this White House team, no one will make a move without a blessing from Karl (Rove) or (Bush campaign manager) Ken (Mehlman) or someone — and there is a specific prohibition on doing these 527s at the suggestion or request or after ‘material discussions’ with an agent of a candidate or party,†Mitchell said.
“So it’s a Catch-22. Republicans want to be asked by the very people for whom it is illegal to do the asking — and there is such an environment of top-down control on the Republican side that it freezes what should be Republican political entrepreneurs,” she said. //
So George Soros gave $24M. Big deal. So did the Bush supporters, directly to the Bush campaign in 2000.
// Francis ran the Bush 2000 campaign’s “Pioneer” program, which produced 246 men and women who each raised at least $100,000. PFA organizers sought out Francis because his close ties to the administration would have lent enormous clout and prestige. //
Your argument that Democrats give more than Republicans is disproven by your own quoted sources.
Your argument that Dems are controlled by billionaires is not proven. No evidence is given whatsoever.
Oh, and BTW, the word is not spelled “imbiscle”.
-plonk-
July 30th, 2006 at 10:07 AM
Brian,
My argument is that you morons claim to be for the little guy but your party is controlled by billionaires who have dumped tens of millions of dollars each into groups who are virtually unregulated — able to accept unlimited contributions.
July 30th, 2006 at 10:16 AM
Brian,
My argument is that you morons claim to be for the little guy but your party is controlled by billionaires who have dumped tens of millions of dollars each into groups who are virtually unregulated — able to accept unlimited contributions. You questioned that fact and I gave you the names of the billionaires who are dumping millions and millions of dollars into Democrats. I gave you links of articles to prove that Democrats are beholden to billionaires.
Also, there is a difference between receiving hard dollars (like the Bush campaign and the RNC did) which are limited by federal law and being able to dump $24 million into Democrat controlled groups. Bush did not raise his money from billionaires $24 million at a time. And those Pioneers you mentioned raised their $100,000 from individual donors a couple of grand at a time subject to the FEC limits.
Doesn’t it bother you that billionaires are controlling your party, Brian? If you’re really the party of the little guy, shouldn’t you refuse dirty money from billionaires?
Thank you for pointing out my spelling mistake. I don’t usually make them. Brian, in addition to being the premier glittering jewel of colossal ignorance, you are an imbecile.
July 30th, 2006 at 11:01 AM
Chris: // controlled by billionaires //
And yet you make absolutely no case to back that up.
Just because they have given the money to some 527 doesn’t mean they control the Democratic Party.
News flash: Democrats don’t march in line like Republicans.
And yes, Democrats are for the little guy. The guy who pays at the pump. The guy who gets sent to war. The guy who is trying to find a job. The guy who gets discriminated against. The guy who works for minimum wage. The guy whose job got Wal-Mart’ed.
July 30th, 2006 at 11:05 AM
Mr. Hanna, does your brain hurt as much when coming up with such tortured bits of amphigory as mine does when reading it?
I suppose you do have one valid point though.
The behavior of the Neanderthal mob that assembled in Seattle could be explained as easily by the extended exposure to left wing “rhetoric” (examples of such as you’ve provided) as by drug use.
Maybe that bag of a**holes was simply having a Democrat moment.
So allow me to pose my question again, but perhaps more succinctly:
Does Richie support Anarchy, Communism or the complete absence of rational thought and action?
July 30th, 2006 at 11:24 AM
I posted this on another thread, but after reading Brian’s latest screed, it bears repeating.
Brian,
I honestly believe you better be wearing a lead suit and a tin foil hat before the radiation beams that Karl Rove has aimed at you through a super secret governmental program yet to be uncovered by the New York Times further penetrate your feeble little mind.
July 30th, 2006 at 11:59 AM
BH-
“follow the money”.
Where did Gore and Kerry (and now Hatch) get a huge chunk of their funding from? Big liberal donors and 527s.
That is a fact. Sorry if facts are not your friends. The sooner you deal with it, the sooner you might actually learn something.
Richie commented on great the activity was in Seattle. Well, he didn’t argue against the mahem and destruction. (which he easily could have)
What part of those facts don’t you believe?
July 30th, 2006 at 3:15 PM
swiftee: // Does Richie support Anarchy, Communism or the complete absence of rational thought and action? //
I’d suggest you ask him. Personally, though, I doubt it.
As to exposure to certain political rhetoric causing problems for people:
// A [2003] study based on a series of seven US polls conducted from January through September of [2003] reveals that before and after the Iraq war, a majority of Americans have had significant misperceptions and these are highly related to support for the war in Iraq.
The polling, conducted by the Program on International Policy (PIPA) at the University of Maryland and Knowledge Networks, also reveals that the frequency of these misperceptions varies significantly according to individuals’ primary source of news. Those who primarily watch Fox News are significantly more likely to have misperceptions, while those who primarily listen to NPR or watch PBS are significantly less likely. //
http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/articles/international_security_bt/102.php?nid=&id=&pnt=102&lb=brusc
July 30th, 2006 at 3:19 PM
Facts: // Where did Gore and Kerry (and now Hatch) get a huge chunk of their funding from? Big liberal donors and 527s. That is a fact. //
And your source? Remember, this should show a huge chunk of funding from 527′s to Hatch. Huge is, let’s say, 75% of his funding?
Perhaps rich liberals give to political parties that support their ideals. Hard to imagine, I know. However, it has been implied that these donors somehow “control” the DFL. I have seen no proof for that, only unsupported claims.
Care to share some real facts?
November 12th, 2008 at 11:08 PM
[...] of the WTO in Seattle. He lists Ritchie as a “thought leader” of the protest. Click here for my original post from [...]