Hillary Removes Bill as First Husband By Greg Palast (satire)

Dandelion Salad

from Greg Palast on Myspace

By Greg Palast
Greg Palast
Wednesday 20 May 2008
New York

In a surprise move meant to reinvigorate her faltering campaign, Democratic hopeful Hillary Clinton dismissed William Clinton as First Husband designate.

Those close to the candidate, speaking on condition of anonymity, said that Mr. Clinton, also known as “Bill,” had, with press revelations of his business associations with the repressive Colombian regime, plus a long history of support for anti-union causes such as NAFTA, had become a “real drag” on Senator Clinton’s ambitions.

While disappointing returns from Kentucky primary polls flashed on campaign monitors, the Senator’s spokesman issued a tersely worded statement announcing the resignation of the ex-President and thanking Mr. Clinton for “his years of service in support of Hillary’s career and her goals for America” and that the candidate would, “miss his presence greatly.”

Mr. Clinton will retain the title of Former Chief of the Free World.

Meanwhile, Senator Clinton dismissed rumors of her accepting the number two spot on the ticket from Senator Barack Obama, though she appeared to leave the door open, telling reporters traveling with her she would consider the Vice-Presidential nomination if she were also simultaneously appointed White House chef, a comment followed by that weird and frightening laugh of hers.

Campaign insiders said that Senator Clinton will shortly announce that her new designee for “First Lad” will be Kevin Costner who is expected to join her in the final desperate days of the primary season after the release next month of his latest flop, Big Advance in My Pants.

Reached at his office in Harlem, New York, Mr. Clinton, an uncommitted super-delegate, stated that he had not been forced from the Clinton campaign, but had chosen to remove himself so he could “devote more time to [his] family.”

***

Greg Palast is the author of the New York Times bestsellers, The Best Democracy Money Can Buy and Armed Madhouse: Sordid Secrets and Strange Tales of a White House Gone Wild. Journalist Palast has completely ignored the primary horserace to devote his efforts to investigating the new attack on the right to vote in the United States.

***

The Election Files

GregPalastOffice

FAIR USE NOTICE: This blog may contain copyrighted material. Such material is made available for educational purposes, to advance understanding of human rights, democracy, scientific, moral, ethical, and social justice issues, etc. This constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in Title 17 U.S.C. section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

see

Robert Kennedy, Greg Palast: The Final Investigation?

Hillary to Obama: I’ll be Prez of Kentucky, you’ll be Prez of Oregon

Robert

by R J Shulman
Dandelion Salad
featured writer

Robert’s blog post
May 20, 2008

LOUISVILLE, Kentucky – Senator Clinton made an offer today to Democratic front runner Barack Obama in a telephone conversation that the best way to promote party unity is to divide up the country. “The fairest way to determine who should be President is to have the person who won each state be President of that state,” she told Senator Obama who was campaigning in Billings, Montana. “For example, I’ll be President of New York, California, New Jersey and Pennsylvania and the like, and I’ll let you have Maine, Guam and the Virgin Islands.”

The party is seriously contemplating Senator Clinton’s idea, according to Democratic sources. “This idea worked a number of years ago when the Pope divided the world between Spain and Portugal,” said Harvey Lineberg, a Democratic Party spokesman.

There is still disagreement as to what to do with Florida and Michigan, whose delegates were disqualified when they held early primaries in defiance of party rules. “Michigan will probably be given to the Canadians. Let them deal with all the unemployment around Detroit,” said Clyde Fleming, a Democratic Party strategist, “and Florida should be given to the Cubans. Heck. Florida is mostly Cuban now anyway.”

“I think my offer to Senator Obama is very magnanimous,” said Hillary Clinton. “By the Republican rules of winner-take-all delegates per state in their primaries, I’d have already won. In other words, if I were a Republican, I’d be the nominee. “She is a Republican,” said Dennis Kucinich of Ohio, who had dropped out of the Presidential race a few months ago, “After all, she did vote for the war.”

see

KY and OR Primary Results (no returns for OR yet)

Garden Girl TV: Harvest + Natural Insect Control

Dandelion Salad

Updated: added the insect control video. ~ Lo

GardenGirltv

Patti Moreno, the Garden Girl, continues to harvest from the Urban Sustainable Garden. Distributed by Tubemogul.

For more great info, check out Gardengirltv.com and sign up for her newsletter.

Updated:

Natural Insect Control

Patti Moreno the Garden Girl shows you how she controls insects in her garden, by using diatomaceos earth! Distributed by Tubemogul.

see

Gardening

KY and OR Primary Results

Dandelion Salad

source

Kentucky

Democrats

51 pledged delegates, 9 unpledged
Candidate Vote % Delegates
Hillary Rodham Clinton 454,220 65.5% To be determined
Barack Obama 207,484 29.9
Uncommitted 17,743 2.6
John Edwards 13,993 2.0

source

Kentucky

Republicans

42 pledged delegates, 3 unpledged
Candidate Vote % Delegates
John McCain 142,290 72.3% To be determined
Mike Huckabee 16,159 8.2
Ron Paul 13,379 6.8
Uncommitted 10,578 5.4
Mitt Romney 9,111 4.6
Rudolph W. Giuliani 3,117 1.6
Alan Keyes 2,130 1.1

source

Oregon

Democrats

52 pledged delegates, 13 unpledged
Candidate Vote % Delegates
Barack Obama 347,852 58.7% 18
Hillary Rodham Clinton 245,211 41.3 12

source

Oregon

Republicans

27 pledged delegates, 3 unpledged
Candidate Vote % Delegates
John McCain 272,817 85.0% 23
Ron Paul 48,300 15.0 4

FAIR USE NOTICE: This blog may contain copyrighted material. Such material is made available for educational purposes, to advance understanding of human rights, democracy, scientific, moral, ethical, and social justice issues, etc. This constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in Title 17 U.S.C. section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

see

Democrat and Republican Delegates

Results

“To know and not to do is not to know.” by Ralph Nader

Dandelion Salad

by Ralph Nader
May 19, 2008

Mountain View, California – An invitation to visit Google’s headquarters and meet some of the people who made this ten year old giant that is giving Microsoft the nervies has to start with wonder.

The “campus” keeps spreading with the growth of Google into more and more fields, even though advertising revenue still comprises over 90 percent of its total revenues. The company wants to “change the world,” make all information digital and accessible through Google. Its company motto—is “Do No Evil,” which comes under increasing scrutiny, especially in the firm’s business with the national security state in Washington, D.C. and with the censors of Red China. Continue reading

Behind the Rise in Prices: The Plan to Torpedo the Dollar

Dandelion Salad

by Danny Schechter
http://www.smirkingchimp.com
May 19, 2008

Who do you think was one of the Bush Administration’s key players on the economy?

If you say Paulson or Bernanke, you might be half right. But there’s another no-name lurking around in the background who tends to be doing the wrong thing at every key moment in the covert history of the Bush (or should we day “Bush League”) Republic.

His name is Jim Wilkinson. He helped organize the GOP “protest”/obstruction of the Miami election recount in 2000. He was the White House’s key media spinner at the Doha Coalition Media Center in 2003. A reporter from Texas said he used techniques first perfected by Stalin. He was an architect of the Republican convention in New York in 2004. He was later dispatched to keep an eye on, and act as “dissembler-in-chief” for Condi Rice.

But at a crucial moment in the history of the Western world, Mr. “I work in the shadows” Wilkinson became chief of staff to Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson, the Goldman Sachs embed in the Cabinet.

Operative Wilkinson was then given the assignment of monitoring the world’s financial markets in a secret operation modeled no doubt on the great intelligence plan that produced the Iraq War.

His qualifications for this historic role?

See above.

As Mike Whitney reported for Information Clearing House at the end of October in 2006 — a day before Halloween — the US was then engineering the drop in the dollar to “improve competitiveness” — i.e. subsidize US exports in a flawed attempt to reduce the growing balance of trade gap. Was it a trick or treat? Read on.

The result was summed up in his headline: “The U.S. Dollar is kaput. Confidence in the currency is eroding by the day.”

Whitney saw then what our media has still yet to report or understand.

…continued

FAIR USE NOTICE: This blog may contain copyrighted material. Such material is made available for educational purposes, to advance understanding of human rights, democracy, scientific, moral, ethical, and social justice issues, etc. This constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in Title 17 U.S.C. section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

see

The Dollar’s Full-System Meltdown By Mike Whitney (econ)

Economy

Whitney-Mike

Bush Promises to Give Enriched Uranium to Saudi Arabia

Dandelion Salad

Democracy Now!

May 20, 2008

As US Threatens Iran Over Enriching Uranium, Bush Promises to Give Enriched Uranium to Saudi Arabia

The Bush administration has pledged to support Saudi Arabia’s nuclear power program, including supplying enriched uranium for nuclear reactors. The agreement came out of President Bush’s visit to the Saudi kingdom last week, during which Bush also pledged new US assistance in guarding Saudi oil reserves.

Harvey Wasserman, one of the founders of the grassroots movement against nuclear power. He is senior editor of the Ohio-based freepress.org and the editor of nukefree.org.

Real Video Stream

Real Audio Stream

MP3 Download

transcript

Creative Commons License The original content of this program is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States License. Please attribute legal copies of this work to democracynow.org. Some of the work(s) that this program incorporates, however, may be separately licensed. For further information or additional permissions, contact us.

***

Bush promises Enriched Uranium to Saudis for cheap gas

IWantDemocracyNow

Turkish Ambassador to U.S. Calls Iran “a threat to Turkey as well as to the U.S.”

Dandelion Salad

sent to me by Cem Ertür

excerpt from ‘Turkish Ambassador to U.S. Calls Iran “a threat to Turkey as well as to the U.S.” ‘

by Andrew Cochran, Counterterrorism Blog, 19 May 2008

Anyone wondering whether the threat posed by Iran is “tiny” or substantial should ponder what the Ambassador from Turkey to the U.S. said today at our panel on the Turkey-U.S. relationship. Ambassador Nahi Sensoy said that Iran has run “clandestine (nuclear) programs for more than two decades,” and those programs are “a threat to Turkey as well as to the U.S.” Granted, Turkey’s method of dealing with that threat includes diplomatic engagement with Iran – the two have not been at war with each other since 1639 – but the Turkish government clearly recognizes that the size of ran’s military is not of critical importance in the age of asymmetric warfare.

http://counterterrorismblog.org/2008/05/turkish_ambassador_to_us_calls.php

***

excerpt from:

‘Remarks by Ambassador Gregory L. Schulte’

U.S. Permanent Representative to the IAEA and the UN Office in Vienna

Economic Research Foundation of Turkey (TEPAV), Ankara, Turkey April 29, 2008

United States and Turkey: Strategic Allies for Global Challenges

Iran has deployed and regularly exercises the Shahab-3 ballistic missile, which has a range of 1300 kilometers. It has claimed that it now has a missile with a range of about 2000 kilometers and that it is developing a missile of even longer range. The deployed Shahab-3 could strike most of Turkey and the Middle East, and the longer-range missiles would reach deeper into Europe.

http://vienna.usmission.gov/_unvie/speeches_and_related_documents/Iran/1741.php

FAIR USE NOTICE: This blog may contain copyrighted material. Such material is made available for educational purposes, to advance understanding of human rights, democracy, scientific, moral, ethical, and social justice issues, etc. This constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in Title 17 U.S.C. section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

see

Bush Speech, World Economic Forum, Egypt

Sustainable Food (UCLA Lecture) + Homegrown Revolution

Dandelion Salad

dervaes-May 20, 2008

Date: 4-9-08
UCLA Education for Sustainable Living
Film courtesty of BRUIN CAST

The 19th century mantra if you wanted to prosper was … go west. The frontier offered unlimited opportunities. But, there were limits. My advice is to go back young man, go back young woman. Look at what your grandparents and great-grandparents ate? They obviously did something right—you’re sitting here, after all! They lived and carried on their line—it’s up to you now. Continue reading

Sen. Kennedy has malignant brain tumor

Dandelion Salad

Raw Story
Associated Press
Tuesday May 20, 2008

…continued

***

Sorry the video is no longer available.

Kennedy Has Malignant Brain Tumor

Aquaflyer

FAIR USE NOTICE: This blog may contain copyrighted material. Such material is made available for educational purposes, to advance understanding of human rights, democracy, scientific, moral, ethical, and social justice issues, etc. This constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in Title 17 U.S.C. section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

see

Ted Kennedy taken to hospital

Rumsfeld: Why Not another 9/11 + 9/11 truth groups dissect Rumsfeld’s ‘another attack’ quip

Dandelion Salad

by Larry Chin
Global Research, May 16, 2008
Online Journal

In a newly-released tape of a 2006 neocon luncheon meeting featuring former War Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, attended by ex-military “message force multiplier” propaganda shills Lt. General Michael DeLong, David L. Grange, Donald W. Sheppard, James Marks, Rick Francona, Wayne Downing, Robert H. Scales and others, Rumsfeld declared that the American people lack “the maturity to recognize the seriousness of the ‘threats’” — and need another 9/11.

When DeLong complained about a “lack of sympathetic ears” in Congress, and a lack of interest among the general American public, Rumsfeld responded, “What’s to be done? The correction for that, I suppose, is another attack.”

This videotape clip is part of a one-hour tape declassified by the Department of Defense in response to a Freedom of Information Act request. The entire clip, and analysis of this damning new revelation, can be found here: “The Correction for that . . . is another attack” (Jason Linkins, Huffington Post, 5/13/08)

For an independent op-ed about the same information, see Rumsfeld’s Mind: If 9/11 worked, why not try it again? (Op-Ed News. It was also the topic of discussion on the May 14 broadcast of Nova M Radio’s Mike Malloy Program.

In the seven years since the day, exhaustive and still growing evidence proves beyond any reasonable doubt that the US government, spearheaded by the Bush administration, planned, orchestrated and executed the 9/11 false flag operation. As openly advocated by wide swaths of elites, from the People for the New American Century (PNAC), of which Rumsfeld has been a member, to the likes of Zbigniew Brzezinski (in his The Grand Chessboard), only an attack “on the order of Pearl Harbor” would, in Brzezinski’s words, cause the American people to support an “imperial mobilization,” and a world war.

Sept. 11, and its resulting “war on terrorism” (in Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran, Guantanamo, Abu Ghraib, etc.), remains the Bush administration’s endless gift from hell, in large part courtesy of Rumsfeld.

Placing the new evidence against previously revealed 9/11-related acts on the part of Rumsfeld, his guilt is overt and obvious. Recall that it was Rumsfeld who enthusiastically penned the “Go Massive” memo, gleefully declaring the Bush administration finally had the green light to kill: “Not only UBL (Usama bin Laden). Go massive. Sweep it all up. Things related and not.”

As the Bush administration’s war ensued in earnest, Rumsfeld gloated to the New York Times that 9/11 provided “the kind of opportunities that World War II offered, to refashion the world.”

It is not for nothing that Donald Rumsfeld was described by legendary war criminal Henry Kissinger as “the most ruthless man I’ve ever known.”

© Copyright Larry Chin, Online Journal , 2008

The url address of this article is: www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=9002

***

9/11 truth groups dissect Rumsfeld’s ‘another attack’ quip

by Muriel Kane
http://rawstory.com
Monday May 19, 2008

A newly-revealed speech delivered by former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld before an audience of Pentagon-sponsored military analysts in December 2006 is providing ample grist for 9/11 conspiracy theorists.

An audio recording of the speech was one of a large number of items released by the Pentagon on May 8 as a result of Freedom of Information requests. The New York Times had filed the requests in the course of preparing its expose of the Pentagon’s use of supposedly independent retired military officers to present its message on network news shows.

Speaking a month after the Democratic Party had recaptured majorities in both houses of Congress, and just following his own resignation as Secretary of Defense, Rumsfeld suggested that a new 9/11 could be the corrective for American complacency:

“This President’s pretty much a victim of success. We haven’t had an attack in five years. The perception of the threat is so low in this society that it’s not surprising that the behavior pattern reflects a low threat assessment. The same thing’s in Europe, there’s a low threat perception. The correction for that, I suppose, is an attack. And when that happens, then everyone gets energized for another [inaudible] and it’s a shame we don’t have the maturity to recognize the seriousness of the threats…the lethality, the carnage, that can be imposed on our society is so real and so present and so serious that you’d think we’d be able to understand it.”

…continued

FAIR USE NOTICE: This blog may contain copyrighted material. Such material is made available for educational purposes, to advance understanding of human rights, democracy, scientific, moral, ethical, and social justice issues, etc. This constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in Title 17 U.S.C. section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

Popular Struggle Intensifies in Bolivia by Federico Fuentes

Dandelion Salad

by Federico Fuentes
http://www.socialistvoice.ca
Green Left Weekly
May 19, 2008

These articles were first published in Green Left Weekly. Federico Fuentes is the editor of Bolivia Rising.

Recall referendum opens new struggle

May 17, 2008
—A new period of uncertainty and opportunity has opened up in Bolivian politics following the calling of recall referendums on August 10 for the national president and prefects of Bolivia’s nine departments (states) by the opposition-controlled Bolivian senate. President Evo Morales has been pushing for this measure since last year.

The law, first introduced into the House of Deputies by the governing Movement Towards Socialism (MAS) last December, had been gathering dust due to the refusal of the right-wing opposition to approve it in the Senate. The sudden move to pass the law has left many wondering why the opposition controlled senate would take such a decision.

The initial idea behind the law had been to let the people resolve through the ballot box the “catastrophic deadlock” between the popular government of Evo Morales, backed by the social movements, and the right-wing opposition, spearhead by the elites from the eastern region tied to gas transnationals and agribusiness.

MAS and the social movements have been campaigning to approve the new constitution, finally handed over by the Constituent Assembly last December, which would dramatically broaden recognition of indigenous rights within a new plurinational state, and increase state intervention into the economy and control over natural resources.

Right-wing ‘autonomy’

In reaction, the elites based in the eastern department of Santa Cruz, in a move to defend their economic and political interests, counterposed to the new constitution their proposal for increased autonomy for the eastern regions – where they control the prefectures and where most of the natural resources are located and more than 60% of GDP originates.

Stepping up a gear in their campaign, Santa Cruz held an illegal referendum on May 4 over proposed autonomy statute that would hand enormous power over to the prefectures, including control over natural resources, distribution of land titles, and the right to sign international treaties.

The rights claimed a massive victory, with supposedly 85% support for the Yes vote. But high abstention – promoted by the government and social movements – meant that the Yes vote in reality represents just over 50% of the electoral.

Since then, the four prefects of the eastern departments have rejected Morales’ calls for negotiations, forming a united bloc that will return to the negotiating table only after the other autonomy referendums are staged. Autonomy referendums will be held June 1 in Pando and Beni, and June 22 in Tarija.

These sectors received the Senate’s decision as a cold shower. “A grave error,” “a political stupidity” and “a disservice to autonomies” were just some of the comments to come out of these quarters.

Opportunity for popular forces

Among the prefects, the opposition control six, MAS two, and one is up for election on June 29, following the resignation of the prefect of Sucre who was elected on the MAS ticket.

Moreover, to be recalled, the president and prefects have to receive a vote of rejection superior in votes and percentage to those obtained in the December 2005 general elections. So whilst the opposition will have to surpass 53.74% of votes (1,544,374 votes national) to remove Evo Morales. The prefects are left in a more complicated situation: given none of them got over 50% they could be revoked with a minority vote against them.

The most precarious case is that of opposition La Paz prefect, Jose Luis Paredes, who received only 38% of the vote in the 2005 elections, and who will have to obtain 62% to remain in his post.

Many believe the move by Podemos, the largest opposition party in the Senate, was aimed at regaining the initiative within the opposition camp, pushing the Santa Cruz autonomists to the background. Part of the thinking behind the move was the hope to put a halt to the referendum to approve the new constitution, as the law on referendums allows only one consultation per constitutional period.

MAS senator Felix Rojas, quoted on Bolpress on May 13, said however that Podemos miscalculated and that “errors in politics are made to pay.” He argued not only do recall referendums fall under different regulations; it would also be possible to hold the referendum on the new constitution in conjunction with the recall referendums.

Right-wing defiance

Responding to these events, the proclaimed “governor” of Santa Cruz, Ruben Costas, announced on May 14 the constitution of a provisional legislative assembly of the “autonomous government of Santa Cruz.”

“Following the political earthquake caused by the approval of the recall referendums … Santa Cruz had to once again put on the agenda the issue of autonomy, and to do this it needed a radical dramatization” a well-known journalist from Santa Cruz told Argentine daily Clarin on May 15.

“They can call it what they want, it is only symbolic. For us what counts is the constitution,” was the response of Vice-President Alvaro Garcia Linera. MAS Senator Antonio Peredo called for charges of sedition to be laid against the Santa Cruz leaders.

Meanwhile, in the presidential palace, excitement is rising for the possibility of removing at least two opposition prefects –La Paz and Cochabamba, heartlands of the MAS base – and the further opportunities in Pando and Tarija, which have a strong presence of peasant movements and where MAS mayors control the departmental capitals.

The recent mobilizations in defence of national unity and against the autonomy referendum in Santa Cruz, along with the nationalizations announced on May 1, have not only seen Morales support increase, but have acted to bring about greater unity and mobilisation of the popular sectors.

A concerted campaign of mass mobilization that builds on the greater unity and mobilisation of the popular sectors of the last few weeks in defence of national unity could ensure an important victory for Morales. The upcoming referendum may become a vote to ratify Morales and his national project for change and strengthen him both nationally and internationally.

* * *

Fraud, violence and mass resistance marks right-wing push

May 9, 2008 — “A day of violence, fraud and a ‘grand rebellion’ against the Santa Cruz oligarchy.

This is how Bolivian president Evo Morales Ayma described the result of the unconstitutional May 4 “autonomy” referendum organized by the authorities in Santa Cruz — which many feared was aimed at dividing Bolivia.

The referendum was the first in a series of proposed referendums to be held in the departments of the so-called Half Moon — Santa Cruz plus Pando, Beni and Tarija, resource-rich departments in Bolivia’s east. The Half Moon remains dominated by the white oligarchy despite the coming to power nationally of Morales, Bolivia’s first indigenous president, on the back of a mass movement against neoliberalism led by the indigenous majority.

Illegal vote

While the National Electoral Court had ruled that the autonomy referendum — which the government had proposed be held simultaneously with a referendum to approve the new constitution — could not go ahead on May 4 due to lack of time and suitable political conditions, the prefecture and civic committee of Santa Cruz, backed by the Santa Cruz Electoral Court, decided to go ahead with what was an illegal referendum.

The referendum revolved around proposed autonomy statutes, drafted by the oligarchy without any discussion, and which less than 15% of crucenos (Santa Cruz residents) had read before May 4. The statutes hand enormous power over to the opposition-controlled prefectures, including control over natural resources, distribution of land titles, the right to sign international treaties and its own police force and judicial system.

On the day, the Yes vote received 483,925 votes, representing around 85% of the votes cast, against 85,399 No votes. However, calls by the social movements and the Movement Towards Socialism (MAS — Morales’s party) national government to abstain led non-participation to rise to 39%, or 366,839 registered voters — more than double the usual abstention rate.

This result was obtained in the face of threats and intimidation by bosses who told workers they would loss their jobs if they did not vote and the menacing patrols of the fascist Union Juvenil Crucenista (UJC) — renowned for carrying out violent, racist attacks on indigenous people.

Oppressed mobilize

However, in the “other Santa Cruz” — such as the popular urban area of Plan Tres Mil and the rural areas of San Julian and Yacapani — organized resistance by the popular civic committee and indigenous campesino (peasant) organizations ensured the non-installation of voting tables.

Despite physical attacks by the UJC, which left more than 20 injured and one dead, in these areas abstention was almost total.

Across the country, massive mobilizations were organized by the powerful indigenous campesino organizations, together with trade unions and urban popular organizations. A week before, Morales had called for demonstrations in all capital cities, except Santa Cruz in order to avoid violence, behind the banner of national unity.

Underlying these events is an intense class struggle, infused with strong ethnic and regional components. The ruling elites are fighting to restore the political power they have begun to lose.

The election of Morales came on the back of five years of intense social struggle by the combative indigenous and campesino movements, which gave birth to an alternative national project based on the demands of nationalization of gas and a constituent assembly to refound Bolivia.

In December of 2005, unified behind its “political instrument” — MAS — this movement propelled former coca growers’ union leader Morales into the presidential palace.

Since then, Morales has initiated a process of returning Bolivia’s gas to state hands, begun implementing an agrarian reform and organised elections for a constituent assembly that has prepared a new draft constitution to be submitted to a national referendum.

For the oligarchy, particularly those with interests tied to the gas transnationals and agribusiness, these changes are intolerable.

Forced to retreat to its trenches in the east, the elite has run a propaganda line that combines rallying against “La Paz centralism,” tapping into the long held sentiments of a “crucenista [Santa Cruz] identity” and outright racism to regroup and mobilise a section of the white population of the east against the government — whose stronghold is in the impoverished and largely indigenous west. This campaign is receiving heavy funding from the U.S. government.

While it cannot be ruled out that the oligarchy could use these social base to move to divide Bolivia through secession, its main plan at the moment is to put a halt on the process unfolding since Morales’ election — aiming to wear down popular support for the government by forcing concessions from the government at the negotiating table and paving the way towards ultimately getting rid of him, via a coup or elections.

Post-referendum struggle

In this context, the results of the May 4 referendum were clearly not a victory for the oligarchy. Forced to rely on fraud and intimidation, the right was unable to get the resounding vote they would have required to turn the results of their illegal referendum into a legitimate mandate.

Yet nor was it a complete defeat — the large Yes vote showed that an important section of Santa Cruz continues to back the oligarchy.

For the popular movements, the important resistance of the “other Santa Cruz” represents a new phase in their struggle. This was reflected in the high abstention and the emergence of an important middle-class layer grouped around Santa Cruz Somos Todos, who, although not part of the MAS project, called for a No vote and support autonomy within the framework of the new constitution.

The actions of the counterrevolution have pushed those forces in favour of change towards greater unity. This was demonstrated in the May Day rallies where, importantly, the Bolivian Workers’ Central (COB), which had until now been very critical of the government, was on the main stage promoting a united front.

The oligarchy, claiming victory from the May 4 vote, will undoubtedly be calling for a return to the negotiating table to force concessions out of the government to water down the new constitution and insert its autonomy statutes.

However, these two projects are incompatible. The government needs to shift the debate back to the draft constitution by calling the referendum for its approval as soon as possible — as the social movements are demanding.

Any autonomy must be within the framework of what has been democratically decided by the constituent assembly. In this way, the movements can counterpose their autonomy based on social justice and solidarity to that of the Santa Cruz elites and win support among the Santa Cruz population.

Moreover, the government needs to continue to implement its economic program of nationalizations — such as those announced on May 1, which included recuperating majority control of four gas transnationals and total control over ENTEL, Bolivia’s largest telecommunications company.

These moves can demonstrate the role of a strong national state and build the confidence and dignity of the popular movements and middle classes to continue pushing the democratic revolution forward.

These nationalizations, along with agrarian reform and wealth redistribution, are crucial to give further momentum to the popular movements. Together with continuing to give soldiers and officials in the armed forces an active role in enacting these measures, this would make possible a strong campaign to win them over to the side of the popular movements. It is a vital to strengthen the nationalist wing of the military against those right-wing elements conspiring to overthrow Morales.

To ensure that the result of May 4 can become a real victory for the popular forces, it is necessary to continue to develop the unity that has been built over the last few weeks to continue the mobilization of the masses and deepen the revolutionary process through decisive economic and political measures.

Socialist Voice is a forum for discussion of today’s struggles of the workers and oppressed from the standpoint of revolutionary Marxism. Readers are encouraged to distribute Socialist Voice as widely as possible.