Publish to Newswire
Add an EventFrom the Open-Publishing Calendar
From the Open-Publishing Newswire
Indybay Feature
Liberation News California, Santa Cruz, and San Francisco Voter Recommendations
For a statement on candidates, also see:
VOTE Marsha Feinland California Candidate for U.S. Senate
http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2010/10/30/18662733.php
VOTE Marsha Feinland California Candidate for U.S. Senate
http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2010/10/30/18662733.php
Photo: Over 50 UC Davis students came out to protest Prop 23 and show Texas Oil Companies they can't buy our ballot!
Liberation News California, Santa Cruz, and San Francisco Voter Recommendations
By Steven Argue
California Propositions
Proposition 19 VOTE YES
This proposition legalizes marijuana for people who are 21 or older who do not possess it in a school yard or consume it in public or in front of minors. The war on drugs ruins far more lives than marijuana. Vote yes on Proposition 19 and legalize it!
Proposition 20 VOTE NO
Moves redistricting from the legislature to an even less democratic appointed commission that contains five Republicans, five Democrats, and four people from neither party. This would not be a step forward. What would be a step forward that would help bring some democracy to America would be moving a way from winner takes all elections in districts and instead instituting proportional representation where parties are represented according to the percentage of votes they receive. No on Proposition 20.
Proposition 21 VOTE YES
Would put an $18 additional fee on vehicle licensing raising an estimated $500 million annually for California’s state parks. A good chunk of that money will be available to keep the parks open and to fund additional wildlife conservation programs while an estimated $50 million will go into offsetting the Proposition’s elimination of park entrance fees. California’s state parks need the money, and although it would be far better if the rich were taxed instead, this $18, the cost of half a tank of gas, will help save California’s state parks. Liberation News joins with the Nature Conservancy in saying “yes” on Proposition 21.
Proposition 22 VOTE NO
Would prohibit the state from using local “redevelopment” funds for state projects. Those “redevelopment” projects consist of subsidies, at tax-payer expense, for private developers building things like hotels, stadiums, and auto-malls. It would make this fund that is already currently used for welfare to the rich a sacred cow that can’t be touched for other projects. This proposition would prevent the state from reshuffling those funds for needed and unneeded programs alike, including schools, cops, welfare to the poor, and firefighting. There is no good reason to make these funds the sacred cow of wealthy developers that can’t be used for the general welfare of the rest of us. No on proposition 22.
Proposition 23 VOTE NO
This proposition, funded by the Texas oil capitalists of Velero and Tesoro, would suspend important clean air and greenhouse gas regulations in California. No on Proposition 23! Boycott Velero and Tesoro! Nationalize the oil industry!
Proposition 24 VOTE YES
Would repeal recent corporate tax loopholes on corporations raising $1.3 billion in needed revenues. This is what is needed, taxing the rich to pay for the wages and benefits of workers and to pay for education and other needed social programs. Vote yes on 24.
Proposition 25 VOTE YES
Would allow a simple majority vote to determine the state budget. California is the only state where a 2/3rds super-majority is required to pass a state budget. This undemocratic status-quo gives the most rightwing representatives of the ruling class in Sacramento far too much power when negotiating the state budget. Yes on Proposition 25.
Proposition 26 VOTE NO
Would require a 2/3rds vote for state and local fee approval. Vote no on 26 for the same reasons as voting yes on Prop 25.
Proposition 27 VOTE YES
Would move all redistricting back to the legislature from an appointed commission that contains five Republicans, five Democrats, and four people from neither party. This would be a step forward in that it would remove power from an appointed commission that undemocratically enshrines control to the Democrats and Republicans for redistricting and undemocratically gives those two parties equal power, no matter who the voters have chosen. While passing Proposition 27 is slightly better than having no Prop 27, a real step that would help bring some democracy to America would be getting rid of districts altogether and eliminating winner takes all elections, replacing it with a system of proportional representation where parties win their number of seats in elections according to the percentage of votes they get.
Santa Cruz Candidates and Ballot Measures:
Measure H VOTE NO
Would increase utility taxes on everyone, including the working class and most poor people, from 7% to 8.5%, with the repressive and bloated Santa Cruz Police listed as the intended top beneficiary.
Measure Z VOTE YES
Would allow the Aromas-San Juan Unified School District in Monterey County and Santa Cruz County to borrow money to continue to fund some of the needs of public education and to pay outstanding loans of the district.
Santa Cruz City Council:
Because no candidate is a socialist, and our problems will only be resolved through socialist measures and workers’ democracy, Liberation News is endorsing no candidate for Santa Cruz City Council, not even critically. The rightwing line-up for Santa Cruz City Council is so bad that only one candidate, of 8 running for 3 seats, has said that he opposes the anti-poor laws of Santa Cruz that make it illegal for those who can’t afford a roof over their heads, to sleep at night. His name is Steve Pleich, and as usual, for any candidate who takes a stand for human rights for the homeless, including active participation in protests by the homeless, his candidacy has been marginalized by the corporate media and by a lack of funding from the local petty bourgeoisie who support the city’s anti-homeless laws, oppose rent control, and opposed increasing the minimum wage.
San Francisco Propositions
Proposition AA VOTE NO
Additional vehicle registration fee of $10 to fix potholes and other road work. This is a regressive tax, tax the rich instead.
Proposition A VOTE NO
This is an earthquake retrofit bond. Bonds, while profitable for capitalists, are a horribly expensive way to fund projects.
Proposition B VOTE NO
Would bring about cuts to health and retirement plans of City workers.
Proposition D VOTE YES
Allows non-citizens to vote in school board elections
Proposition E VOTE YES
Election-day voter registration
Proposition G VOTE NO
An attack on the pay, benefits, and work rules of Muni transit workers
Proposition H VOTE NO
Prohibits party leaders from holding local office. More likely to hurt small third parties than anyone else.
Proposition I: VOTE YES
Moves voting to Saturdays, a better day for the working class
Proposition J VOTE NO
Hotel tax increase from 14% to 16% and clarifies that that travel agencies booking rooms must pay the required taxes and clarifies that people living in residential hotels are not required to pay the taxes. While labor unions support this tax, it is a regressive tax increase instead of a tax on the rich with those paying it including working class visitors and the homeless. And, as much as it may be popular to tax visitors, there is a point where San Francisco’s high hotel taxes will have a negative impact on the already lagging tourist industry.
Proposition K VOTE YES
Hotel tax clarification. This proposition does not increase taxes, but instead clarifies that that travel agencies booking rooms must pay the required taxes and clarifies that people living in residential hotels are not required to pay the taxes.
Proposition L VOTE NO
This is an anti-homeless no sitting or lying on the sidewalk law very similar to laws passed by the City Council of Santa Cruz. Stop criminalizing poverty! No on Proposition L.
Proposition M VOTE NO
Community policing and foot patrols. This is proposed as an alternative to Proposition L. Yet, police violence and harassment of the homeless and people of color is already a major problem. An increase in the police presence would cause more problems and is not the solution. While the capitalist government adopts more and more to police state measures against the poor, it is important to remember that only a socialist society can eliminate homelessness
Proposition N VOTE YES
Would increase the tax rate of real estate sold with a value of $5 million or more. This is a progressive tax, vote yes on N.
Summary you can print-out and bring to the election booth:
California Propositions
Proposition 19 VOTE YES
Proposition 20 VOTE NO
Proposition 21 VOTE YES
Proposition 22 VOTE NO
Proposition 23 VOTE NO
Proposition 24 VOTE YES
Proposition 25 VOTE YES
Proposition 26 VOTE NO
Proposition 27 VOTE YES
Santa Cruz Candidates and Ballot Measures:
Measure H VOTE NO
Measure Z VOTE YES
San Francisco Propositions
Proposition AA VOTE NO
Proposition A VOTE NO
Proposition B VOTE NO
Proposition D VOTE YES
Proposition E VOTE YES
Proposition G VOTE NO
Proposition H VOTE NO
Proposition I: VOTE YES
Proposition J VOTE NO
Proposition K VOTE YES
Proposition L VOTE NO
Proposition M VOTE NO
Proposition N VOTE YES
Candidates:
U.S. Senate: Marsha Feinland (Peace and Freedom Party)
U.S. House, 8th District Gloria La Riva (Party for Socialism and Liberation, running on Peace and Freedom Party ticket)
U.S. House, 6th District: Eugene E. Ruyle (Peace and Freedom Party)
California Governor: Carlos Alvarez (Party for Socialism and Liberation, running on Peace and Freedom Party ticket)
Lieutenant Governor: C.T. Weber (Peace and Freedom Party)
Secretary of State: Marylou Cabral (Party for Socialism and Liberation, running on Peace and Freedom Party ticket)
Controller: Karen Martinez (Peace and Freedom Party)
Treasurer: Debra Reiger (Peace and Freedom Party)
State Attorney General: Bob Evans (Peace and Freedom Party)
Insurance Commissioner: Dina Padilla (Peace and Freedom Party)
Also see:
VOTE Marsha Feinland California Candidate for U.S. Senate
http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2010/10/30/18662733.php
Subscribe free to Liberation News
https://lists.riseup.net/www/info/liberation_news
Liberation News California, Santa Cruz, and San Francisco Voter Recommendations
By Steven Argue
California Propositions
Proposition 19 VOTE YES
This proposition legalizes marijuana for people who are 21 or older who do not possess it in a school yard or consume it in public or in front of minors. The war on drugs ruins far more lives than marijuana. Vote yes on Proposition 19 and legalize it!
Proposition 20 VOTE NO
Moves redistricting from the legislature to an even less democratic appointed commission that contains five Republicans, five Democrats, and four people from neither party. This would not be a step forward. What would be a step forward that would help bring some democracy to America would be moving a way from winner takes all elections in districts and instead instituting proportional representation where parties are represented according to the percentage of votes they receive. No on Proposition 20.
Proposition 21 VOTE YES
Would put an $18 additional fee on vehicle licensing raising an estimated $500 million annually for California’s state parks. A good chunk of that money will be available to keep the parks open and to fund additional wildlife conservation programs while an estimated $50 million will go into offsetting the Proposition’s elimination of park entrance fees. California’s state parks need the money, and although it would be far better if the rich were taxed instead, this $18, the cost of half a tank of gas, will help save California’s state parks. Liberation News joins with the Nature Conservancy in saying “yes” on Proposition 21.
Proposition 22 VOTE NO
Would prohibit the state from using local “redevelopment” funds for state projects. Those “redevelopment” projects consist of subsidies, at tax-payer expense, for private developers building things like hotels, stadiums, and auto-malls. It would make this fund that is already currently used for welfare to the rich a sacred cow that can’t be touched for other projects. This proposition would prevent the state from reshuffling those funds for needed and unneeded programs alike, including schools, cops, welfare to the poor, and firefighting. There is no good reason to make these funds the sacred cow of wealthy developers that can’t be used for the general welfare of the rest of us. No on proposition 22.
Proposition 23 VOTE NO
This proposition, funded by the Texas oil capitalists of Velero and Tesoro, would suspend important clean air and greenhouse gas regulations in California. No on Proposition 23! Boycott Velero and Tesoro! Nationalize the oil industry!
Proposition 24 VOTE YES
Would repeal recent corporate tax loopholes on corporations raising $1.3 billion in needed revenues. This is what is needed, taxing the rich to pay for the wages and benefits of workers and to pay for education and other needed social programs. Vote yes on 24.
Proposition 25 VOTE YES
Would allow a simple majority vote to determine the state budget. California is the only state where a 2/3rds super-majority is required to pass a state budget. This undemocratic status-quo gives the most rightwing representatives of the ruling class in Sacramento far too much power when negotiating the state budget. Yes on Proposition 25.
Proposition 26 VOTE NO
Would require a 2/3rds vote for state and local fee approval. Vote no on 26 for the same reasons as voting yes on Prop 25.
Proposition 27 VOTE YES
Would move all redistricting back to the legislature from an appointed commission that contains five Republicans, five Democrats, and four people from neither party. This would be a step forward in that it would remove power from an appointed commission that undemocratically enshrines control to the Democrats and Republicans for redistricting and undemocratically gives those two parties equal power, no matter who the voters have chosen. While passing Proposition 27 is slightly better than having no Prop 27, a real step that would help bring some democracy to America would be getting rid of districts altogether and eliminating winner takes all elections, replacing it with a system of proportional representation where parties win their number of seats in elections according to the percentage of votes they get.
Santa Cruz Candidates and Ballot Measures:
Measure H VOTE NO
Would increase utility taxes on everyone, including the working class and most poor people, from 7% to 8.5%, with the repressive and bloated Santa Cruz Police listed as the intended top beneficiary.
Measure Z VOTE YES
Would allow the Aromas-San Juan Unified School District in Monterey County and Santa Cruz County to borrow money to continue to fund some of the needs of public education and to pay outstanding loans of the district.
Santa Cruz City Council:
Because no candidate is a socialist, and our problems will only be resolved through socialist measures and workers’ democracy, Liberation News is endorsing no candidate for Santa Cruz City Council, not even critically. The rightwing line-up for Santa Cruz City Council is so bad that only one candidate, of 8 running for 3 seats, has said that he opposes the anti-poor laws of Santa Cruz that make it illegal for those who can’t afford a roof over their heads, to sleep at night. His name is Steve Pleich, and as usual, for any candidate who takes a stand for human rights for the homeless, including active participation in protests by the homeless, his candidacy has been marginalized by the corporate media and by a lack of funding from the local petty bourgeoisie who support the city’s anti-homeless laws, oppose rent control, and opposed increasing the minimum wage.
San Francisco Propositions
Proposition AA VOTE NO
Additional vehicle registration fee of $10 to fix potholes and other road work. This is a regressive tax, tax the rich instead.
Proposition A VOTE NO
This is an earthquake retrofit bond. Bonds, while profitable for capitalists, are a horribly expensive way to fund projects.
Proposition B VOTE NO
Would bring about cuts to health and retirement plans of City workers.
Proposition D VOTE YES
Allows non-citizens to vote in school board elections
Proposition E VOTE YES
Election-day voter registration
Proposition G VOTE NO
An attack on the pay, benefits, and work rules of Muni transit workers
Proposition H VOTE NO
Prohibits party leaders from holding local office. More likely to hurt small third parties than anyone else.
Proposition I: VOTE YES
Moves voting to Saturdays, a better day for the working class
Proposition J VOTE NO
Hotel tax increase from 14% to 16% and clarifies that that travel agencies booking rooms must pay the required taxes and clarifies that people living in residential hotels are not required to pay the taxes. While labor unions support this tax, it is a regressive tax increase instead of a tax on the rich with those paying it including working class visitors and the homeless. And, as much as it may be popular to tax visitors, there is a point where San Francisco’s high hotel taxes will have a negative impact on the already lagging tourist industry.
Proposition K VOTE YES
Hotel tax clarification. This proposition does not increase taxes, but instead clarifies that that travel agencies booking rooms must pay the required taxes and clarifies that people living in residential hotels are not required to pay the taxes.
Proposition L VOTE NO
This is an anti-homeless no sitting or lying on the sidewalk law very similar to laws passed by the City Council of Santa Cruz. Stop criminalizing poverty! No on Proposition L.
Proposition M VOTE NO
Community policing and foot patrols. This is proposed as an alternative to Proposition L. Yet, police violence and harassment of the homeless and people of color is already a major problem. An increase in the police presence would cause more problems and is not the solution. While the capitalist government adopts more and more to police state measures against the poor, it is important to remember that only a socialist society can eliminate homelessness
Proposition N VOTE YES
Would increase the tax rate of real estate sold with a value of $5 million or more. This is a progressive tax, vote yes on N.
Summary you can print-out and bring to the election booth:
California Propositions
Proposition 19 VOTE YES
Proposition 20 VOTE NO
Proposition 21 VOTE YES
Proposition 22 VOTE NO
Proposition 23 VOTE NO
Proposition 24 VOTE YES
Proposition 25 VOTE YES
Proposition 26 VOTE NO
Proposition 27 VOTE YES
Santa Cruz Candidates and Ballot Measures:
Measure H VOTE NO
Measure Z VOTE YES
San Francisco Propositions
Proposition AA VOTE NO
Proposition A VOTE NO
Proposition B VOTE NO
Proposition D VOTE YES
Proposition E VOTE YES
Proposition G VOTE NO
Proposition H VOTE NO
Proposition I: VOTE YES
Proposition J VOTE NO
Proposition K VOTE YES
Proposition L VOTE NO
Proposition M VOTE NO
Proposition N VOTE YES
Candidates:
U.S. Senate: Marsha Feinland (Peace and Freedom Party)
U.S. House, 8th District Gloria La Riva (Party for Socialism and Liberation, running on Peace and Freedom Party ticket)
U.S. House, 6th District: Eugene E. Ruyle (Peace and Freedom Party)
California Governor: Carlos Alvarez (Party for Socialism and Liberation, running on Peace and Freedom Party ticket)
Lieutenant Governor: C.T. Weber (Peace and Freedom Party)
Secretary of State: Marylou Cabral (Party for Socialism and Liberation, running on Peace and Freedom Party ticket)
Controller: Karen Martinez (Peace and Freedom Party)
Treasurer: Debra Reiger (Peace and Freedom Party)
State Attorney General: Bob Evans (Peace and Freedom Party)
Insurance Commissioner: Dina Padilla (Peace and Freedom Party)
Also see:
VOTE Marsha Feinland California Candidate for U.S. Senate
http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2010/10/30/18662733.php
Subscribe free to Liberation News
https://lists.riseup.net/www/info/liberation_news
Add Your Comments
Comments
(Hide Comments)
I'll be discussing my recommendations on Free Radio Santa Cruz this morning. Starting around 9:00 AM. That's at 101.1 in Santa Cruz or live streamed at: http://www.freakradio.org/listen.html
It is mandatory that everyone voting READ THE VOTER HANDBOOK. San Francisco Voters have this statement in their Voter Handbook on Proposition I.
The San Francisco voter information pamphlet is at:
http://www.sfgov2.org/ftp/uploadedfiles/elections/ElectionsArchives/2010/Nov2010_VIP.pdf
The Statement that is on the ballot:
Shall the City open polling place on the Saturday before the November 2011 election if donors contribute enough money to pay for the costs?
STEVE ARGUE, DO YOU SUPPORT PRIVATELY FUNDED ELECTIONS, BY DEFINITION, ELECTION FRAUD?
Here is the crisis in election fraud that occurred by the exact same fascist gang in 1997, 1999, 2001 and 2003, all to promote anti-rent control Democrats and their stadium swindles:
http://www.brasscheck.com/stadium/
Alex Tourk, the author of this election fraud proposal, is a long-time Democratic Party agent, and former aide to anti-rent control current mayor of San Francisco, Gavin Newsom. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alex_Tourk
As the voter handbook states, on page 121 in the Digest for Proposition I:
WE ALREADY HAVE SATURDAY VOTING TWO SATURDAYS BEFORE ELECTION DAY. In San Francisco, you can vote in every election 2 Saturdays and 2 Sundays before election day at the County Registrar's office from 10 a.m. to 4 p.m. in a city that is only 49 square miles with a decent public transportation system, far better than Santa Cruz, for instance. We also have lots of cabs and for many of us in the downtown area, mostly the workingclass, we can walk to City Hall where the County Registrar is. It is in walking distance (less than 2 miles) of the Mission District, South of Market, the Tenderloin, the Fillmore, Nob Hill, Chinatown, and Polk Gulch, all areas served by lots of buses and cabs.
IN ADDITION, WE HAVE ABSENTEE VOTING BY MAIL 29 DAYS BEFORE ELECTION DAY, as does the rest of California. At least 1/3 of San Franciscans, and sometimes 1/2, vote by mail.
These polling places in the precincts are unnecessary, very expensive and a perfect setup for election fraud, which is of course, why the Democrats, like Alex Tourk, support his election fraud proposal for the mayor's race of November 8, 2011.
The Controller's Statement on page 121 for Prop I states that this will cost us $1.7 million at a time when we have to fight for money for healthcare, childcare, public transportation and all other needs of the workingclass.
THE WORKINGCLASS IN SAN FRANCISCO HAVE THE SAME 30 DAYS TO VOTE AS DOES THE REST OF CALIFORNIA, and in addition, we can vote at the County Registrar NOT JUST ONE BUT TWO SATURDAYS AND SUNDAYS BEFORE ELECTION DAY, IN EVERY SINGLE ELECTION.
No one but the fascist Democrat-Republicans supports this election fraud proposal.
The San Francisco voter information pamphlet is at:
http://www.sfgov2.org/ftp/uploadedfiles/elections/ElectionsArchives/2010/Nov2010_VIP.pdf
The Statement that is on the ballot:
Shall the City open polling place on the Saturday before the November 2011 election if donors contribute enough money to pay for the costs?
STEVE ARGUE, DO YOU SUPPORT PRIVATELY FUNDED ELECTIONS, BY DEFINITION, ELECTION FRAUD?
Here is the crisis in election fraud that occurred by the exact same fascist gang in 1997, 1999, 2001 and 2003, all to promote anti-rent control Democrats and their stadium swindles:
http://www.brasscheck.com/stadium/
Alex Tourk, the author of this election fraud proposal, is a long-time Democratic Party agent, and former aide to anti-rent control current mayor of San Francisco, Gavin Newsom. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alex_Tourk
As the voter handbook states, on page 121 in the Digest for Proposition I:
WE ALREADY HAVE SATURDAY VOTING TWO SATURDAYS BEFORE ELECTION DAY. In San Francisco, you can vote in every election 2 Saturdays and 2 Sundays before election day at the County Registrar's office from 10 a.m. to 4 p.m. in a city that is only 49 square miles with a decent public transportation system, far better than Santa Cruz, for instance. We also have lots of cabs and for many of us in the downtown area, mostly the workingclass, we can walk to City Hall where the County Registrar is. It is in walking distance (less than 2 miles) of the Mission District, South of Market, the Tenderloin, the Fillmore, Nob Hill, Chinatown, and Polk Gulch, all areas served by lots of buses and cabs.
IN ADDITION, WE HAVE ABSENTEE VOTING BY MAIL 29 DAYS BEFORE ELECTION DAY, as does the rest of California. At least 1/3 of San Franciscans, and sometimes 1/2, vote by mail.
These polling places in the precincts are unnecessary, very expensive and a perfect setup for election fraud, which is of course, why the Democrats, like Alex Tourk, support his election fraud proposal for the mayor's race of November 8, 2011.
The Controller's Statement on page 121 for Prop I states that this will cost us $1.7 million at a time when we have to fight for money for healthcare, childcare, public transportation and all other needs of the workingclass.
THE WORKINGCLASS IN SAN FRANCISCO HAVE THE SAME 30 DAYS TO VOTE AS DOES THE REST OF CALIFORNIA, and in addition, we can vote at the County Registrar NOT JUST ONE BUT TWO SATURDAYS AND SUNDAYS BEFORE ELECTION DAY, IN EVERY SINGLE ELECTION.
No one but the fascist Democrat-Republicans supports this election fraud proposal.
For more information:
http://www.brasscheck.com/stadium/
Alex Tourke says in his arguments for I:
"While 59% voted by mail in the June 8 primary, only 34% of registered voters participated in the overall election. We are not suggesting there be any changes to absentee voting. Our efforts are centered around changing an antiquated system of hosting elections on Tuesday, which is a barrier to increased participation, specifically for working families."
Supporting such a change was the intent in supporting this. On the other hand, you raise valid concerns.
But on the question of absentee ballots, I've always seen absentee voting itself as a recipe for fraud and would prefer moves to more in-person voting where ballot boxes can potentially be directly watched by election monitors. Far worse of course, are voting machines, the most expensive solution to a problem that never existed. In terms of the actual vote, we need to move closer to a European system where monitors watch the ballot boxes (filled with paper ballots) after they're caste and watch until the votes are done being counted.
"While 59% voted by mail in the June 8 primary, only 34% of registered voters participated in the overall election. We are not suggesting there be any changes to absentee voting. Our efforts are centered around changing an antiquated system of hosting elections on Tuesday, which is a barrier to increased participation, specifically for working families."
Supporting such a change was the intent in supporting this. On the other hand, you raise valid concerns.
But on the question of absentee ballots, I've always seen absentee voting itself as a recipe for fraud and would prefer moves to more in-person voting where ballot boxes can potentially be directly watched by election monitors. Far worse of course, are voting machines, the most expensive solution to a problem that never existed. In terms of the actual vote, we need to move closer to a European system where monitors watch the ballot boxes (filled with paper ballots) after they're caste and watch until the votes are done being counted.
Brother Steve
I completely agree with every thing I just read of yours .Keep up the GREAT work.
Frank Little Lives!
I completely agree with every thing I just read of yours .Keep up the GREAT work.
Frank Little Lives!
Steve discussed his recommendations on Free Radio on Sunday. Go to the last 1/3 of the audio file at http://www.radiolibre.org/brb/brb101031.mp3
We are 100% volunteer and depend on your participation to sustain our efforts!
Donate
$210.00 donated
in the past month
Get Involved
If you'd like to help with maintaining or developing the website, contact us.
Publish
Publish your stories and upcoming events on Indybay.
Topics
More
Search Indybay's Archives
Advanced Search
►
▼
IMC Network