After a long debate yesterday, the Democratic State Committee rejected (for now) Anthony Pollina’s request to address them and ask for some sort of endorsement. While the Pollina campaign will spin this as a rebuff only by the Party elite, the truth is the State Committee is both more liberal than much of the greater Dem community, and also represents a cross-section of muckity-mucks as well as grassroots activists – so the rejection is not good news for Pollina.

As I have stated on this site, I personally believe, as a matter of principle, that if somebody wants to address such an open-to-the-public committee, they should get to. Everyone should have the opportunity to be heard. It’s hard to condemn, though, as I appreciate that people have concerns; that an audience would just be spun to suggest some sort of support (as he repeatedly does regarding his meeting with the Barre Town Dems in his interview with Baruth), or that it might undercut a potential Democratic candidate. Then there’s simply the feeling that they owe nothing to someone who – in public over the years – has repeatedly made the point that he has higher regard institutionally for even Republicans over Dems. It’s a simple reality of human nature that such history is hard to easily shake off, due to the same psychology that causes many leftists to conclude they won’t be able to vote for Hillary Clinton in November if she is the Democratic Presidential nominee.

Still…

In any event, the same questions will keep going round and round, and some are more valid than others. There’s the whole third party concept. Some might question Pollina’s historic committment to some progressive issues (but honestly, what candidate doesn’t invite that kind of question)? But there is one big roadblock that may make all other questions ultimately meaningless – a roadblock made manifest by Representative Rachel Weston of Burlington before Pollina himself at a recent Montpelier House Party. A question – and an account – repeated again to State Committee members yesterday.

Weston is a rising star in Vermont politics; young, smart, charismatic, politically progressive – and an elected Democrat from a very left leaning district that is always a key battleground between Dems and Progs. At the house party, Pollina gave his unity pitch (which resonated with Weston), and then took questions from the group.

Weston stepped up to ask the obvious, yet heretofore unspoken one: If Pollina wants Dems to look past Party labels and support him based solely on the issues for the good of the greater community, is he willing to do the same? Specifically – if a Prog chooses to run against a Dem who is progressive on all the issues (and who may even support him, perhaps?) is he willing to offer his own support to that Dem even if there’s a Prog candidate, given that he’s asking that level of commitment for himself?

It would seem to have been a critical, even defining moment for Pollina – or perhaps a re-defining moment, as that is truly what he is attempting to do before Democratic crowds. Unfortunately for all of us, he first tried to avoid the question entirely by suggesting they hadn’t made such a confrontational run in a while. Weston pointed out that the immediacy of the question was standing right before him. She fully expected – as usual – to face a Progressive opponent herself in her battleground district.

Over the course of his evening, Pollina shifted from the response that he wouldn’t support anyone in such a conflict, to the position that he might support both, to the view that they would have to talk about it if it comes up.

But what was missing for Rachel was the clear reciprocation she was looking for. A statement that if she were to join Team Pollina, buck partisanship, focus on the issues only, and support him with her reputation, that he would join Team Weston, buck partisanship, focus on the issues only, and support her with his reputation. In attempting, in front of a crowd, to find a way to have his cake and eat it too, the message Weston received in response to her question was simple: No.

So the issue at the end of the day is trust, and the fact is, it takes two to tango. As dubious as Dems are toward Pollina specifically, its questions like Weston’s that get to the heart of the trust issue on the Dem side; when Pollina speaks of wanting to take on Douglas as a team, does he mean working together shoulder-to-shoulder, or does he have a team of horses in mind?

For those who haven’t been following any of these events, I’ve put together (largely from CNN.com, the AP, and the UK Guardian) this timeline of the past few days in Chinese-occupied Tibet.  Very inspiring to see the long-persecuted and oppressed Tibetans fighting (bravely) for their independence from the harsh Chinese government.

March 10: Hundreds of monks turn-out to protest Chinese occupation on the 49th anniversary of the Tibetan Uprising (which ultimately led to the exile of the Dali Lama to India).  Protesting the recent arrest of a group of monks who were celebrating the Dali Lama’s receipt of the U.S. Congressional Gold Metal, about 300 monks from the outskirts of Lhasa (the capital) attempt to peacefully march to the Center of the city but are stopped by the Chinese police; the apparent organizers and leaders of the march are arrested.  Then, 15 monks from Tsuklakhang Temple are joined by 2 laypeople and march to the center of Lhasa, along the way shouting pro-independence slogans, handing out literature and raising the Tibetan flag (all of which, including the flag itself, are outlawed).  They are quickly arrested and reportedly beaten.  Nearby shops are ordered closed by the police and armed troops are deployed to warn others throughout the city against joining the protests.  None of the detained monks have been seen or heard from since.  As word quickly spreads, over 130 monks in Qinghai Province (which borders Tibet) converge with over 200 laypeople outside a government building and shout pro-Dali Lama slogans.  Police stop the protest and no one is reported arrested.  Chinese officials convene an emergency meeting with monks in Qinghai Province, but 70 of them walk out carrying a portrait of the Dali Lama (which is banned) and shouting pro-independence slogans.

March 11:  Hundreds of monks from the Sera Monastery show-up to protest, demanding the release of those arrested and shouting pro-Tibet slogans.  Riot police use tear gas to disperse the crowd.

March 12: 100 nuns from the West side of Lhasa peacefully march towards the city center but police forces turn them back.  Meanwhile, 30 miles East monks at Gaden Monastery launch a protest; police surround and seal of the monastery.

March 13:  The same group of nuns attempt again to march- they have not been see  or heard from since.  Later, two monks from Kirti Monastery in Sichuan Province stab themselves in the chest, hands, and wrists.  They were said to protesting the arrest of 17 monks from the Sera Monastery on Monday (3/10).  They have been taken to a nearby hospital and are not expected to live.  Other monks at the same Monastery are staging a hunger strike.  By the end of the day, 500 students at Tibet University have been arrested.

March 14:  Monks from Ramoche Temple attempt to launch yet another protest march but police seal off the streets and prevent it.  Laypeople join in and fighting ensues.  Reports are of widespread rioting, with more than 1,000 people in the streets hurling rocks at police, and setting fire to vehicles and shops owned by ethnic Chinese who have moved to Tibet since the occupation.  CNN.com is also reporting that telephones and electricity have been shut-off in Lhasa.  Meanwhile, at the Chinese Embassy in New Delhi, India, at least one person was beaten by police, several arrested, and dozens chased away as they protested in solidarity with their friends and family of Tibet, shouting pro-Tibet slogans and waving the Tibetan flag.

March 15: 6 demonstrators have been arrested in New York in front of the United Nations building; 3 have been arrested in Sydney; at least 20 demonstrators have been arrested in Katmandu; tear-gas was used to break-up a pro-Tibet really in the Swiss city of Zurich; and un-confirmable reports suggest that demonstrations and rioting continued in Lhasa in the morning- the Chinese government has imposed strict curfews and given Tibetan demonstrators until Monday to “turn themselves in” as they “show constraint” against the protests, which many are calling the most significant (and violent) in all of China since 1989’s Tinnaman Square.  By the end of the day, pro-Tibet demonstrations were reported in cities across the world, including Washington D.C. and Chicago.  Lhasa is now said to be “like a ghost town” with thousands of Chinese troops maintaining “order” and enforcing strict curfews.

Tibetan exiles living in India are reporting that at least 100 people have been killed so far, with hundreds missing and there whereabouts unknown; Chinese officials put the number dead at 10.  Exiled Tibetans in India (primarily in North New Delhi and Dharmsala) have now been encircled in their neighborhoods by Indian police and are being prevented from leaving.  Protesters who had otherwise been planning a march from the exiled Tibetan government’s offices in Dharmsala to the border of Tibet- a march to protest the plight of the Tibetans and confront Chinese officials ahead of the upcoming Beijing Olympics- have largely been arrested or put under house arrest by Indian officials.

The Chinese State has, as is usually the case, completely censored the media.  Western journalists requesting access to Tibet have  been entirely ignored, and their Beijing offices are reporting that the vast majority of Chinese people have no idea what is happening (most all internet sites mentioning the protests have been blacked out, along with cable news channels).  Images and details have been leaking out sparingly.

How things in Tibet, and India, progress over the next couple of days remains to be seen.