[Prairiegreens-org] Re: [Peace-discuss] Inclusive PresidentialDebates

[John W.]

Excellent summary, Dave.  You're absolutely right.

John W.


On Tue, Jul 8, 2008 at 4:21 PM, unionyes <unionyes at ameritech.net> wrote:

 Walter is absolutely correct, when he gives the example of Europe and other
> countries outside of Europe.
>
> In Germany ( the country I know the most about since my wife is a German
> National ) and most other Western European countries, elections are
> significantly more " free and fair ".
> For Instance ;
>
> 1) Everyone is AUTOMATICALY a registered voter the day they turn 18.
>
> 2) Elections are held on Sunday, when 95 % of people do not work.
>
> 3) It is illegal for candidates to buy radio and television ads. All
> candidates are given the same air-time via candidate panel discussions every
> Sunday for up to six weeks before the elections.
>
> 4) Last but not least, there is proportional representation, usually with a
> 5% threshhold ( a political party receives 5.5 % of the votes, they get 5.5
> % of the seats in the parliament or congress.
>
> Compare that to what we have here.
>
> We DO NOT have a democracy. We have the illusion of a democracy with the
> choices made for us, as to which two candidates are acceptable to corporate
> interests. This is accomplished via corporate campaign contributions, which
> buys air time ( no money, no air time ).
>
> We have a corporate controlled media that benefits financially from the
> candidate purchased ads and a psuedo public radio / televion network that is
> also primarily controlled by corporate money.
>
> We have a Presidential Debates Commission that is a private corporation
> controlled by the DNC and the RNC, that has the " right " to exclude anyone
> they want.
> Remember, until the 2000 elections, the debates were conducted by the
> League of Women Voters.
>
> We have massive voter disenfranchisement and obstacles to register to vote.
> Every state with different laws and no federal rights to vote.
>
> And since the 2000 election, massive voting fraud via electronic voting
> machines, that are also corporate controlled. Election officials cannot
> access the machines under penalty of fines and prosecution.
>
> On top of all this, there is the daily exclusion, distortion, etc. by the
> corporate media of facts about issues, whats going on in other countries in
> regards to how they have solved certian problems that we currently have,
> etc..
> Then when a candidate does come along that refuses corporate money and is
> willing to speak out about real issues, and is getting some support in the
> populace, you get the constant spin, over and over and over again, that said
> candidate " doesn't have a chance to win " , which then becomes a
> self-fulfilled prophecy with the electorate, thanks to the so called " news
> programs ".
>
> Unfortunately the Nazi Propoganda Minister Goebels was right, when he said
> ; " A lie repeated often enough, will eventually be accepted as the truth by
> most people. "
>
> I don't mean to be pestimistic, but this is our reality. And then people
> wonder why nothing has changed for the better in this country since 1981.
>
> David J.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> *From:* Walter Pituc <wpituc2 at gmail.com>
> *To:* jencart13 at yahoo.com
> *Cc:* Peace-discuss List <peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net> ; Prairie
> Greens of East Central Illinois <prairiegreens-org at lists.chambana.net>
> *Sent:* Tuesday, July 08, 2008 1:08 PM
> *Subject:* [Prairiegreens-org] Re: [Peace-discuss] Inclusive
> PresidentialDebates
>
> No, I think you are mistaken Jenifer. I will not argue about the spoiler
> argument here because I know people have different political persuasions and
> different takes on it on the peace list and I wouldn't want to devolve this
> into mere partisan bickering, but what I will argue for right here is the
> desperate need for equal access to debates to non-major party/Indy
> presidential candidates. If we as a nation truly believe in equality under
> the law, then we would have fairer ballot access laws, open and inclusive
> debates, publicly funded campaigns, and equal media coverage.
>
> From a purely civil libertarian perspective, if you are a citizen of the
> United States you should get a fair shake at being able to run for office
> and for equal treatment under the law. In Europe and elsewhere, there is
> more political diversity and more transparent and equal treatment (relative
> to us at least) of more marginal voices in society because the laws there
> allow for it.
>
>
> -Walter
>>
>>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.chambana.net/mailman/archive/peace-discuss/attachments/20080709/fd14634b/attachment.htm