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

[Jenifer Cartwright]

David J,
Yes, an excellent (and depressing) summary. What did you mean by, "And then people wonder why nothing has changed for the better in this country since 1981." What was going on in 1981?
 --Jenifer

--- On Wed, 7/9/08, John W. <jbw292002 at gmail.com> wrote:

From: John W. <jbw292002 at gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Prairiegreens-org] Re: [Peace-discuss] Inclusive PresidentialDebates
To: "unionyes" <unionyes at ameritech.net>
Cc: "Peace-discuss List" <peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net>
Date: Wednesday, July 9, 2008, 9:55 PM


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 
To: jencart13 at yahoo.com 



Cc: Peace-discuss List ; Prairie Greens of East Central Illinois 
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

_______________________________________________
Peace-discuss mailing list
Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/listinfo/peace-discuss


      
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.chambana.net/mailman/archive/peace-discuss/attachments/20080709/6f865bdc/attachment.htm