25. September 2008 by Greg Kelver.

Well, maybe that is not exactly what they said but that seems to be what they implied in a rather arrogant editorial against the inclusion of Ralph Nader and Bob Barr in the Presidential Debate Debacle. 

http://blogs.usatoday.com/oped/2008/09/our-view-on-t-1.html#Close

Any voter who owns a TV or lines their birdcage with a newspaper knows they have had plenty of opportunity to “scrutinize” the two Old Party Candidates. In fact, the 24/7 non-stop McBama propaganda campaign is just about all they see, even when they have had more than enough and really don’t want to see anymore.  What they don’t have much opportunity to see are the sensible alternatives to the status quo train wreck.  Bob Barr and Ralph Nader are both principled presidential candidates who will be on the ballot is nearly every state.  They are running good campaigns and deserve the opportunity to present their ideas to the American People in the debates.  American People are certainly smart enough to be able to make a sensible and informed choice from among four candidates. When actually asked the question, a recent Zogby Poll showed that  69% of the crucial independent voters wanted to see Bob Barr included in the debates  ZOGBY POLL.  So exactly what is it that USA Today and the Ruling Elite are so afraid of that they don’t want a better informed electorate? Why do they  attempt to limit our access to important information and real debate about issues while trying to force feed us the “Lipstick on a Pig” bullshit that they think is so newsworthy?

 Voters are getting far more than adequate opportunities to scrutinize McBama and most are less than thrilled with the choice they are being offered. The solution to that problem is more choices, not less.  If you are a grownup voter who would like to see a real debate and be offered more choices, please feel free to express your opinion to the Commission on Presidential Debacles at 202-872-1020.  While you have them on the phone, you might want to ask them to release the secret contract between the Democratic and Republican campaigns so we all can better “scrutinize” McCain and Obama to see exactly what it is they have planned for our future.  

Posted in Politics | 1 Comment »

19. September 2008 by Greg Kelver.

It is always interesting  to watch the lengths that some enlightened journalists will go to in order to avoid reporting on what Libertarian candidates are saying. Despite the  non-stop 24/7 media frenzy of the McBama campaign, rarely do they ever mention Libertarian Bob Barr who is on target to be on the ballot in just about every state.  If they do, he is usually painted as a “spoiler” to the Republicratic Party’s  assumed ownership of your vote.   But the latest manipulation by Indianapolis Star political guru Matthew Tully about the gubernatorial debate is totally amusing if not downright hilarious.  

http://www.indystar.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080917/NEWS08/809170380

Just like their apparent blindness to the financial meltdown now taking place around us, our political professionals seem to be totally oblivious to the 800 pound gorilla. A gorilla who is not just in the room but is now standing on the stage, waving his arms, and grunting loudly.
 

While it was encouraging to see the Indiana Debate Commission properly and fairly acknowledge  the Libertarian Party ballot access by including Andy Horning in the gubernatorial debate, apparently some still haven’t quite figured it out yet. Although not apparent from Mr. Tully’s column, Andy Horning actually was on the same stage as Mitch Daniels and Jill Long-Thompson - standing right next to Jill although he probably should have been standing between the two bickering candidates.  He answered just as many questions and had just as many rebuttals as either of the other two. Andy was clearly both smart and funny in the debate. He is an obviously qualified individual who has a different and far more constitutionally friendly vision for Indiana than either Daniels or Long-Thompson has. It is a vision that I and probably many other libertarian leaning Hoosiers share.  Andy gets and understands the big picture even if most of Mr. Tully’s faithful readers remain completely clueless.

But fortunately, in this broadband driven information age, voters can see the debate online to decide for themselves who actually won the debate. Those interested may want to visit http://www.c-spanarchives.org/library/index.php?main_page=product_video_info&tID=5&src=atom&atom=todays_events.xml&products_id=281110-1 and have a look without a heavily biased media slant.

Newspaper executives can’t seem to get a real handle on why fewer and fewer people are subscribing to their newspapers. Perhaps they might want to take a good, long, hard look at Mr. Tully’s column and pay some attention to the handwriting on the wall. There are plenty of clues for those paying attention. 

Posted in Politics | 1 Comment »