From Jill Stein’swebsite:
Last week Green Party presidential candidate Dr. Jill Stein was arrested, along with VP candidate Cheri Honkala, attempting to get into the presidential debates in Hempstead, New York. This week her fight continues with a lawsuit filed today [October 22] against the Commission on Presidential Debates (CPD), claiming that the CPD, Democratic National Committee, and Republican National Committee, together with the Federal Election Commission and Lynn University, had deprived her of her constitutional rights to due process, equal protection, and free speech, as well as her statutorily protected civil rights.
snip
According to the lawsuit pleadings, “Dr. Jill Stein is not only equal under the law to the two “major party” candidates, she is better, because she became a viable contender for the Presidency while being discriminated against by the defendants at every turn.”
“Our constitution is supposed to protect us against manipulations of democracy of the kind scheduled tonight, and I hope the court will act now to stop this farce, but either way, we will keep up the fight, and one of these days American elections and our debates will be reclaimed by the American people,” said Stein.
Kathleen Kirwin filed the emergency complaint on behalf of Dr. Stein. The injunction request was denied and the event occurred with only the Republican and the Democratic candidates.
Last Thursday Gary Johnson of the Libertarian Party filed a court challenge to the CPD “debates” in Washington, D.C. Both lawsuits were sponsored by a Libertarian member with the two largest independent parties, Greens and Libertarians, working in tandem against the bullying corporate parties.
Isn’t it nice to see at least our marginalized third parties working together bipartisanly I’m thinking!
Over 14,000 have signed a statement calling on the CPD to change its criteria and let in third parties. Repeated public calls for opening the CPD debates over the years, months and weeks have been ignored by that CORPORATION!
The first 2012 third party presidential debate did occur online thanks to “Free & Equal”, a truly non-partisan (non-partisan unlike the restrictively bipartisan CPD) civic organization. It was hosted by Larry King on Tuesday, October 23, at the Chicago Hilton. The debaters included Dr. Jill Stein (Green Party), Gov. Gary Johnson (Libertarian Party), Virgil Goode (Constitution Party) and Rocky Anderson (Justice Party).
SHAMEFULLY, NO MAJOR OR CABLE NETWORKS IN THE U.S. AIRED THIS DEBATE. It was ... wait for it ... brought to us, the American citizens, via television by Al Jazeera and Russia Today.
Statement by Ben Manski, campaign manager for Jill Stein:
“It shouldn’t be the case that the only TV networks bringing this debate to the American people are based in countries whose political systems are even less democratic than our own. The failure of CNN, MSNBC, and others to broadcast the debate only adds to the global perception that the United States doesn’t live up to the democratic standards it professes.”
Jill Stein and her running mate, Cheri Honkala, will appear on 85% of ballots on Election Day and have recently polled 2-3% of voters in four consecutive national polls.
Dr. Stein of all the election candidates has qualified for federal public financing. You would think being granted federal funding, our taxpayer dollars, makes her serious enough of a NATIONAL candidate to have the opportunity to be seen by the voters at least along with the other two legacy party candidates, who are getting tremendous media focus already. A national television forum before the election is necessary for the voters to familiarize themselves with her and her platform!
The Commission on Presidential Debates calls itself a non-partisan entity but it is really a puppet organization for the Democrats and the Republicans and their big funding corporations. It is set up to exclude any parties that might challenge the governing power brokers. It is set up to block legitimate qualifying candidates to share their platforms and meet their potential voters. MILLIONS of voters!
A third party candidate being blocked from the national debates loses out on potentially connecting with MILLIONS of voters. The first debate was viewed by approximately 60 million viewers. The third party candidates are forced to be dependent for broad name recognition on advertising campaigns. Unfortunately, extensive advertising is prohibitively expensive for the third party candidates who are not selling out their platforms to accommodate corporate donors. Quite the catch-22.
Corporate media has thoroughly iced out third party candidates from their commentary, pretending they do not exist, that they do not represent millions of citizens. Dr. Stein's being arrested and cuffed to a chair for eight hours in a Long Island temporary detention facility over a week ago after an act of civil disobedience didn't evoke a peep from corporate media! (What if Obama or Romney had been cuffed to a chair like that for eight hours? Eight seconds? WHAT A DOUBLE STANDARD!) Sadly, thanks to big corporate media and the CPD, many voters will see the names of Stein and Honkala and the other candidates who may be listed on their ballots and ask themselves, "Who the hell are these people?"
MONEY SHOULD NOT EQUAL SPEECH, but in Post-Morality America (as David Brooks calls it) it assuredly does!
Here is the injunction in full. To summarize, Dr. Stein’s complaint alleges that the CPD and the FEC denied her, and other defendants, their rights to due process, equal protection, and free speech.
Also on Jill Stein’s statement:
“The debates must include every candidate who is on enough ballots to win the White House and who has demonstrated a minimal level of support -- meaning either 1% of the vote in a credible national poll, or qualification for federal matching funds, or both,”.... “In 2012, the Green and Libertarian party candidates both meet all of these criteria and are both contenders for the presidency…These debates belong to the people, not the politicians or Wall Street.”
Here is a link to the third party debate hosted by Larry King (good for Larry!) on October 23rd. It's really a refreshing watch, presidential candidates passionately addressing relevant issues such as a failing economy, climate change, marijuana, military spending, war, civil rights, Patriot Act, unemployment, drones, detention, the specter of war with Iran, etc.
The next third party presidential debate will be on October 30 at 9pm EST at the aforementioned link or through live streaming via http://freeandequal.org/live.
More information at: http://action.freeandequal.org/debate-rsvp/.
THIS IS WHAT DEMOCRACY LOOKS LIKE!
TIP:
Enter the amount, and click "Tip" to submit!
Comments
Obama knows which side his bread is buttered on and by whom and it ain't any of us!
When he takes up the stance of being the non-flip floppy one re Romney I am astounded by the shamelessness of him and the naivete of anyone buying it.
best, libby
I believe they must achieve 15% as an average within 5 national polls, but as quoted on an earlier blog of mine, the real tricky part is that the polls often don't include the names of third parties as an option when presented to the voters polled. So how can you reach the 15% when you are excluded as a choice? Sounds like Karl Rove rules, eh?
But this is how things work in Post-Morality America. You honor a technicality of law or rule that is an insulting twisting and skewering of law to accommodate -- as a fig leaf -- something amoral and actually illegal and/or totally anti-democratic or anti-constitutional iN ESSENCE AND ACTUALITY!
Good for Stein and Johnson for pushing back. Too bad both legacy corporate parties are jamming the courts with partisan cronies. ALEC has done an earnest job especially!
We got three branches all rotted with corporatism and cronyism.
best, libby
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article32847.htm
"In America today, law serves the powerful, not justice. In effect, there is no law, and there is no justice. Only unaccountable power.
"What is the point of a vote when the outcome is the same? Both candidates represent the interests of Israel, not the interests of the US. Both candidates represent the interests of the military/security complex, agribusiness, the offshoring corporations, the suppression of unions and workers, the total demise of civil liberty and the US Constitution, which is in the way of unbridled executive power .
"In the US today, the power of money rules. Nothing else is in the equation. Why vote to lend your support to the continuation of your own exploitation? Every time Americans vote it is a vote for their own obliteration."
One comment, if any who follow my comment, I beseech You, not only to comment, but regardless of how difficult the open sewer system makes it rate her post.
Libby deserves to be on the front page and the higher up, the better.
-R-
She was trying to crash a privately owned function to which she had not been invited. If she tried that when I held a birthday party for one of my children, I would, if I had the power the "Big Two" have, have done the exact same thing.
She is neither naive nor stupid. She knew exactly what she was doing and she wanted the publicity she thought she'd get form it. For her to whine now that the mass media aren't playing fair by not giving her that undeserved publicity, is ridiculous. That lawsuit is frivolous and vexatious and if she goes ahead with it she deserves to be sued her own self.
If she is, as she thinks she is, presidential material then she'd better learn to take her lumps on the road to the White House. For her to pull a stupid stunt like that, fail to get what she wanted, and then throw a tantrum is NOT indicative of her being competent enough to sit in The Oval Office; or ANY pubic office, for that matter.
There's an old rule in politics and in life: "If you don't want to get the shit kicked out of you - learn to pick your fights with great care."
I think that you, her many other supporters, and she, herself, ought to be thankful that mainstream media DID NOT bring that ill-concieved attempt to look like she was a poor wee waif, who was being brutally picked on by two big bullies, to the attention of more of the voting public than already know. North Americans of all three major countries, do not vote for national leaders out of sympathy. That's a tough job and it takes someone as tough as nails to do it.
Her campaign manger should be fired for letting her go ahead with that really dumb idea. I've been a campaign manager - a winning one - and I have no respect for one who won't stand up to his candidate and tell her to put a sock in it when she gets a bad idea; that's his job, fer pete's sake.
She spoke well on her appearance with the 3 other minor candidates. And she got across many good points. It is well that she is showing a high regard for issues other than 'green' ones. She has to combat the public's perception that she leads a 'one issue' party. She has an uphill battle with that alone, never mind other issues. The very last thing she can afford to do, both for her campaign and for her efforts to build her party, is to appear too fragile to be a leader.
I wish her - and you - all the best......Sky
.
.
I find it heartening that Stein and Johnson became judicially proactive on this. Their exile from the national debates when they represent such a serious number of us and would be quite popular with so many more if given a MOLECULE of a chance using our airways which used to be not TOTALLY MONOPOLIZED by corporate and political will. Look at the days of Watergate! I suppose the rat bastard took notes back then and began plugging up all the flexibility we as citizens had to making our leaders accountable, getting rid of the most pro-citizen representatives we have using all the bottom feeding scum sucking ways as used by the Karl Roves, etc.
Though the cronyism of the judicial system whether Dem or Republican does not inspire judicial risk-taking, especially given the personhood of corporations in the eyes of our highest judicial team -- sociopathic personality profile of a corporation -- and considering how especially ALEC has been trying to fill EVERY judicial slot in America with a Repub corporate crony Stein and Johnson are resorting to the process of democracy, what is left of it.
The third party candidates had to use grassroots traction entirely. And the fourth estate, the corporate media, now run worldwide by 6 or so mega-conglomerates has such massive access and such massive profiteering incentive to totally IGNORE the will of so much of the American people voiced and represented more faithfully by these third party candidates.
"Ends justifies the means" of the power brokers, and dismantling democracy is one of the serious ends!
Soft fascism is hardening fast. It is late in the game and I see open salon as a microcosm of the entire population and there is such fierce enthrallment to the corporate and media will, such loyalty to the "branding" of Obama by media rather than the REALITY of what horrifying policies he has sustained from the chilling Bush/Cheney years and what he is implementing even more frightening.
Obama is a front-man for oligarchy that is the enemy of our democracy. As Jill Stein declared in the debate, money should not replace free speech in this country.
If the people are against war or health care profiteering, then the corporate-captured politicians are run by their corporate pimps and legislate EVIL and the corporate pimps invest money into trying to brainwash the public into coming round to assent to their own worst interests. And amazingly after years of tv enmeshment and commercial manipulation, the population is so tragically susceptible, especially without a sense of fellow citizen support which is exactly what the media commentary blocks out. Wants to stifle dissent. Wants to confuse citizens and to set them against those fighting hardest for their welfare.
Huge demonstrations against corporate and political behaviors of people are no longer mentioned on corporate media. The police set up to protect citizens is used against Americans exercising the heretofore right to assemble and to protest!
How long before more and more of us will be considered enemies of the state for protesting a state governance that is destroying human and political rights for us Americans?
best, libby
best, libby
So the third parties are eligible but not with the CPD's catch-22 rules. If you don't have the popularity you can't be in the debates but they do all they can to scotch that and ask for too high a degree of popularity considering the reality of the media blackout and the polling process. Since the third parties have to register as highly as 15% on national polls, how can they begin to when some of these polls won't offer their names as choices, ergo, they can't register above zero!!!
I think both candidates havea case that should have been heeded, Sky. It was not ego whining imho! It was trying to use what is left of our democratic system.
Glad you appreciated Stein's debates performance.
best, libby
If you really want your hair to stand on end, read Glenn Greenwald today on a just released Washington Post revelation about Obama's "disposition matrix". all I could think of was IBM colluding with the Nazis to keep statistical track for oppression and annihilation.
Try to "lesser evil" that, America!
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/oct/24/obama-terrorism-kill-list
sorry, sky, didn't get time to figure out and apply the link stuff yet.
I will quote some of it:
"Based on interviews with "current and former officials from the White House and the Pentagon, as well as intelligence and counterterrorism agencies", Miller reports that as "the United States' conventional wars are winding down", the Obama administration "expects to continue adding names to kill or capture lists for years" (the "capture" part of that list is little more than symbolic, as the US focus is overwhelmingly on the "kill" part). Specifically, "among senior Obama administration officials, there is broad consensus that such operations are likely to be extended at least another decade." As Miller puts it: "That timeline suggests that the United States has reached only the midpoint of what was once known as the global war on terrorism."
"In pursuit of this goal, "White House counterterrorism adviser John O Brennan is seeking to codify the administration's approach to generating capture/kill lists, part of a broader effort to guide future administrations through the counterterrorism processes that Obama has embraced." All of this, writes Miller, demonstrates "the extent to which Obama has institutionalized the highly classified practice of targeted killing, transforming ad-hoc elements into a counterterrorism infrastructure capable of sustaining a seemingly permanent war."
"The Post article cites numerous recent developments reflecting this Obama effort, including the fact that "CIA Director David H Petraeus is pushing for an expansion of the agency's fleet of armed drones", which "reflects the agency's transformation into a paramilitary force, and makes clear that it does not intend to dismantle its drone program and return to its pre-September 11 focus on gathering intelligence." The article also describes rapid expansion of commando operations by the US Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC) and, perhaps most disturbingly, the creation of a permanent bureaucratic infrastructure to allow the president to assassinate at will:
"JSOC also has established a secret targeting center across the Potomac River from Washington, current and former U.S. officials said. The elite command's targeting cells have traditionally been located near the front lines of its missions, including in Iraq and Afghanistan. But JSOC created a 'national capital region' task force that is a 15-minute commute from the White House so it could be more directly involved in deliberations about al-Qaeda lists."
"The creepiest aspect of this development is the christening of a new Orwellian euphemism for due-process-free presidential assassinations: "disposition matrix". Writes Miller:
"Over the past two years, the Obama administration has been secretly developing a new blueprint for pursuing terrorists, a next-generation targeting list called the 'disposition matrix'.
"The matrix contains the names of terrorism suspects arrayed against an accounting of the resources being marshaled to track them down, including sealed indictments and clandestine operations. US officials said the database is designed to go beyond existing kill lists, mapping plans for the 'disposition' of suspects beyond the reach of American drones."
"The "disposition matrix" has been developed and will be overseen by the National Counterterrorism Center (NCTC). One of its purposes is "to augment" the "separate but overlapping kill lists" maintained by the CIA and the Pentagon: to serve, in other words, as the centralized clearinghouse for determining who will be executed without due process based upon how one fits into the executive branch's "matrix". As Miller describes it, it is "a single, continually evolving database" which includes "biographies, locations, known associates and affiliated organizations" as well as "strategies for taking targets down, including extradition requests, capture operations and drone patrols". This analytical system that determines people's "disposition" will undoubtedly be kept completely secret; Marcy Wheeler sardonically said that she was "looking forward to the government's arguments explaining why it won't release the disposition matrix to ACLU under FOIA".
"This was all motivated by Obama's refusal to arrest or detain terrorist suspects, and his resulting commitment simply to killing them at will (his will). Miller quotes "a former US counterterrorism official involved in developing the matrix" as explaining the impetus behind the program this way: "We had a disposition problem.""
end of quote
I don't know about you but I am getting chills and the term "final solution" is suddenly haunting me.
And the apologizing apostles of the American Judas are marching us all there, to the exponentially expanding kill and detention lists.
I wish I were being hyperbolic, but the obama regime defies that.
God, he even calls it the "matrix"!
best, libby
I had read about this before -- Democracy Now, I think -- and just shook my head. Lawrence O'Donnell made an interesting point a couple nights ago -- Obama didn't list his signing of the NDAA as one of his "accomplishments" during the debates and doesn't include it in his speeches, not to mention the other of his "accomplishments" that he avoids mentioning.
I hope this censorship is made public enough that plenty of American citizens become aware of it and the blatant antidemocratic nature of the election process as it currently exists. And then, if that happens, let's hope it matters enough to enough people to at least make a dent in the voting.
You should not be astonished at my comment. I support Jill's goals. I despise puerile, "un-presidential" tactics in a presidential race. Such tactics are best left to "the other two".
Jill's key appeal, aside from her Green philosophy, is her integrity. That integrity was not apparent in that cheap publicity stunt. That same integrity WAS very much in evidence when she was, during the debate, offered a chance to speak out of turn and refused; she advised the moderator - Larry King - that he was in error and that another candidate was due to speak. That, in turn, led to the discovery that Larry had skipped the opening statements by the candidates. They got that straightened up quickly.
You iterating and reiterating the barriers and hurdles that are, and will be, placed in Jill's path, by "them other guys" only makes it clear that they are smart enough to reduce the exposure of a competitor to the public. That's their "job." Were I in their shoes, I'd do the same thing. I can only hope that if Jill ever makes it to the top position, that she has the capability to do the same thing also. When you enter the arena as a gladiator, you'd better be prepared to play by the lion's rules!
I think that she is making a further blunder by trying to bash the big two for not including her in their debate. Did the four, in your debate, invite any of the dozens of other presidential candidates? Nope, you didn't. And don't give me any blather about all those unknown candidates "not having the numbers" that Jill, Gary, and the others have, That's the line the big two used to keep Jill out of their debate! Try to remember that "what's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander."
I don't know if your constant bad-mouthing of Obama and Romney is part of the Green Party's acknowledged tactics. If so, it's not a good tactic for a small party to use. Let the big boys use it; it suits their style. It gives the true believers on each side ammunition against "them other guys" arguments in their own minds. It gives them sound bites that they can hear in their minds and say, amongst their cronies, with the intention of appearing wise.
Contrary to what some think, it does NOT change the mind of those who support the opposition nor sway the undecided. What sways people is hearing a clear, clean, unambiguous, positive platform of what your candidate will do that is good for the people who will be voting.
Your focus ought not to be "throw the bums out"; too many people don't think that they are bums. A wiser message might be along the lines of, "Together WE are America, and we CAN do better!". It attacks nobody and it is positive and uplifting.
Keep up the good fight, my friend......
;-)
.
We obviously disagree.
Stein fights for other third parties, she also has the right to fight for herself and her own party removed from them with her own extenuating situation, its advantages and disadvantages.
Just because others don't think they are "bums" doesn't mean they aren't. Since so many are focusing on the Republican "bums" I think I ramp it up to focus attention on vile acts of the Dem ones! I know this gets blowback and accusations of incivility and I am sacrificing rhetorical maturity and maybe it does work against me. But I believe we have to tap into our feelings and this anti-feeling culture, way too many people, who would rather look at strategy than the moral compass seriously piss me off. best, libby
As for the debate fortunately it was aired on C-Span but it wasn’t listed which means that many people may not have even known it was playing. That is just another scam that they use to keep people from getting the information they need and they probably have a lame excuse for it.
Under these terms the only candidates that qualify are those that collect bribes and agree to betray the voters as soon as they get elected then the make promises which they write on TP before using it.
Quite right. We are the only developed nation on Earth with a political system dominated by only two parties. All other developed democracies are served by coalition governments, and rarely does one party ever win out enough to push the others aside.
This is what it will take to crack the two party monopoly on ideas in America. It will take a coalition, it will take all of our third parties, the Greens, the Libertarians, the Justices, even the Socialists and Communists to beat back that corporate Juggernaut, and through the process we'll be better for it.
Nothing forces compromise and dialogue like relying on the neighbors.
best, libby
You write:
"Quite right. We are the only developed nation on Earth with a political system dominated by only two parties. All other developed democracies are served by coalition governments, and rarely does one party ever win out enough to push the others aside.
"This is what it will take to crack the two party monopoly on ideas in America. It will take a coalition, it will take all of our third parties, the Greens, the Libertarians, the Justices, even the Socialists and Communists to beat back that corporate Juggernaut, and through the process we'll be better for it.
"Nothing forces compromise and dialogue like relying on the neighbors."
So I quoted most all of it -- I kept on going :-) -- because it resonated inside me seriously. Thank you for saying it. When I watched the third party debate I was DAZZLED because I watched as a super fan of Stein't but it thrilled me when I heard the alternate candidates saying wise things I agreed with or even things I didn't agree with but coming from a place of CLARITY AND COMMITMENT!
Watching Obama and Romney for even the few minutes I could stomach it sickened me because of the smoke and mirrors vagueness and emotionalized rhetoric without substance behind it and the realpolitik that I know is going on, the war criminality and white collar criminality.
Yes, we need a coalition. We also need role modeling good and moral leadership. Stein calls it the politics of courage. Not the politics of corporate cronyism, cowardism, bullshit, and status quo zombie-ism!
best, libby