- SHNS
- Scripps Newspapers
- Abilene Reporter-News
- Anderson Independent-Mail
- Boulder Daily Camera
- Corpus Christi Caller-Times
- Evansville Courier
- Henderson Gleaner
- Kitsap Sun
- Knoxville News Sentinel
- Memphis Commercial Appeal
- Naples Daily News
- Redding Record Searchlight
- Rocky Mountain News
- San Angelo Standard-Times
- Treasure Coast Newspapers
- Ventura County Star
- Wichita Falls Times Record News
- SHNS Partners
- Scripps Broadcast
- Scripps Networks
- Scripps Blogs
Democrat, GOP stranglehold stifles third party candidates
Submitted by SHNS on Mon, 10/13/2008 - 14:51.
Be honest. What have you learned from the first two presidential debates? Do you expect to be any more enlightened by Wednesday night's third and final showdown between Barack Obama and John McCain?
If you're like my friends and associates outside the newsroom, you're setting the bar pretty low. If these "debates" have proven anything, they confirm our two-party choice is dumb and dumber (you pick).
Three months before the current market meltdown, the Wall Street Journal carried this headline: "The State of the Union? Furious." When the ever-bullish Bible of U.S. capitalism acknowledges that the natives are restless, you know things are serious.
But the Journal, like the rest of the mainstream media (MSM), persists in the notion that America's political duopoly - fronted and funded by the same racketeers who got us into this mess - can deliver solutions.
While the press works itself into its quadrennial lather, thinking Americans wearily ask, "Is this the best there is?"
Sure, voter registration is up, but some of the biggest gains have been among independents. And with a dozen states investigating charges of fraudulent sign-up scams by ACORN, the Democratic numbers look increasingly suspicious.
Yes, "Maverick" McCain wrapped up the Republican nomination, but it was Ron Paul who raised more than $30 million from grass-roots sources via the Internet.
Yeah, "Messiah" Obama preaches "change," but can anyone say what that means? His entourage of Carter- and Clinton-era holdovers doesn't exactly exude freshness.
Fact is, there's hardly a dime's worth of difference between Obama and McCain when it comes to dealing with the metastasizing credit crisis. Both supported the widely unpopular and apparently ineffective $700 billion bailout. Neither has a clue about what to do next. Some choice.
In another dispatch, the Journal declared, without substantiation, that "the electorate has shown little appetite for third-party candidates."
For this, the political scribes can pat themselves on the back. By serving as handmaidens for Democratic and Republican spin doctors, they suck the oxygen right out of democracy. The media's treatment of Paul, a former Libertarian standard bearer, epitomized the bigotry. Though he was the lone Republican presidential candidate to speak authoritatively on the crumbling domestic economy and America's economic imperialism overseas, the Texas congressman received only token coverage.
Likewise, Ralph Nader - widely credited/castigated for single-handedly defeating Al Gore in 2000 - gets the bum's rush. Agree with him or not, Nader isn't afraid to challenge the oil industry in ways that corporate politicians never have and never will.
For decades, he's assailed nuclear energy, Wall Street speculators and the Israeli lobby - all issues that the Republicrats still won't touch. Or how about someone - anyone - who would represent the public by taking a seriously hard line on illegal immigration?
It would be refreshing to see such views on display Wednesday night. Alas, corporatism's grip on politics is so tight that Anheuser-Busch (now Belgian-based InBev) helps bankroll the "debates," which Nader refers to as a series of "parallel interviews."
Keeping their cozy duopoly game going, former heads of the Republican and Democratic parties who run the debate commission dictate arbitrary thresholds for inclusion (typically 10 to 15 percent in a set of prescribed opinion polls). This is an impossible Catch-22 in a prevailing news blackout, unless you're a multibillionaire like Ross Perot, who bought his way onto the stage.
The irony is that Nader (running on the Ecology Party ballot line in Florida) wages a national campaign while the Republicans and Democrats pick their spots, based on polling and probability of success. Five weeks before Election Day, McCain pulled out of Michigan, the eighth biggest state.
"We have a one-party system designed by the parties," Nader said this spring in the shadow of Philadelphia's historic Independence Hall. Would the Founding Fathers be impressed with what's onstage at Hofstra University Wednesday night? I'm betting they'd vote independent.
After all, there's no point in rewarding bad behavior.
(Kenric Ward writes for Scripps Treasure Coast (Fla.) Newspapers, The Stuart News, Fort Pierce Tribune and Vero Beach Press Journal. E-mail ken.ward(at)scripps.com.)
Time for the People
Now is the time for the people to come to the aid of our Country and join the Nader campaign and vote for Ralph Nader! Read about the issues at www.votenader.org and www.nader.org SEb
sham debates
Ralph Nader and Ron Paul:
The wisdom of experience.
Realignment of American Politics
The Dems and Republicans are the spoilers
Any Democrat who calls Ralph Nader a spoiler needs to watch this vid:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LVzxBOTtPfA
Barack Obama & Raila Odinga
In 2006, Obama campaigned for a relative in Kenya, who was running for the Presidency. Obama's cousins name is Raila Odinga. Subsequently, Odinga lost by 230,000 or so votes. He did not accept the loss. So he called for demonstrations by his political supporters who in turn committed ethnic cleansing and genocide. Point blank, this guy tried to subvert the election process and use blackmail until he got what he wanted. Here is a video that gives a good accounting of the events along with photo's as proof of Obama and Odinga campaigning together. And Obama, used U.S. taxpayer money for this and his Senatorial position to help this terrorist. Titled: Barack Obama & Raila Odinga - Link: - http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=S8QcpdUtxNQ&feature=related
Vote 3rd party
I am voting 3rd party, as are many of my friends. My vote will not be wasted, as many want us to believe. My definition of a wasted vote is one for a candidate who does not represent my views. McCain and Obama would both fall into that category. I am choosing Baldwin, but please choose the 3rd party candidate who most closely represents your views, there are at least 4 3rd party candidates in most states. Now is the time to end the duopoly. There are other choices. You don't get any prize for picking the winner, vote for your principles, not theirs.
Great article! Any of the
Great article!
Any of the third party candidates would be an improvement over the Republicrats.
Americans need to turn OFF the mainstream media, and look online for honest reporting.
I'm voting Baldwin. We'll
I'm voting Baldwin. We'll never get any change as long as we keep voting for one of two establishment politicians. It's the same policies regardless of the administration, and they're taking America down a road that no one wants to go down.
Vote your mind and you conscience!
Nadar is a statist
Ralph Nadar is just another advocate of big government. Governments don't work, we need freedom.
I encourage anyone and
I encourage anyone and everyone to vote for a third party candidate. Let's send a message to Washington and not vote for Obama or Mccain!!!
Bob Barr '08
Baldwin is a part of the constitutionalist party. Go look up their crazy beliefs and ideas, they are pretty insane. Same goes for the Green Party, we do not need more government, or in Baldwin's case, religion in government.
Bob Barr brings true prosperity (with an agreeable Congress)!
stop bashing
stop bashing other 3rd party candidates, you are doing just as the media tells you to do and making them all seem less legitimate.
Vote your conscience
educate yourself before voting
When Ron Paul endorsed Chuck Baldwin I contemplated giving him my vote. While I agree with his views on sound money, small government and low taxes, the Reverend has some pretty religious extremist beliefs. I don't agree with the political secularism from the "no Merry Christmas" crowd, but for Christ's sake...keep your religion out of politics, it does nothing but incite the mob.
While I don't fully agree with his temperament either, I guess Bob Barr will get my vote this year. I wish Ron decided to run on a third party ticket.
Chuck Baldwin is most like Ron Paul and.....
...Chuck Baldwin, contrary to what many people mistakenly think, will not try to ram religion down people's throats. He believes that people should be free to practice and or not practice whatever religion they want as long as it doesn't hurt others. I think if people do their homework and really research the candidates, they'll conclude, as I have, that Chuck Baldwin brings to the table more of what this country needs right now than any other candidate for President ---not to mention that he'd appoint Ron Paul Secretary of the Treasury.
Wrong
Ralph Nader is for decentralization "all the way down to the local level."
Watch the You Tube vid "Nader Wins California" and you'll hear it from the horse's mouth.
The reply ^^^
was for Andy White.
RE: Chuck Baldwin
Anon,
I respectfully disagree with your calculus.
Chuck Baldwin worked for the "Moral Majority" between 1980 and 1984, a faith-based organization whose goal was to move a political agenda forward that was in line with what their religious beliefs deemed appropriate. In my opinion, the moral majority was integral in the neo-conservative takeover of the Republican Party and trampled many of the rights we have today. Almost as much as nazi's trampled on our freedom of speech and expression with their whole "political correctness" movement.
Again, similar to Barack Obama, I can't take him at his word, I have to rely on his record as my only source of information before I cast my vote on him. I agree with many of his opinions on the issues, but his temperament is what makes me nervous.
Post new comment