Revolutionary Ideals
Days prior to the election I am putting out a few thoughts about the event. I offer this for those who had questions/comments about the election.
First of all, it would be good for America to decide NOW that two-parties are not nearly enough to represent the diverse groups we are. The sooner you accept this the better. I will not accept that the two parties represent the interests of most Americans (I include all of North America in that). I would be glad to back up that comment anytime.
If our government stayed within the original Constitutional bounds, ( See LP.org ) two parties would be quite adequate and capable of representing the country. Abuse, govt. blank check mentality, complexity and unprecedented growth has shown an even greater need for a better choice than the lesser of two evils can offer.
It took us time to learn that blacks and women are not property, but equal in the rights to own and protect property. Those errors, luckily, were amendable and our government moved towards greater protection of freedoms. Society moved towards great advances in industry and quality of life. Somewhere along the way things went off track.
Now, about election season, a personal pledge to NOT use polls or statistics to decide who is a 'viable candidate' would be literally brilliant. I heard, months before the Dems and Repubs had accepted their candidacy for President, that Badnarik , My man Michael was not a viable candidate. Um, this was before the media almost completely ignored the Libertarians and other hard working independent parties. What foresight did people have that the (L)'s would be left out. I see no valid reason for the omission.
Here, on the verge of the election, Mr. Badnarik has received .02% of the media attention and is polling anywhere from 1% to 6%. There are hundreds of articles on how Michael Badnarik might very well unseat George W. Bush in the election of `04 by appealing to the large number of conservatives who will not vote for Kerry, but are dissatisfied with Bush. But hardly ANY articles on his position on American politics. Do you wonder why his stands on the issues were left out.
Ideas like, bring the troops home. . . NOW, keep our Supreme Court Justices protecting choice and unalienable rights, demanding performance accountable government, and other {Gasp} Libertarian/Constitutional ideas are among these positions. And they are quite important for the large number of voters in America who will not vote because they feel there is not a candidate that believes as they do.
What magical thirty second appeal will Michael be capable of when the people have made it to the voters booth and have never heard of him?
I thought the media had the task of removing ignorance and confusion at the ballot box? I guess they are giving new definition of Yellow Journalism, this time they are just plain chicken.
Of course, it would have helped greatly if these wavering Bush fans had seen or heard of Badnarik. Can we call the process democratic? Of course, as 'democracy is what you get when three wolves and one sheep vote on what is for dinner. Bah bah bye bye Black Sheep. If there is no protection of rights, and rather just majority rule, our jaded view finders will always only reveal the ones wicked enough to be rated by how evil they are.
We do not stand up enough and demand for the independent parties [on enough ballots to win] to be included in the debates (Perhaps you disagree with the Libertarians or Socialist Workers Party, and justify their exclusion for that reason? I do not). We do not question the news organizations enough. Those media outlets that play 'Yellow Journalism' with the philosophies that contradict their own.
Unless you are a repub or a dem (Auto-inclusion), it is very difficult to get a presidential candidate on the ballots on enough states to win. Tens of thousands of signatures must be acquired. Have you ever tried getting TEN? It should be an easy choice to include all these ballot accessible candidates in the debates.
Our Politicians are there to protect us from us and from them. Kind of like elected shepherds. And in this case,
Fear the shepherd that eats the sheep.
Leave the shepherd that ignores the sheep.
And for that matter, Don't be a sheep.
May the best candidate win,
May the voting populace know who that is,
Scott
First of all, it would be good for America to decide NOW that two-parties are not nearly enough to represent the diverse groups we are. The sooner you accept this the better. I will not accept that the two parties represent the interests of most Americans (I include all of North America in that). I would be glad to back up that comment anytime.
If our government stayed within the original Constitutional bounds, ( See LP.org ) two parties would be quite adequate and capable of representing the country. Abuse, govt. blank check mentality, complexity and unprecedented growth has shown an even greater need for a better choice than the lesser of two evils can offer.
It took us time to learn that blacks and women are not property, but equal in the rights to own and protect property. Those errors, luckily, were amendable and our government moved towards greater protection of freedoms. Society moved towards great advances in industry and quality of life. Somewhere along the way things went off track.
Now, about election season, a personal pledge to NOT use polls or statistics to decide who is a 'viable candidate' would be literally brilliant. I heard, months before the Dems and Repubs had accepted their candidacy for President, that Badnarik , My man Michael was not a viable candidate. Um, this was before the media almost completely ignored the Libertarians and other hard working independent parties. What foresight did people have that the (L)'s would be left out. I see no valid reason for the omission.
Here, on the verge of the election, Mr. Badnarik has received .02% of the media attention and is polling anywhere from 1% to 6%. There are hundreds of articles on how Michael Badnarik might very well unseat George W. Bush in the election of `04 by appealing to the large number of conservatives who will not vote for Kerry, but are dissatisfied with Bush. But hardly ANY articles on his position on American politics. Do you wonder why his stands on the issues were left out.
Ideas like, bring the troops home. . . NOW, keep our Supreme Court Justices protecting choice and unalienable rights, demanding performance accountable government, and other {Gasp} Libertarian/Constitutional ideas are among these positions. And they are quite important for the large number of voters in America who will not vote because they feel there is not a candidate that believes as they do.
What magical thirty second appeal will Michael be capable of when the people have made it to the voters booth and have never heard of him?
I thought the media had the task of removing ignorance and confusion at the ballot box? I guess they are giving new definition of Yellow Journalism, this time they are just plain chicken.
Of course, it would have helped greatly if these wavering Bush fans had seen or heard of Badnarik. Can we call the process democratic? Of course, as 'democracy is what you get when three wolves and one sheep vote on what is for dinner. Bah bah bye bye Black Sheep. If there is no protection of rights, and rather just majority rule, our jaded view finders will always only reveal the ones wicked enough to be rated by how evil they are.
We do not stand up enough and demand for the independent parties [on enough ballots to win] to be included in the debates (Perhaps you disagree with the Libertarians or Socialist Workers Party, and justify their exclusion for that reason? I do not). We do not question the news organizations enough. Those media outlets that play 'Yellow Journalism' with the philosophies that contradict their own.
Unless you are a repub or a dem (Auto-inclusion), it is very difficult to get a presidential candidate on the ballots on enough states to win. Tens of thousands of signatures must be acquired. Have you ever tried getting TEN? It should be an easy choice to include all these ballot accessible candidates in the debates.
Our Politicians are there to protect us from us and from them. Kind of like elected shepherds. And in this case,
Fear the shepherd that eats the sheep.
Leave the shepherd that ignores the sheep.
And for that matter, Don't be a sheep.
May the best candidate win,
May the voting populace know who that is,
Scott
Comments