Hot News!
• Bearman Cartoon: Freestore Foodbank Blogger Challenge
Contact Us
v mail, fax: (214) 481-6464
e mail: click here
On today's date in The Beacon archives, we published:
•Lobbyists Hack Your Elections: The OEJC Calls for Voting Systems Recall, Return, and Refund, Part I (2007)•Trickle Down Justice (2007)
•Coming this week: Buy Nothing Day! (and Boycott MTV) (2007)
•Updates on the BOE “Situation” (2007)
•UC Student Groups March to President Nancy Zimpher (2006)
Events
 |
|
|
Friday, October 03, 2008
Democrats, Liberal Free Speech, and the Nader Problem
Posted by The Dean of Cincinnati
Photo courtesy of here.
Some will refuse to believe it, but there is a part of me committed to being an undecided voter until the moment I cast my ballot. I remain open to someone persuading me one way or another until the moment of my vote. That said, I still advocate for whomever happens to be my favorite candidate at the time. And, at this time, I am enjoying the candidacy of Ralph Nader. So I decided to exhibit my enjoyment of Ralph Nader’s campaign at the recent open-to-the-public party Democrats held in Oakley to watch the Vice Presidential debates. I was surprised by my rough treatment by the Democrats.
1. No signs inside.
I guess I kind of understand why they kicked me out with my Nader signs inside the front room at the Oakley theatre—but I’m still not sure if standing with signs in an open-to-the-public event at an open-to-the-public location should be that big of a deal, particularly since all kinds of people had signs for Democrats. They said they wouldn’t let someone have John McCain signs, and they wouldn’t let me have Nader signs, either. I guess I understand, a little bit.
But here is the thing: Democrats are supposed to be liberal. They are supposed to value free speech and diversity. And they are supposed to support a progressive agenda. So, when Democrats show they do not value my divergent free speech supporting a progressive agenda, it just makes me a bit frustrated with how I think the liberal agenda has been watered down, hijacked, and yanked to the right. Minus one point for the Democrats.
2. Caleb Faux took down my Nader sign.
Caleb Faux made a major faux pas when I caught him taking down the Nader sign I had in front of the Oakley theater, in the public right of way. Now, some of you may be thinking that signs don’t belong in the public right of way—and you are correct! But the few Nader signs paled in comparison to the dozens upon dozens of Driehaus signs. So, when I saw Faux taking my signs, I thought, “Oh, no he didn’t.”
“Those Driehaus signs are gone,” I exclaimed, walking out of the theatre and past the sign bandit. I took every Driehaus sign out of the ground, and returned them to the Driehaus campaign table. “At least I’m not keeping them,” I told a frustrated Caleb as I walked back inside.
Don’t touch my sign if you expect your Driehaus litter to remain in the right of way. That’s another point. The Dems are now down two.
3. “If you don’t leave, someone is going to kick your ass.”
I’m not sure why my meager protest about opening up the debates would incite anyone to violence, but I couldn’t believe receiving this threat from a mindless Democrat drone attempting to intimidate me into silence.
I double-dog dare any Democrat to try and kick my ass. In the meanwhile, I’m taking two more for the supreme disrespect for my right to peaceful and nonviolent assembly. That takes the Democrats down four.
4. Foul-mouthed hypocrisy and ballot access barriers.
Minding my business at the bar and ordering a Miller Lite, some freshly bearded Democrat walks up and informs me that Ralph Nader is a “narcisistic fucker.” I looked this dude straight in the face and told him Obama is a “narcisistic fucker,” too. (I’m not saying one way or another whether I believe that—I just wanted to reflect this guys bad attitude back at him.)
Amazingly, this pathetic excuse for an activist and his cronies acted offended that I would start hurling names, suggesting that my behavior was immature. Hypocrisy, anyone? That move just cost you another point, bringing the debt up to five points.
Next, this freshly bearded guy decided to inform us, with great pride, that his father fought to keep Nader off the ballot in 2004. This really exemplifies why I get so irritated with Democrats.
See, I find it a liberal (and liberating) idea that independents can get on the ballot. Why would anyone deny another person the right to run for office? Is that what Democratic ideals are all about? This guy just gave me a double dose of hypocrisy, so it’s going to cost another two. That takes the Dems down seven.
5. “People like you brought us eight years of George Bush.”
Get a grip. George Bush stole the election in Ohio in 2004, and Nader wasn’t even on the Ohio ballot. But what did the Democrats do about it? Absolutely nothing. They just rolled over like dogs. What kind of an opposition party is that?
Independent politics didn’t bring more George Bush—that was a corporate controlled and rigged election system given a free pass by do-nothing Democrats who just sat on the sidelines and watched the whole thing happen, probably just waiting until it was their turn to have the gig rigged on their behalf. I’m taking one point for every year you’ve mistakenly blamed Nader for your party’s lack of opposition. Dems now down fifteen.
6. Wulsin supporters are ridiculous.
Don’t believe me? Just say the words “Dr. Malaria” and watch what happens! I just wish these feverish whack jobs had some basic reading comprehension skills. They don’t seem to understand that Wulsin admits, in her “Immunotherapy and Beyond” report, how she analyzed raw human data from East African subjects, and that she wanted to continue malariotherapy studies even after admitting that it appeared ineffective. They must have some hyped up Kool-Aid over at the campaign HQ.
Slippery Vic didn’t show her face at the event (gosh, I would have loved to ask her some questions), but I wish her goons could comprehend the discrepancies in her report were not the subject of Dr. Baratz’s complaint to the Medical Board, and the Board’s refusal to take action has absolutely no bearing on anything in the previous paragraph. These Wulsin goons (combined with people like Jeff Berding, who can’t understand a simple concept like “ranked votes") show how the Democrats apparently have a problem with basic reading comprehension. I’m taking two for that, as the Dems slide down further into the hole at seventeen.
7. “I’d vote for Nader, but he doesn’t have a chance to win.”
If everyone who said this voted for Nader, he’d have a chance to win. Enough said. The Democratic Party is guilty here of large-scale brainwashing so they can maintain their hegemony. You can only hear these pre-programmed responses so many times before it sounds like they went to school for this stuff. I’m taking five points for the sheer stupidity at play here. That’s takes it to the mystical twenty-three.
8. Yelling insults while walking away.
I bet some Democrats from the event will come to comment on how much they hate me. But I did not walk away. Not from a single person. Not from a single conversation. Even when threatened, yelled at, cussed at, and insulted. There is nothing I hate more than someone who can only hurl a pre-programmed one-liner before running back into the safety of the throngs. Your pitiful fear gives Democrats a bad name. I’m taking another point. You’re down twenty-four.
9. John Cranley quotes Dumb and Dumber.
So I walk into the theatre to see some of the debate and John Cranley immediately starts talking to me. But I didn’t mind. He kept talking about how I stopped protesting when the beer started flowing. Then he said something like “The beer flows like wine.” He kept saying it was from the movie Dumb and Dumber.
I responded to Cranley, saying I saw that movie but didn’t remember the line, when a bunch of Democrats angrily turned around and shushed me. Kind of frustrating, since no one turned on Cranley to shush him while he yammered about Dumb and Dumber.
Later, Cranley told us he voted for Nader in 1996. I don’t know where Cranley lived in 1996, but Nader wasn’t even on the ballot in Ohio. Maybe he cast a ballot while studying at Harvard.
So, was Cranley smarter when he studied at Harvard, or when he quoted from Dumb and Dumber at a Vice Presidential debate viewing drinking party in Oakley? I’m taking another point while you figure that one out. Dems down twenty-five.
10. The whipped guy whose wife made him stop talking to us.
That’s right: he was interested in talking to us, but she wouldn’t let him. He didn’t even put up a fight. Nothing like closed-mindedness meets Nazi-like obedience in a Democratic relationship. I’m taking five, bringing the total to thirty.
Bonus: David Pepper and staff
David Pepper and his staff were totally cool with me. We chatted, and laughed, and treated one another cordially. Say what you will about Pepper, but he showed that some Democrats do know how to act like respectable human beings (even if he wore a Wulsin sticker). I’ll give the Dems five bonus points.
Final total: The Dean 25, Democrats 0.
• Share This Article!
Listen to this article
|  |
Register
Anonymous comments are allowed, but you can create an account above to stamp your name and to avoid typing the anti-spam code.
If you are not familiar with our rules for leaving comments, click here! The Cincinnati Beacon is not responsible for the contents of any comments. Comments do not represent the views of the moderators of The Cincinnati Beacon.
03 Oct 2008 at 10:49 pm | #
.
Gosh, don’t know what to say about all this, but, glad we decided to pass on the event !
We received, somewhat, the same treatment by Obama insiders while advocating Hillary at the last event.
Signs were removed, we were forced to relocate and an organizer shook his head, as if in disgust, that anyone would support Hillary.
Additionally, at a Cranley for Congress event at the Covedale, we had the WiFi, for which we paid for, disconnected for blogging during the event.
With Friends like this ?
.
04 Oct 2008 at 08:03 am | #
Yup, this is our Democratic Party and this is how we operate. Is everyone proud of us?
04 Oct 2008 at 08:03 am | #
Typical concern troll: Goodness me, the Dean is “surprised” that Democrats take an illiberal stance towards people who decide to crash their partisan event in a year when they would gladly rip each others arms off if it would help them win back the presidency.
As if they would turn to the twit with the Nader sign and say, “how interesting, perhaps we should discuss and potentially change our support to THAT guy ... after everything that has happened”.
This type of story has become a set piece for the Beacon, and it plays itself out at any public political event where the Dean manages to get past the door. The purpose isn’t really to convince anybody or provoke discussion. It’s just a cynical ploy for the Dean to crank out articles and remain marginally visible.
04 Oct 2008 at 08:30 am | #
.
Green Meanie while there may be some validity in your arguement, that is no excuse for the treatment the Dean received.
After all, doesn’t the progressive organizations advocate apearing in protest at McCain events ?
Don’t be so HypocRitical !
.
04 Oct 2008 at 09:04 am | #
I, too, think there are pockets of Democrats that are a bit intolerant of the 1st Amendment.
On Labor Day, I posted this blog entry:
http://buckeyerino.wordpress.com/2008/09/01/lorain-labor/
There’s a lot of words in that blog entry, but it only takes a couple of seconds to scroll down to the two photos which were taken on public property at a public event, and those two photos are sufficient to tell the story.
04 Oct 2008 at 09:54 am | #
At our next McCain rally I will see to it that the Dean of Cincinnati is welcomed with open arms and treated with respect.
Sounds as if those Dems were on the level of Philly Eagles or Buffalo Bills fans. Believe me those people are nasty and uncouth. I’ll bet they are Democrats as well.
04 Oct 2008 at 10:33 am | #
There are many reasons why I would do something like I did. Here’s one: The Hamilton County Democratic Party needs constant reminding that there are local progressives who are tired of being ignored.
We didn’t like how they backed the proposal for a big, new jail. We don’t like how they oppose PR, how they support red light cameras. We don’t support The Deal that gave Todd Portune his seat while judges and Deters remain unopposed. We don’t like their anti-progressive agenda.
Are they afraid? Do they fear that people like me will cost the election on a national level? Do they fear people like me can affect close races here locally? I guess we’ll have to see what happens.
But if it does—and if they turn to those of us who support progressive causes without voting for Democrats—then at some point they will have to ask if their constant offense against our agenda was worth it. If they really gained anything by alienating us and costing them our votes.
04 Oct 2008 at 10:49 am | #
White Male: I may take you up on that. I’ll see if I can find a Bob Barr for President sign, or an old Ron Paul sign, and we’ll see what happens.
04 Oct 2008 at 11:05 am | #
.
No, we don’t think they are afraid. We do think they attempt to marginalize the beacon efforts.
We oppose PR. We do favor staggered terms to provide continuity.
Red-Light cameras are too much like the China Syndrome, especially when the county auditor will send dog license violations to those whom appear in the newspaper with their dog and home address.
Well, locally we think the beacon, or their supporters, have definitely demonstrated that they can influence local elections. At least issues.
In all fairness, as admitted, the beacon is media advocacy not independent journalism.
Soooooooooooooo, if the beacon wants to have the freedom to express their opinion, even when some would consider that position bizarre, offensive, then the beacon should respect the opinions of others even when off the wall threats.
Individual personalities are not the parties ideology.
In fact, the Dem leaders we speak with DO NOT APPROVE of MISTREATMENT of ANYONE.
.
04 Oct 2008 at 11:08 am | #
. “I’ll see if I can find a Bob Barr for President sign, or an old Ron Paul sign, and we’ll see what happens.”
What’s wRong with the same Nader sign ?
.
04 Oct 2008 at 11:17 am | #
But Caleb Faux wanted to take down a lone Nader sign. This, while dozens upon dozens of Driehaus signs littered the roadside.
What’s up with that?
What’s wrong with encouraging conservative voters to support conservative independent candidates since their guy is a corporate sell-out, supporting bloated military spending to private contractors and big government via “Homeland Security”?
04 Oct 2008 at 11:55 am | #
Interestingly enough there are many polls where Nader’s pulling more support from McCain than Obama.
The undemocratic Corporate Democrats have hijacked the Presidential “debates” along with their partners in crime across the aisle. Walter Cronkite called the CPD corporate sponsored charades fraudulent.
They also illegally worked on taxpayer time to knock Nader off of the ballot in 2004 and gave themselves bonuses for it. (That isn’t a link to a blog Greg Harris.) They worked very hard to stifle the voices of many real progressives that opposed the bipartisan war, bipartisan bail outs, bipartisan free trade deal, and bipartisan legislation repealing our civil liberties.
They launched 23 lawsuits in 2004 and there should be an investigation here in Ohio. Unfortunately we can’t expect any prosecution of any undemocratic and illegal activities with regard to Ohio’s 2004 stolen election.
Why do the Corporate Democrats hate democracy and always work to limit voter choice?
04 Oct 2008 at 11:57 am | #
Dean, it was hillarious watching Caleb Faux putting the Nader sign back up. I wish I had gotten a video of that!
04 Oct 2008 at 01:11 pm | #
You could have your voice heard by attending democratic meetings and fighting for democratic candidates who hold your point of view.
Instead you leave the democratic party and join the fringe green party and then show up with you sign and want to be noticed and respected? The only thing missing was you holding your breath to turn blue from your little tantrum
04 Oct 2008 at 02:24 pm | #
What Democratic candidates who hold my point of view? Jeff Berding?
04 Oct 2008 at 03:22 pm | #
third33, the Democrats and Republicans are the fringe parties. They lied and said we needed a jail, but the people said no. They lied and said we needed a war, but the people don’t want it. They said we need deregulation and allowed their friends on Wall Street to screw poor people and now they bailed out these corporate crooks.
The Republicrats will lose elections if they aren’t allowed to rig the system by creating extremely high ballot access barriers, or shutting non-corporate candidates out of the debates they control, allowing big money to nullify honest elections, or by gerrymandering districts etc. They rule by fear of which gang is worse and impose corrupt policies on the American people to benefit their corporate paymasters.
The only thing missing was a real citizen run non-partisan debate that included candidates that aren’t shills for the corporations.
04 Oct 2008 at 04:12 pm | #
Where were the Greens (or other 3rd partys) in supplying opposing candidates. On one hand you say third party candidates are marginalized and need more attention and on the other you blame Rep/Dems for not running a candidate against an incumbent.
What better way to cull support for any third party nationally than by going out to win elections on a local basis throughout the country.
04 Oct 2008 at 04:33 pm | #
Great article!
04 Oct 2008 at 04:37 pm | #
Dean--
If you really wanted to see some sparks fly, you should have called Obomba and “arrogant” fucker.... I think that’s more accurate anyway…
04 Oct 2008 at 04:38 pm | #
david crowley? if none of them do then it is safe to say that you have no business trying to be noticed by the democrats
04 Oct 2008 at 04:58 pm | #
You say “Some will refuse to believe it, but there is a part of me committed to being an undecided voter until the moment I cast my ballot.” None of us believe it. We know you’re a Republican. You’ve been anti every Democratic candidate from day one and continue to be, locally and nationally.
You’ve shown up at Democratic meetings wearing Steve Chabot shirts, and at Democratic meetings with Nader signs. What’s your point? Why don’t you just go to the Chabot, Brinkman, Schmidt, Deters, Hartmann and Nader (if there are any) meetings and fundraisers and enjoy yourself. You’ve probably generated a couple of bucks for their campaigns from the support on this site and you’ll be welcomed with open arms, as White Male says.
Instead of wasting precious time trying to create contentious situations to bring attention to yourself and acomplish nothing politically, shouldn’t you be canvassing for McCain right now? Your boy’s not doing too good in the polls.
04 Oct 2008 at 05:51 pm | #
Bearman, instead of asking where the marginalized third party candidates are, why not ask where the major opposition party is—the Democrats?
Answer - the cut a back door deal not to run opposition.
cincysuz, I have never put on or otherwise touched a Chabot shirt. What are you talking about?
common39, I have liked Crowley, but then he had to go support red light cameras, tell lies, and back the opposition to PR.
04 Oct 2008 at 07:11 pm | #
Speaking of silencing anybody who is not a member of either the Dem or Rep parties, I just received my absent voter ballot yesterday and I was surprised to see that there were eight people running for president of the United States listed on it. Three of whom I had never heard, and two others who I know nothing about. Apparently the media didn’t seem to think they were worth mentioning as viable candidates even though they are viable enough to be put on the ballot. Vera Z
04 Oct 2008 at 08:07 pm | #
The chances of you agreeing 100% with any candidate are slim. If you want someone who would vote like you every issue to run you have to run yourself. Taking a sign to a party isnt really accomplishing anything to further your cause. All it does is make you feel like a man to be different. It is pretty sad and pathetic.
04 Oct 2008 at 09:37 pm | #
Bearman, the Greens do run candidates and are backing Chris Dole who’s running as an Independent. Independents have to collect about 5,000 signatures while corporate party candidates only have to collect 50-100. Look at how weak the coverage of the commission race is. Without a media that does it’s job, it comes down to big money and those back room deal makers have all the special interest money.
No need for facts when you’re so good at making up lies cincysuz.
Instead of wasting time making things up, why don’t you just vote for an anti-war candidate? There are quite a lot of them on the ballot here in Ohio despite the fact that the corporate media doesn’t want you to know it. Instead you’ll vote for the status quo and continue your nonsense.
He didn’t say he has to agree with them 100% of the time, did he? Crowley is usually better than the rest but he’s voted the wrong way on his share of things. Under PR the Dean will be more likely to get candidates he agrees with more often elected.
The Dean helped make more people aware that the “debates” are controlled by the two party duoploy and their corporate sponsors instead of being real non-partisan citizen run debates. They are fraudulent. The fact that you don’t think the American people should start holding these parties and their politicians accountable for a change is sad and pathetic.
04 Oct 2008 at 11:20 pm | #
Sometimes you guys head out with this Bull in China shop mentality- I love you dearly- you are so far ahead of the Local Papers and bring us great info - but sometimes- I think you just go baited for a good fight. Gear up for it before you get there. It is like you want a damn good fight- and beg for it. I don’t get it sometimes guys. Sometimes you are so good- and others- you backslide into HS mode!
We know you want Nader for President. OK we got it. But the reality is- he isn’t going to even get 5% of the vote in Ohio- I know I voted for Ross Perot because I couldn’t stand it that year. I understand alternative votes. I knew he didn’t stand a snowballs chance in hell- but I couldn’t in my heart live with the other choices.
But this year-is different. Take a look at cute and folksies Palin- I watched the Debate this afternoon.- and tried to remain unemotional taking notes and then watched the Couric interviews. OH MY GAWD. This woman is just a melanoma away from being president. Words like Haveta, Git, backatya, and the smug winking at a camera- I’m far from a Condi Rice fan- but all of the Foreign Affairs work she has done is history if this woman gets anywhere near DC. It isn’t fresh- It isn’t exciting- it is disgusting. Any HS grad who has been taught 3 days of rote study could have gotten thru that debate. We are in deep trouble. And don’t tell me that she has the blessing of Henry Kissinger- Dr. Mensa- he has to be cringing evertime she opens her mouth.
So while you have your strong convictions. Think about this before you vote your heart. Do you really want to risk this in Washington? Do you really want to risk this woman being President. Do some research in the Frontiersman Newspaper and stay off the blogs and find out what she was like as mayor and governor. The figures don’t add up to the media hype. Wasilla was $33M in debt when she left. Stay away from the Huffinton, and the rest of the blogs. Do the real research.
I totally understand why you want to vote for your 3rd party- I did one year. But this isn’t a year to gamble. Palin could be your President- NO SHIT.
05 Oct 2008 at 06:26 am | #
Bull in a China Shop,
Every four years is “different.” I remember the “emergency” back in 2004—about why we could not “risk” alternative voting. Now in 2008, there is another “emergency.” I predict that we will have “emergencies” from now on—as they are really good for maintaining voting patters to benefit the hegemony.
I can’t help but point out the the Bull in a China Shop theory was busted by Mythbusters.
If you really thought people like me were a “threat” to getting the wrong person elected, you should literally beg your corporate Democratic party to behave in a manner that does not lead this this outcome.
But you won’t. You will, instead, try to convince ME to stop my behavior—though I’m not the one in bed with the corporations, I’m not the one refusing to allow a truly democratic process to be engaged for the benefit of the American voter, and I’m not the one putting up barriers to ballot access.
That’s precisely the behavior—endorsed and promoted by the Democratic Party—that makes people like me. So Dr. Frankenstein, don’t make a monster and then blame your own creation.
05 Oct 2008 at 11:29 am | #
#19 Librariangrrl: “arrogant fucker? Of course everyone but the most isolated racist understands by now that the constant use of the word “arrogant” applied to Obama (not McCain and Nader who actually ARE arrogant) is racist code language. It says, that n-word better stay in his place, who does he think he is. You, Justin, Dean and many others on here have been trying to find a strategy to get around revealing your absolute horror and fear that a black man may become president of the united states. But it slips through. In posts like yours and others.
05 Oct 2008 at 12:21 pm | #
common39, you have no business telling the Dean what his business is. The Democratic Party knocked Nader off of the ballot in 2004, they shut him out of the debates and created extremely high ballot access barriers, they brag about knocking him off of the ballot and instead of engaging in an actual discussion about the direction of our country the just hurl insults and run away because they know Nader has a better platform.
The Dean has every right to protest their cowardly and undemocratic behavior. Just because Crowley is the best the local Democratic Party has to offer doesn’t mean that he doesn’t push for corporatizing our public spaces and imposing jail taxes etc. We are taxpaying citizens and will continue to exercise our rights to free speech.
Bull in China Shop, you sound more like BS in a China Shop. Do some research on the Mastercard VP. His record sucks and he makes plenty of gaffes. Why are the Democratic candidates anti-gay.
05 Oct 2008 at 02:42 pm | #
The rules are the same for every candidate to get into the debates. Weren’t you included in the mayor debates thanks to david pepper. wasn’t quite what it took to put you over the top. as far the the presidential elections go meet the qualifications. I do hold my political party accountable through the primary process.
To act like he was trying to hold the democrats accountable by showing up with a nader sign is BS. He went ot pick a fight.
05 Oct 2008 at 07:28 pm | #
cincysuz-
I’m sure you know by now (or you should) that I posted that “arrogant fucker” comment especially for you.
I have heard McCain called arrogant more than Obomba, and Nader called arrogant more than the two combined. Despite what you wish to believe, the word arrogant DOES NOT mean “uppity n-word”. If I wanted to say “uppity n-word” I would have.
I’m not sure what your definition of racist is. Generally, most people believe racism to be: the belief that all members of a certain race possess characteristics, abilities, capabilites (or lackthereof) based on ethnicity. Since I do not think Obomba’s skin color plays any part whatsoever in the arrogance I perceive him to exude, I do not think that calling him so can be considered racist, as I have called McCain the same on more far occasions considering that I generally tend to gravitate towards the liberal crowd.
The fact however, that you are assuming that every white person that uses the word arrogant to describe a black person--regardless of the circumstance--is racist, kinda falls under the definition of racism in my book. Before you go around accusing people of racism, which I consider a serious allegation, maybe you should evaluate the bigotry that is seething in yourself first.
O wait, let me guess, people of minority status can’t be prejudice, right?
06 Oct 2008 at 03:00 am | #
But is just isn’t this event. There have been others and you know what I’m referring too. You know exactly what I’m talking about.
I do love the fact that you are sometimes you are weeks and months ahead of the Enquier on stories- and at the bottom of things before they even come close. It is great! And that is why I keep coming back.
But you have to stay somewhat balanced to keep a great blog going.
Now for the Democrats being anti-gay. Not true. They said during the debates which I forced myself to watch again today. Man I’m suck a damn glutton for punishment. They agree that people should be able to enter into legal contracts for legal rights-for property, hospital visitations, etc....but they are holding out on marriage- which I do disagree with. I have married relatives! And so does Steve Driehaus have a married lesbian cousin she will be in town working the campaign closer we get to the election- she was here working in September. But you have to follow the party line- you have to go with what is accepted by the general public- marriage is what people accecpt-Not everyone can be as open as we are- I wish they could be- but they arent’. Fact of life in the real world.
And Biden has the best choice of words on Abortion I have ever heard in my life. I am pro-life- but...that is because of my church and my beliefs. But- It is not my job as a legistlator to force the laws of my church on the people of this country. It is not my job to force the laws of my beliefs on the people of this country- it is illegal- seperation of church and state. I am pro-life but believe in being pro-choice and leaving it at the state level. But it is between a woman, her God and her physician. Heard this on Meet the Press a few weeks ago- and jumped for joy. He said what I’ve wanted to hear. He is against abortion- but says- I can’t believe in it- but I can’t legistlate it- that is illegal. I can’t force morality. He said the same thing in the debate with gay marriage. He doesn’t believe in it- but says that they deserve to have the rights as partners.
But in terms of acting like journalist- sometimes you have to keep your own emotions out of things. And most of the times you guys do a great job- but other times, it is like you are out there- just loaded for bear begging someone to start a fight and take you on. NO- stop it. Keep the Beacon emotion free- and keep things on an equal even keel. It is so easy to get wrapped up in the emotion- let us do that- but moderate us.
I heard Gwen Ifel go nutz this morning. She wanted to stand up and tell Palin- hello, I am the moderator of this debate and you will answer my questions, and you will not take things off topic- but she was so shocked by her response- she didn’t know what to say and she wanted to remain calm and professional. But she cut loose this morning. That is a great example to follow.
As I said- it is going to get a whole hellva lot worse in the next 4 weeks. We have the second Congressional that is going to turn into real shit soon. So stay cool for us.
06 Oct 2008 at 08:59 am | #
.
Most Dem’s are not for marriage of gays or lesbians, PERIOD !
As far as legal rights, any individual should be able to provide legal rights to the individuals of their choice.
After all, didn’t Leona Helmsley leave a good chunk of her estate to her dog ?
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/02/us/02gift.html?incamp=article_popular
.
06 Oct 2008 at 11:48 am | #
Jason, I remember this event very differently.
Almost 500 people attended this debate watch party, and--as is your right--you heckled many of them as they entered the theatre. The overwhelming majority of folks ignored you. If you’ll recall, I approached you and asked “do you really think you’ll change minds here?”, to which you replied that you were doing it for “fun.” Well, the handful of folks who didn’t ignore you I guess gave you your “fun,” but they hardly represent the 99% of people in that theatre that night who were there to watch a debate and didn’t pay you or your cameraman any mind.
I think it’s pathetic that someone said anything about getting your ass kicked, etc., but honestly, how many of the 500 people in attendance actually argued with (or threatened) you? A dozen or so?
I think you had your narrative written before you even showed up.
06 Oct 2008 at 03:07 pm | #
Actually, I did not come to the event with any plans similar to what actualized: I wanted to ask Driehaus and Wulsin some questions, but they didn’t show up.
Justin always has Nader signs in his car, so I decided to join in with handing out signs. When I was kicked out, I was told that I could hold my signs outside, or put them away if I wanted to come in.
At that moment I decided to protest.
I think you had your comment written before you read my post.
06 Oct 2008 at 04:56 pm | #
Let’s see....
jason’s goal is provoke a response, he succeeds and then complains about such a response.....
he’ll kick our asses to boot…
jason, you are starting to sound like Kenny Lawson Jr… (Nate)
06 Oct 2008 at 05:02 pm | #
Let’s see the scene from another perspective…
You’re a progressive Democrat, going to see the VP debate.
Some guy is holding a Nader sign, saying “Open the Debates! Ralph Nader!”
Here is what SHOULD be totally reasonable—without yelling at the guy, or cussing, or starting a fight, or anything at all, you think, “Hey, why aren’t the debates open? I may be a Democrat, but I believe in Democracy, and though I don’t want to vote for Ralph Nader, he is on enough state ballots to win. Why isn’t he included in the debates, like in similar situations all across the developed world?”
Then, you advocate for opening the debates, not because you support one third party or another, but because you know it is what is right for our Democracy.
But instead, that does not happen. Democrats get territorial, and angry, and start yelling things like, “People like you brought us eight years of George W. Bush.” After hearing that refrain time and time again, I can’t help but change my slogan, by adding a snipped - “Don’t let Obama steal the progressive vote!”
Even though this obvious play on words satirizes the Democratic Party’s brainwashing attempt against independents, people get even more angry. Their anger is not reasonable, but based on some kind of raw group-thinking emotion. They yell back. I add to my refrain, simply by pointing out facts—like how Obama supports a pay-or-die, for-profit health care system.
You see how this goes. I really fail to see what I’ve done wrong.
06 Oct 2008 at 05:19 pm | #
"At that moment I decided to protest.”
You decided to protest not being able to take your signs into a private event for supporters of an oppossing candidate? Gosh, Jason, how do you event such causes?!
06 Oct 2008 at 05:35 pm | #
Librarygrrl - Is your library devoid of books? My definition of racist is the traditional definition and it includes what you left out, that the racist believes that she is inherently superior to another group.
I’d like you to cite any articles, publications that call McCain arrogant. Karl Rove labeled Obama “arrogant” and it was very purposeful. It’s stuck with the right-wing media and others as a buzz word substitute for what they really want to call him.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-ridley/when-rove-calls-obama-arr_b_109639.html
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/06/26/obama.rove/index.html
You’re confused. No one claims that minorities can’t be prejudiced, bigoted, biased or hateful. Anyone and everyone can be all of those. The argument is whether or not a minority can be a racist. The reasoning is that to be truly racist, one must hold and wield systematic (as opposed to anecdotal or incidental) power over the target of one’s hatred. In short, African-Americans have been almost entirely powerless until very recently in our history. Therefore, they cannot be racist. I happen to agree.
06 Oct 2008 at 06:01 pm | #
Jason and Justin,
Just what I said guys,
Sometimes your head and your hearts are in the right place- but you just said it- you get yourselves all wrapped up in WANTING to create an event.
If you want to talk to Steve D.- you are going about it all wrong. You are creating a hostile enviroment instead of one of open direct communication- just like you did when we were without power- think first- be proactive instead of re-active. But you have one of the most approachable politicians we have ever had in years in this city- not wanting to talk to you because of how you have approached him in the past. SHOT GUN READY AND LOADED and half cocked. Steve will talk to anyone- and I mean anyone. Hell at an Elder game- he was standing there talking to Chabot about some of the construction on Glenmore
Avenue and how it was screwing up the traffic! Like neighbors! And if anyone started a controversial conversation- he walked them away from Chabot. No dirty politics between them. Not what he wants. And you are making him out to be an anti christ. He is far from it.
Wulsin- forget it- that is a lost cause- you couldn’t get a straight answer out of her- that is like looking for a decent 2 x 4 at Home Depot! Impossible- all warped!
This is one of the best blogs we have- and yet every now and then you slip back into this mode of thinking it is some kind of HS gossip Gotta get back at ya world.
STOP IT. BE professional- and We understand your love of those 3rd party candidates- but then you have to back off being loud, rude and making a joke of yourself.
06 Oct 2008 at 08:02 pm | #
gh,
What do you mean “private event”?
China Shop:
No, you’ve got it wrong. I contact his campaign. And whoever they have running media for that campaign gave me the royal run-around. Even called me on my cell, to promise me a response that never came.
Listen, if the Driehaus campaign doesn’t want to make enemies, they are going about it all wrong. So save your lesson and give it to them, instead.
06 Oct 2008 at 08:55 pm | #
China BS, Driehaus has failed to answer simple questions, We’ve waited a long time and have been patient. It’s campaign season and we’ve got legitimate questions for him.
Jason has every right to protest the undemocratic behavior of the Democrats. They have hijacked the debates. Many Dems don’t know this. Many of them think Nader should be in them, but even if they didn’t it still would be wrong. The Democrats knocked Nader off of the ballot and harass third parties. We were expressing our dissenting views and I was not being loud or rude to anyone.
Nadetr has a better platform than the Democratic candidate. Obama’s protectively immitating McCain and taking too many important issues off of the table. Jesse Ventura was polling low, but won because he was allowed in the debates, that’s why the Republicrats hijacked it from the League of Women Voters.
07 Oct 2008 at 11:23 am | #
Most Dems are not for marriage for gays or lesbians, PERIOD
Yeah, you’re probably right. I know i’m not for marriage for them either, but then again, i’m not for legal marriage for anyone. Marriage is a religious ceremony and therefore can not be legislated into allowing certain groups to participate. Now, making civil unions illegal is reprehensible. I think legal contracts between gays or lesbians should be allowed. Which i believe is the same sort of thing articulated by the Democratic candidates.
Dean,
You guys consider yourselves to me “media advocates” right? I don’t see much in this thing any more that really addresses the issues in the media. Instead you take on the role of “independent media” and report on things yourself. And then you slam views that are dissenting from your own. I fail to see where the media advocacy comes into play.
Oh, and i do think that taking a video camera to these sorts of things is really all about inciting problems than actually stimulating conversation or debate.
07 Oct 2008 at 11:41 am | #
I’m for equality for all. If it’s just a religious ceremony then you shouldn’t be able to get married by a judge or Elvis. Nader-Gonzalez supports equal rights for gays and lesbians.
NtotheC, the corporate media is failing to let people know there’s a candidate that supports gay rights. We think they should.
07 Oct 2008 at 04:16 pm | #
NtotheC is right.
As is ChinaShop. Anymore if someone is in disagreement with the views of either of you, you don’t report objectively. You find it offensive and then jump all over people.
If you are a media advocate, and are interested in bringing all sides to a story and not just the Justin and Jason show, then do so.
It is wonderful to be passionate, it is terrible to be onesided.
We already have one rag in town that is doing that and then there is the Whistleblower blowing away.
You guys are leaning in that direction. Sorry to tell you. But you are!
07 Oct 2008 at 08:22 pm | #
John Kerry and John Edwards supported gay marriage bans. The Dean is authorized by the state to marry men and women. I don’t think the state will allow him to marry gays or lesbians though I’m sure he would be happy to. That is discrimination. It is an anti-gay stance that the Democrats have taken.
Whoa Doggies, we are entitled to our opinions and we cover issues and things that nobody else does. We welcome people to write for us and to leave comments.
We’re not onesided. I think all the Independent candidates that are on enough ballots to win the electoral college should be included in the debates. That would only be 6 candidates including the corporate candidates.