Presidential Candidates Acting Like Leaders
 

Yes, that's right. Last night in St. Louis two presidential candidates acted like leaders. They stood up for what they believed in and acted like people who had the convictions to lead a country. They acted "presidential" in the best sense of the term in my opinion.

Oh...

You thought I was talking about Bush and Kerry?! Hell no!

Last night, Michael Badnarik (Libertarian) and David Cobb (Green) were arrested for their civil disobedience protesting the CPD locking them out of the presidential debates. They crossed the police line, after explaining to the crowd outside why they were doing so, and surrendered soon afterwards. Badnarik, had he been given the opportunity before being arrested, would have served the CPD with an <a href="http://thelfactor.org/arizona_state_lawsuit.html">Order to Show Cause</a>, which basically forces them to explain why the candidates were not being allowed into the debates. Word is that while Michael Badnarik was unsuccessful, an Order to Show Cause was still delivered by someone else.

This on the heel of news that the Arizona Libertarian Party has <a href="http://www.lp.org/lpnews/0411/arizona-debate.html">filed a lawsuit</a> to stop state funding of the third presidential debate.

More information regarding the Badnarik and Cobb arrests can be found on their respective sites (links to follow). Badnarik's site includes many interesting anecdotes as well about students being detained simply for walking back from class the wrong way.

Badnarik: http://badnarik.org/newsfromthetrail.php?p=1346

Cobb: http://www.votecobb.org/news/arrested

Here's to two men of character who are willing to stand up for their beliefs with integrity and conviction. (no pun intended ;))

YES! Wooo hoooooo!!

That's a politician that I could vote for!

I was leaning toward voting Kerry to get Bush out, but Mr. Cobb really is making a strong showing, in what little ways he can, being locked out of the race by the media and all....

I only WISH we had some REAL campaign finace reform. You'd think that with how fast the candidates got around the last round of reforms, we'd be stepping it up a notch, but no.

Do people really think that it would be more beneficial having LESS political viewpoints to debate from? Also, do people feel that the Green party and the Libertarians are not valid political parties?

I wonder...maybe I should have gone for a more "punchy" thread title. Something like "Presidential candidates arrested!" or something like that. I dunno - that's just not what I take out of the story though. Figured there'd be room for a lot of valid discussion about this *shrug* :confused:

well, its a good way to get publicity, isnt it?

Probably still wont see much if anything about this in the press, which is unfortunate. Things like this SHOULD get publicity. There's more than two people running for president, its an imporatnt thing, but people don't seem to care or realize it. Fortunately some people do.

The rage is relentless
We need a movement with a quickness
You are the witness of change
And to counteract
We gotta take the power back

RAGE popped in my head. I hope these two candidates continue to run, Bush and Kerry don't know the meaning of resolve and conviction.

Im confused by the Badnarik webpage though under African Americans I see

http://badnarik.org/whybadnarik/why_...namericans.php


End taxes so african americasn have the resrouces to invest and start buisness...etc

Is that saying that ONLY non-african americans will have to pay taxes?

no, he's pointing out that taxes such as income taxes, which a lean government doesn't need, keep money out of the hands of citizens, including African Americans. WIth this extra money, they will have more ability to invest and start businesses.

Oh okay thanks for clarifying. Althought i dont like his elimination of restrictions on work permits- I think this is dangerous- none of the canidates have a plan to stop the flow of illegals from mexico- this is a MAJOR security threat- enough with screaning VISAS and nofly lists- they can just come on through the border down south!), nor his quip a bout Bush wanting to reinstate the draft - other than that he seems to be a fair canidate.- the question is how many years til someone like him has a chance of being elected to presidency? Im not deemeaning yours or anyother libretarian votes, but in all seriousness, he wont get elected ( this year atleast not), partly due to having no Ads, no recognition, no rallies, no debates, no media coverage, etc.... so when will america be ready for someone like this :(?

The borders being under the control of the military should help to significantly curtail illegal immigration.

Yes but if we don't vote simply because he won't when then we can't assist in conjuring the percentile needed to get onto the debates, with increased media coverage. The vote was not a waste if it even slowly increases to a viable force over the years.

True I suppose- but isn't Nader a more popular third party canidate?

If so- he gets almost NO media coverage- except when he was making the ballots in some states... I think petitions, that lawsuit, and letters to local papers would be benificial too- no doubt some libertarians are doing that.

Id be surprised if the main stream media even has headlines over that lawsuit? I didnt see a thing about it on FOX or CNN the day of the debates...

It would be self defeating for the Rep/Dem media to cover it as it would expose more people to the injustices of the parties they support and provide coverage for the Lib and Green party.

Badnarik is on more ballots and he comes from the most successful 3rd party in the US, that's one bit of why I would argue he is a more viable candidate than Nader. The Libertarian party has over 600 public offices, moer than all the other 3rd parties combined IIRC.

As far as the border issue, not only does he want to make it a national defense issue, he wants to open immigration, recognizing the fact that we are an immigrant nation. This relates to national security because, then, the only people coming into the US illegally would be those doing so for illegal purposes.

http://badnarik.org/supporters/blog/...rest_front.jpg

A picture from the frontline :)

Slashdot <a href="http://politics.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=04/10/13/1657237&mode=nocomment&tid=226&tid=225&tid=224&tid=11">recently posted</a> some questions and answers asked to Bush, Kerry, and Nader. What I found particularly interesting (and depressing at the same time) was how both Kerry and Bush completely blew off the question asked about election reform - at least, election reform dealing with the most basic problems in our system.

---------------

5. ELECTION/VOTING REFORM:

To the candidates, you talk a lot about the importance of promoting democracy in other countries. However, I have never heard you take on the issue of election reform in our own country. The current presidential system seems to have several shortcomings, including two-party duopoly and the ability to win the Election without winning the popular vote. This hardly seems democratic. What are your positions on instant-runoff voting and proportional representation? Do you currently, and would you in the future, support any reforms to encourage a greater diversity in our political system?
- A combination of 2 questions from Douglas, 19, of IA, and Jeffrey, 30, of NC

President George Bush Responds:

I signed the Help America Vote Act, which has provided $3 billion to states and local governments to help make sure the voting process is fair. The law requires jurisdictions to provide for provisional voting, provide voter information at polling places, comply with Federal rules for mail-in registration, and properly manage statewide voter registration lists. It also created the Election Assistance Commission, which is providing assistance to state and local authorities as they move forward on complying with the Act's requirements.

I was also proud to sign into law campaign finance reform, which is helping to improve the integrity of the electoral process by preventing unions and corporations from making unregulated, "soft" money contributions, increasing the influence of individuals, and creating new disclosure requirements.

Senator John Kerry Responds:

All Americans saw in the 2000 election how crucial free and fair elections are for our society. That is why I supported the election reform legislation and continue to fight for electoral reform. Voter intimidation and race-based efforts to stop people from voting are an outrage that we simply must stop. Even before I am elected, I will protect voting rights by providing teams of election observers and lawyers to monitor elections and enforce the law. And as president, I will reform our national election system to correct the problems revealed by the 2000 presidential election.