 |
|
Add to My Group
|
January 5, 2008 at 07:45:27
by Rob Kall Page 1 of 2 page(s) 
|
|
 
|
It shouldn't matter if you support any of these candidates. Disney's ABC network is acting in an anti-democratic, anti-American way. We must send them a message. Disney has contributed to four Dem candidates. Disney's ABC network is only allowing those four Dem candidates to participate in the New Hampshire debate and disallowing the participation of Dennis Kucinich and Mike Gravel, and on the Republican side, is excluding Duncan Hunter. Who the hell is Disney/ABC to tell American voters who they should listen to? They had threatened to exclude Ron Paul, but apparently, he met their arbitrary performance criteria in Iowa. Back in 1992, Bill Clinton only pulled 3% in Iowa. I wonder if they would have excluded him from a New Hampshire debate, given their current attitude. This is taking media interference in the election process to an intolerable, obscene new level. How do you spell a-d-v-e-r-t-i-s-e-r b-o-y-c-o-t-t? 
Recently, Ron Paul supporters were encouraged to sell their stock in Fox News Corp (Paul Supporters Fight Back-- Dump Fox News). How effective we could be if only we were sitting on vast hordes of Disney stock!
Until recently, corporations were legally forbidden from influencing elections in any way. Only a few years ago, the FCC had a mandate to regulate.
This move by ABC is not the first. NBC blocked Mike Gravel from their Philadelphia debate. But this is the worst case yet. It should not be allowed to stand.
AP reports,
Democratic presidential candidate Dennis Kucinich filed a complaint with the FCC on Friday after ABC News excluded him, fellow Democrat Mike Gravel and Republican Duncan Hunter from its prime-time debates on Saturday.
Kucinich argued that ABC is violating equal-time provisions by keeping him out of the debate and noted that ABC's parent Walt Disney Co. had contributed to campaigns involving the four Democrats who were invited.
"ABC should not be the first primary," the Ohio congressman said in papers filed at the Federal Communications Commission.
The AP article also reported ABC's rationale. The network set rules to narrow the field. Candidates had to meet at least one of three criteria: place first through fourth in Iowa, poll 5 percent or higher in one of the last four major New Hampshire surveys, or poll 5 percent or higher in one of the last four major national surveys. Disney/ABC has no right to set these arbitrary criteria. If Dodd and Biden had not withdrawn from the race, ABC could have been rejecting five legitimate candidates. They won't step down because of this editorial. It will take a lot of people contacting ABC to make them back down. And contacting them may not be enough. Economic action might be necessary, and time is of the essence. Also, let CNN and the other networks know. I doubt NBC will report it, because they did the same thing to Mike Gravel, but maybe the other networks, maybe C-Span, or National Public Radio, will. Contact whoever is on airamericaradio today. Call your local talk radio host, whether right or left wing. This is a non-partisan issue. 
1 | 2
Take action -- click here to contact your local newspaper or congress people:
Have the FCC Fine ABC for refusing to allow legitimate Presidential Candidates Participate in their Debate
Click here to see the most recent messages sent to congressional reps and local newspapers
Rob Kall is executive editor, publisher and site architect of OpEdNews.com, President of Futurehealth, Inc, more...)
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author
and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.
 Contact Author |
Contact Editor |
 View Authors' Articles |
|
|
|
| 51 comments |
|
Bill Moyers had Paul and Kucinich each on his journal
My experience is that I have to wait a day when I want to send a link from his site. Gist of Kucinich's remarks include that he is suing. Paul was congratulated for having the YouTube with the most hits. A very good program on MSM. by Margaret Bassett (45 articles, 2909 quicklinks, 42 diaries, 1849 comments [99 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Saturday, Jan 5, 2008 at 8:20:07 AM  (0+)
|
|
Been there, done that Rob
ABC has been excluding Ron Paul since last March! We later got into it with Stephanopolis for telling Ron Paul "You won't win", they have censored sevaral interviews and shows, polls...Ron Paul rEVOLution was built on the internet because MSM has been excluding Ron Paul, thus, Ron Paul supporters have been boycotting MSM. I'm only sorry that it took ABC to ban Kucinich for you to actually notice and take action. Thanks for mentioning Ron Paul, we're happy to help by including the name Kucinich to point out Ron Paul is not alone (as many think he is "fringe" and is his weakness) by Jeanette Doney (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 6 diaries, 307 comments [1 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Saturday, Jan 5, 2008 at 8:47:49 AM (0+)
|
|
Reply: You're only sorry, what???
Rob has called attention to Paul's exclusion as have other non-Paulbots here on OpEd News and they've likewise offered their support. You're coming across as a bit of an ingrate don't you think? by C.Bid (0 articles, 7 quicklinks, 7 diaries, 739 comments [2 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Saturday, Jan 5, 2008 at 9:54:08 AM (0+)
|
|
Reply: No
Rob called out for the Ron paul troops to help him and we answered the call. NO ONE here answered the call a month ago when it was Ron paul being censored, and today Ron Paul is being censored, did you sign the petition? I believe the majority of Ron paul supporters signed the impeach cheney petition, and we understand Ron paul's position of tabling...I wonder too why so many neocons signed on for it. So did you sign the petition for Ron at "Protest Fox"? by Jeanette Doney (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 6 diaries, 307 comments [1 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Saturday, Jan 5, 2008 at 12:13:53 PM (0+)
|
|
Reply: Sound a bit like an ingrate to me...
but yes, I DID sign. THANK YOU. by C.Bid (0 articles, 7 quicklinks, 7 diaries, 739 comments [2 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Saturday, Jan 5, 2008 at 2:16:04 PM (0+)
|
|
Reply: You are WRONG ..
I am not a Ron Paul supporter, per se. But I do every single ACTION item to help his campaign. Many of us DO. OpEd News has been TOTALLY FAIR And square in ensuring democracy, I assure you. Better than any other online community for this. Please play fair with Rob. by ladybroadoak (39 articles, 20 quicklinks, 12 diaries, 394 comments) on Saturday, Jan 5, 2008 at 3:06:18 PM (0+)
|
|
Reply: I agree!
I made a small contribution to Rob for my appreciation of his welcoming Ron Paul supporters to come to OpEd and debate issues. I don't have allot of money, but I am a capitalist in that I think I should pay for what I appreciate and FREEDOM of speach is way up there. Thank you for being you. by Jeanette Doney (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 6 diaries, 307 comments [1 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Saturday, Jan 5, 2008 at 4:52:06 PM (0+)
|
|
Sending this info out to our lists.
Rob, We are sending your message out to our list of 50,000+ people. This is an INJUSTICE to the Political System and we will do our part to get the message out. Below are some of the contact info that we have for ABC. ABC: (212) 456-7777, to send email, go to www.abc.com, scroll to bottom of page and click on "Contact Us" We would post this on YouTube but since we have lost our account 3 times now, with no explanation why, we have kind of gotten tired of signing up for YouTube. We will also include your message in our daily emailing of our private 300+ contacts. Since today is the day of the Debate it may be too late but will try our best. It TAKES A Doctor to HEAL Our Country, Freedom4America Group by Freedom4America Group (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 69 comments [16 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Saturday, Jan 5, 2008 at 8:56:09 AM (0+)
|
|
Reply: AWESOME!
Wouldn't it be wonderful if Rob would go sign the petition at "Protest Fox", Richard Holland started? by Jeanette Doney (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 6 diaries, 307 comments [1 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Saturday, Jan 5, 2008 at 9:39:39 AM (0+)
|
|
Reply: Exclusions
Thank you for including the phone numbers, addresses, etc. We will call, write and email. AND we will pass this op-ed to others. by Linda Inveninato (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 12 comments) on Saturday, Jan 5, 2008 at 2:40:51 PM (0+)
|
|
Good Job Rob, as a Ron Paul supporter I say we join forces!
As a Ron Paul supporter I know how it feels to have your candidate excluded. I say it's time for Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich supporters to join together in the Network sponsor boycotts of ABC and FOX news. I encourage folks who feel we should be allowed to hear ALL the candidates and NOT just who the MSM Networks support to join in. Together we are making a difference and will continue to make a difference. Fight the power with the pen and purse. by CharlieFree (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 4 comments) on Saturday, Jan 5, 2008 at 9:16:28 AM (0+)
|
|
Reply: Regardless of the candidate...
they should be given equal representation and time in debates. The MSM has too much say in who's message gets out and they are quick to use various polls to marginalize the competition. We have seen how they will refuse to air spots by groups and candidates whose views they do not share... this has become increasingly worse over the last few years and is beginning to become more apparent just how bad media consolidation can be used for party and establishment gain. A certain amount of Campaign Finance Reform will be requisite for change as will a re-examination and change of current consolidation and monopoly acts/laws that allow the power of the press to rest in only a few hands nation-wide... Right now, all we can do is to hit them in their only interest... the wallet! That is the only thing these people understand. The Ron Paul supporters understand this well -it's time that everyone else did too. It takes a concentrated effort, folks. by C.Bid (0 articles, 7 quicklinks, 7 diaries, 739 comments [2 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Saturday, Jan 5, 2008 at 10:11:46 AM (0+)
|
|
ABC's debate hijinks
let's get ABC to save us all a lot of time, money and frustration by just announcing who the next president will be. hopefully such will preempt Lil' George from declaring himself president for life. by irwin wingo (3 articles, 0 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 13 comments) on Saturday, Jan 5, 2008 at 9:49:11 AM (0+)
|
|
Eventually our President will be appointed not elected.
Everyone regardless of who you support should send a message to ABC, Disney and urge the FCC to take action. This is about our right to a fair election. The entire electorate should be outraged. Every election cycle we see more and more of our democracy erode. Soon the media will simply appoint a "President" by Anna Ragland (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 8 comments) on Saturday, Jan 5, 2008 at 10:00:59 AM (0+)
|
|
Reply: Americans empower the media
Nobody's forcing us to watch TV or buy newspapers or even listen to the radio. by Ingrid (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 142 comments [20 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Saturday, Jan 5, 2008 at 5:01:39 PM (0+)
|
|
boycott
I stopped watching tv some years ago but my partner watches it occasionally. One day last week I overheard three commercials in a row for some drug or another. I listened in for a bit while doing other things and discovered that it went kind if like this. 4 or 5 drugs and windex. 4 or five drugs and floor mop. I think boycott is a good idea but it is very telling about how far we have let this go that most of the products that pay abc are drugs and most Americans cannot even afford to buy them. Weird. I hate to say it but I don't think they are afraid of us anymore. Why should they be, we just keep letting them suck the life out of our country and our souls. I never saw a flea that felt bad for the dog. They just kill it and move on to the next dog. Kim by kgongre (19 articles, 0 quicklinks, 22 diaries, 30 comments) on Saturday, Jan 5, 2008 at 10:08:59 AM (0+)
|
|
Reply: It is difficult to feel any different.
We should take inspiration where we can and not underestimate ourselves, though... I mean, think about where we'd be these days if Frodo had just given up the quest... C'mon! by C.Bid (0 articles, 7 quicklinks, 7 diaries, 739 comments [2 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Saturday, Jan 5, 2008 at 10:18:10 AM (0+)
|
|
Link for ABC news programming
Your link for ABC didn't work for me. Here is the one I ended up using. ABC News: Network Programming Feedback by Louise Nelson (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 12 comments [3 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Saturday, Jan 5, 2008 at 10:24:29 AM (0+)
|
|
In principle, I agree...
...but I am looking forward to a debate between a manageable number of mostly viable candidates! by Robert Sargent (10 articles, 0 quicklinks, 26 diaries, 318 comments) on Saturday, Jan 5, 2008 at 11:25:59 AM (0+)
|
|
Boycott
One reason the Radical Right is sucessful in its manipulation of the media is the threat of boycotting advertisers. The Right certainly is not the majority, but because of their allegedly Christian organizations they have been able to serve the threat. Somebody should research the top five advertisers on ABC and let them know that they must tell ABC in no uncertain terms that the majority of Americans are sick of this kind of censorship. By the way, the Democrats are the real culprits. Don't kid yourself, Hillary and Edwards want more face time - not less. Recall they got caught speaking about this demented plan months ago. If the Dems said there would be no debate if Kucinich isn't there, he'd BE THERE. - Dusty Nathan, misterwriter111@hotmail.com by Dusty Nathan (18 articles, 0 quicklinks, 9 diaries, 69 comments [2 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Saturday, Jan 5, 2008 at 12:10:43 PM (0+)
|
|
Reply: One reason the radical right is so successful
is that most media outlets are owned these days by a handful of right wingers. But, make no mistake, the top contenders would like to narrow the field and have more exclusive debates from the get go... by C.Bid (0 articles, 7 quicklinks, 7 diaries, 739 comments [2 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Saturday, Jan 5, 2008 at 2:10:40 PM (0+)
|
|
Reply: Missing Link
It's mostly about ratings = advertising $$$$$/profit It is a sad comentary on most faceless voters but they generally have the attention span of a lobotomized gnat. Generally people watch the debates to confirm their views not to look at alternatives. The comment in OPednews should tell you this eg those who don't identify with Obama resent his win in the Caucus... with quotes like ...."I feel uncomfortable" or "he's not quite right" when questioned they turn 'it's my view and I'm entitled to it."(true but...). Years ago I was part of a uni group who inteviewed people at random using policy of a lesser party as the question 80+% agreed the policy saying it was worth voting for but when the source was revealled virtually all back peddled give silly excuses. Who amongst us believe that the Gerry Springer show anything buy voyuerism at its worst? Vet the stations played it for years...it rates. In the debates the moderators try to pit one candidate against an other...because it's good television. Talking heads discussing sensible issues would send everyone in the TV looking for more beer. Having said that The FCC should sanction any media outlet who doesn't abide by equal time rules and I don't mean being on the stage and not being asked to comment. I don't care if it Repubs, Dems or the happy birthday party. Maybe a diferent format is required by law. by Andris (4 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 531 comments) on Saturday, Jan 5, 2008 at 3:16:58 PM (0+)
|
|
That's what happens when you have zero percent of the vote!
Our esteemed host wrote: Disney/ABC has no right to set these arbitrary criteria. If Dodd and Biden had not withdrawn from the race, ABC could have been rejecting five legitimate candidates. Define “legitimate.” Is a candidate who draws less than 1% of the vote truly a legitimate candidate? Sorry, but I don’t think so, and if the debates serve any reasonable purpose (and I’m not certain that they really do, but enough other people seem to think so that I won’t challenge the conventional wisdom here), it seems to me that it makes sense for the debate sponsors, now that the 2007 gang-debates are out of the way and the also-rans are starting to fall, to limit the debates to those serious candidates with a serious chance of actually winning something. If voters really are measuring the candidates by their debate performances, if the debate sponsors limit the debates to those with a partially realistic chance of winning, then the voters get more of a chance to see the real prospects individually. This is not a freedom of speech issue; no one is saying that the candidates cannot say what they want. Rather, it is a freedom of the press issue: the media have a right to accept or reject articles for publication (and Mr Kall occasionally rejects articles for publication on his fine site), or to decide to whom they will grant air time. If Messrs Kucinich, Gravel and Hunter wanted to be in the New Hampshire debates, then they should have done better in Iowa! [A longer version of this comment is posted on my site.] by Dana Pico (9 articles, 0 quicklinks, 4 diaries, 193 comments [2 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Saturday, Jan 5, 2008 at 12:58:20 PM (0+)
|
|
Reply: SO YOU CONCLUDE
that the highly educated, well-informed state of Iowa decides for the rest of the nation who the viable candidates are? And ABC, having access to public airwaves, is not analagous to Rob paying for the space OpED News uses on the internet. ABC has a fiduciary duty to the public that was once embodied in the "fairness doctrine," and although that doctrine has been repealed by the neocons, it lives on in the very spirit of journalism as the Fourth Estate. Rob has no such duty, as he has not been granted any publicly owned interest with which to make a profit. by W.M.L. (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 537 comments [52 recommended, 1 rejected]) on Saturday, Jan 5, 2008 at 2:31:20 PM (0+)
|
|
Reply: If your argument is reasonable . . .
. . . then I have a complaint, because I think that I'd make a good president, and ABC isn't giving me time, either. As it happens, I just received this e-mail from the Kucinich campaign: A real Democrat keeps fighting Dear Kucinich Supporter, We want to keep you updated with everything that is happening with the ABC situation. As you know, they have excluded Dennis from tonight's debate. Yesterday, the Kucinich for President Campaign filed an emergency complaint with the Federal Communications Commission claiming that the ABC television network is violating its obligation to operate in the public interest by excluding Ohio Democratic Congressman Dennis Kucinich from tonight's scheduled debate in Manchester, NH. The filing points out that Kucinich is the only Democratic presidential candidate who has qualified for Federal matching funds who is being excluded by ABC. Further, the complaint charges, the televised event is not a true presidential primary debate without including all credible candidates, but instead is effectively an endorsement of the candidates selected by ABC. Besides fighting this in court, we are fighting on the airwaves by purchasing TV and radio time. Supporters will also be gathering outside the location of the debate in Manchester, New Hampshire tonight to hear Dennis speak. But he should be inside at the debate. Mainstream America needs to hear about the one real Democrat - Dennis Kucinich. We need your support to get the word out that Dennis has the platform that America needs and wants. The mainstream media won't tell you. Did you know Dennis just won another straw poll? It was held by the Washington State Democratic Party but you will have to look hard to find it! Please contribute $25, $50, $100, or any amount you can so we can get our message to more Americans. Together we can overcome the media blockade. Strength through Peace Even the Kucinich campaign has agreed, in this e-mail, that ABC can limit the debate to "credible candidates." The only question is: which candidates are "credible?" ABC set up reasonable criteria to determine that, and Mr Kucinich failed to meet any of the three criteria. Why should a candidate who got virtually no votes at all in the first caucus, and is under five percent in both the New Hampshire state and national polls, be considered "credible?" by Dana Pico (9 articles, 0 quicklinks, 4 diaries, 193 comments [2 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Saturday, Jan 5, 2008 at 4:20:43 PM (0+)
|
|
Reply: Didn't Kucinich endorse Obama?
I supported Kucinich until Nader announced his candidicy, saying Kucinich would fold to Kerry/Edwards. Nader was right, and that's why Kucinich isn't getting the support one would have thought, what with the impeachment of Cheney (talk about an issue MSM avoids) Democracy is more choices more voices. That is the only reason I can think why Kucinich should be included in the debate. I cvan't think of a better reason. I give the Ron Paul rEVOLution credit for organizing on the net, that is revolutionary with the money and polls...but this needs to translate into MSM poll time, and that is hard because of a generational technology gap. You Tube is on the way, but not there yet... but I for one, would appreciate a C-Span 24hr, unbiased campaign news, a "campaign weather" channel so to speak, so candidates like Kucinich, who has been the most entertaining and refreshing voice (beside Gravel who is the closest we have to a George Galloway) can entertain us with truths as we watch each other swallow others' lies, to cast our ballots in hopes we can do better than we have. by Jeanette Doney (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 6 diaries, 307 comments [1 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Saturday, Jan 5, 2008 at 5:16:06 PM (0+)
|
|
Reply: Because Kucinich IS credible
This is the real scheme of things- obviously you haven't learned this yet. by Ingrid (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 142 comments [20 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Saturday, Jan 5, 2008 at 5:31:00 PM (0+)
|
|
Reply: Jeanette and Ingrid
Bingo! You are both correct. by C.Bid (0 articles, 7 quicklinks, 7 diaries, 739 comments [2 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Saturday, Jan 5, 2008 at 9:10:58 PM (0+)
|
|
Please forward this to people ...
This is an advertiser list . I don't know how recent. I got it off of Daily Kos website.. http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/9/6/123212/7371 for ABC For an extensive list of companies involved with the film and Disney's major shareholders, see highacidity's diary. My list is undoubtedly partial, but this is the best I could do. Not everyone will contact every advertiser here, so if you have to pick and choose, I suggest you use the following criteria: 1. Call the ones you do business with first. Some pointers on the calls: 1. Be polite. Ok, that's it. Now here is the list. Have at it. Sears Mr. Clean and Swiffer Charles Schwab Kellogg's Chase Rewards Card AAA Go to http://www.aaa.com and enter your zipcode to find your state/local numbers Bounty Symantec Subway Mitshubishi T-Mobile Mazda CitiGroup Claritin Jell-O Home Depot Red Lobster Hyundai Motor America CashCall Comcast Aflac Nissan Carl's Junior I have this list posted on my ladybroadoak.blog for easy access!! by ladybroadoak (39 articles, 20 quicklinks, 12 diaries, 394 comments) on Saturday, Jan 5, 2008 at 3:02:35 PM (0+)
|
|
Reply: That's a wonderful list.
Now, today's commentary was written especially for OpEdNews. 08/01/05 - TV Networks: Programming Your Vote, at It explains who controls the five TV networks, and links to who controls the advertisers. By seeing what they have done to program our vote, you can now see the full force of what has happened to our homeland. It's still not too late if enough people wake up. There are simply more of us than them. They win only because good people do nothing. by Edward Ulysses Cate (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 232 comments [9 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Saturday, Jan 5, 2008 at 5:50:35 PM (0+)
|
|
Reply: Thank you!
We need to advise these companies to pull their ads or the independent thinkers of this country will blame them for them for silencing democracy. by Kathlyn Stone (46 articles, 227 quicklinks, 27 diaries, 690 comments [1 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Sunday, Jan 6, 2008 at 9:31:40 AM (0+)
|
|
Now Ron Paul is in. Did they just changed the rules?
http://mparent7777-2.blogspot.com/2008/01/abc-relents-ron-paul-included-in.html But the new rules make sure Kucinich is still out. Iowa was that important, apparently. Must be funny rules for a rigged game. by Mario Dufour (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 11 diaries, 25 comments) on Saturday, Jan 5, 2008 at 4:26:11 PM (0+)
|
|
Reply: And Kucinich?
Tell me. by Mario Dufour (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 11 diaries, 25 comments) on Saturday, Jan 5, 2008 at 11:08:32 PM (0+)
|
|
ABC Email Address: Member Services
For any other questions, please contact ABC Member Services directly at the following address: memberservices@abc.go.com PLEASE, DELUGE THIS ADDRESS WITH EMAILS OF OUTRAGE. ABC is subverting the electoral process and devaluing our votes. by JonmarkP (1 articles, 0 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 111 comments [13 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Saturday, Jan 5, 2008 at 5:11:01 PM (0+)
|
|
Blame the Media, Democratic Party and All Other Candidates
The issue is not about whether any given candidate should or shouldn't be allowed to participate in a debate. The issue is "who should decide????" It is an outrage that a private corporation should get to make the rules about who can and cannot appear in a debate on a network regulated by the FCC. But this goes much further than just blaming ABC and the mass media. With regard to Kucinich, or any Democratic candidate, the Democratic Party itself and all the other Democratic candidates are making a very clear statement if they agree to the rules ABC has made. Either they see this as a corporate abuse of power or they should refuse to appear. While you're busy contacting advertisers, consider giving the other campaigns and the DNC a call as well. Kucinich isn't just another guy running for President. He's a credible candidate with a very large following. Again, the question is "who should decide." Let's not turn over our democratic institutions to corporate America. by welshTerrier2 (7 articles, 3 quicklinks, 4 diaries, 105 comments) on Saturday, Jan 5, 2008 at 6:25:41 PM (0+)
|
|
Reply: I think you nailed it!
Exactly. Who should decide? by C.Bid (0 articles, 7 quicklinks, 7 diaries, 739 comments [2 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Saturday, Jan 5, 2008 at 9:14:48 PM (0+)
|
|
Reply: Who should decide?
It seems to me that the people should decide. And the people, in teh Iowa caucuses and in the opinion polls, simply have not made dennis Kucinich a credible candidate. He got virtually nothing in Iowa, zero percent. In the public opinion polls, he's always below five percent. The man simply is not a credible candidate. Sorry if that offends you, but he just isn't. by Dana Pico (9 articles, 0 quicklinks, 4 diaries, 193 comments [2 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Saturday, Jan 5, 2008 at 9:33:21 PM (0+)
|
|
Reply: oh, please!!
he's not "credible" ...??? .. and who are you BLAMING for that? The voters? The MEdia, just what? Dennis GAVE his votes in the caucuses to Obama because it wasn't cool for him to have a campaign manager working from his home? What year are you living in? He never had a chance in Iowa, obviously. The thing is this: Dennis is a candidate for ALL people, not just Iowans, or just New Hampshirites .. their are people all over the globe who like Dennis as the REAL candidate to change America's (disastrous!) course. They know that he wants to see people in the Adminstration and in CONgress be accountable; AND he follows the prescribed Constitutional legal remedy - IMPEACHMENT. So if you don't want to hear about fixing the mess, then let's all just sit around and ignore the MAJOR ISSUE OF OUR TIME, and of our children's time by citing "polls" that are no reflection of REALITY in any way. He was on New Hampshire TV AFTER the debate and he was GREAT, as always. The debate wouldn't have been such a "love fest" of collaborators in an illegal war if Dennis had been on there. It would be really nice to have just one person in this field of contenders tell the whole, unvarnished truth for a change. He AND Gravel both deserved a chance to SPEAK for a very large group of people out here in REALITY'S VILLE. by ladybroadoak (39 articles, 20 quicklinks, 12 diaries, 394 comments) on Saturday, Jan 5, 2008 at 10:48:43 PM (0+)
|
|
Reply: Kucinich good for 5% after Dodd, Biden and Gravel drop out
It's not always about being a credible candidate to win it all, it's about getting particular issues into the debate and fighting for the identity of the party. For example, if Kucinich was to talk about Hillary's selling out to big health and get a standing ovation and tons of press coverage, the front-running candidates would take note and adjust their positions. Also, if the ABC "criterion" was applied pre-Iowa, it didn't consider that Kucinich picks up a lot of support from the candidates who dropped out post-Iowa. Ron Paul was considered a minor fringe candidate when he made the explosive pronouncement that 911 was a product of US interference abroad - after that he had massive increases in support and money. I think as a far left candidate Kucinich knew pretty surely from the get go he couldn't win it all - it's all about making primary time the stage for national discussion from a variety of viewpoints. by Gustav Wynn (77 articles, 65 quicklinks, 5 diaries, 421 comments [34 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Saturday, Jan 5, 2008 at 10:53:32 PM (0+)
|
|
Reply: Regarding "0%" in Iowa
Also, I believe the way the caucasing in Iowa worked is that any voter whose first choice doesn't get 15% of the total in the room gets to change their vote for another candidate. Kucinich voters therefore used their second chances and thus his own total was zero. by Gustav Wynn (77 articles, 65 quicklinks, 5 diaries, 421 comments [34 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Saturday, Jan 5, 2008 at 11:01:21 PM (0+)
|
|
Reply: The People of Iowa Didn't say Kucinich Couldn't Debate
No, it doesn't offend me. I hope you're not offended by my calling your comment absurd. Even if every single person in Iowa said they hated Kucinich and thought he had absolutely nothing to contribute, it was not they who barred his participation in the debate. ABC did that. Can I assume from your comment that you think an FCC-regulated over-the-air broadcasting corporation should be able to set the threshold that determines who can debate and who can't? Is that your argument? I wonder if Biden or Dodd had not dropped out whether ABC would have allowed them to debate. What ABC did was an affront to democracy. Commercial enterprises should not be able to make the rules (i.e. set the threshold) that determine who can speak to the American people on the air during a debate and who cannot. Those rules should be set by the political parties. Minor candidates play an important role in bringing new ideas to the national dialog. These ideas are often not immediately popular with the electorate but we benefit by considering them. Campaigns are about much more than winning and horseracing. They are a mechanism to raise different perspectives and give them a public airing. I'd be interested to know whom you're supporting. by welshTerrier2 (7 articles, 3 quicklinks, 4 diaries, 105 comments) on Saturday, Jan 5, 2008 at 10:56:27 PM (0+)
|
|
Media Selects Candidates
I agree, the issue is "who should decide?" and in a democracy, where the people own the air waves, time should be given to all candidates. Maybe we should try democracy sometime. Another part of the problem is the two (really one, "corporate") party system. Corps get everything they want and the people consistently lose. Corporations have become more powerful then our government - senators and Congressman leave to become lobbyists - it's backwards. Corporations are supposed to be governed by a charter. People and governments should be able to revoke their charters when they stop serving the public good. Most of these mega corporate monopolies have stopped serving the public. In local communities, cable channels are required to run council meetings and other important community meetings. These media giants should be providing time for every viable candidate to state their platform and issues and an opportunity to debate each other publicly (then put them on the internet for anyone that wants to educate themselves). The solutions are easy - but they threaten the status quo. It seems that those in power would rather destroy this country then share in it's prosperity - it's disgusting. I also agree that all candidates should be insisting that the rules not be manipulated towards a few front runners, but that the process be changed to allow more ideas to be presented and debated - so that the sphere of influence is widened. But those in power, those with the advantage, always resist letting go - out of fear their power will be diminished. Contacting the candidates, telling is a great idea. Kucinich's stand on important issues are important to America, and people should be hearing his stands on: Single Payer Health Care Impeachment Ending the war on Iraq Strength through Peace. by August Adams (11 articles, 0 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 583 comments [11 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Saturday, Jan 5, 2008 at 9:34:48 PM (0+)
|
|
Moyers, Paul, Kucinich
Saw Bill Moyer's report today , thank goodness PBS has the courage to continue to broadcast the truth despite Bush's/Murdoch/Tomlinson's attempt to out him. Just found out Murdoch owns Direct TV , thank God I have Dish network. The MSM have become the Corporate Fascist's Pravda, unbelievable. I used to think that in This Country the media was into reporting the truth not in towing the line for the Corporations,naive. Anyway I am in Pauls camp but was majorly impressed by Kucinich. He is right about the Medical Insurance Industries and I'm sure all the big players (Clinton, Romney, O'Bama, Giuliani) are in their pockets. The Government however has cowtowed to them and allowed them to get where they are through legislation. The government is a major force in what's destroying Medicine today and to allow our government to run the entire show is also very scary. (Picture Medical Halliburton's) Unless the people gets their heads out of the Fox News, ABC's News' sand bag we simple folk are in real trouble . BRING ON THE BOYCOTT. BRING ON THE STRIKE. We have the Net we have the brains, lets do it. by RG (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 4 comments) on Saturday, Jan 5, 2008 at 11:27:47 PM (0+)
|
|
Final Thought
Dennis Kucinich is the most dedicated, genuine candidate the Dems have to offer. However, the Kuciniches of the world rarely win. What they do is bring light to many issues which are then incorporated into the party platform. This might be the most important reason to have men like him out front and addressing the nation. Many of you recall the black man, Allen Keys, who was in the 1996 and 2000 GOP debates. He was more glib than the entire pack, too. Had the Democrat Party embraced that ideals of the third-party numbskull in 2000, Gore would have been president for the last seven years. Hands down! If Dennis Kucinich did an independent campaign the GOP would win. That's how dynamic the little man from Ohio is! But because the corporate ABC is against the changing the staus quo of what Bush and the corrupt Congress had done for broadcasters, they don't want to hear Kucinich saying "impeach" the bastards again, as he did (exclusively!) in previous debates. We need these voices and it's a pity that ABC chose to withhold them. Moreover, I chose to withhold my spending from their advertisers beginning today. - dusty nathan by Dusty Nathan (18 articles, 0 quicklinks, 9 diaries, 69 comments [2 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Sunday, Jan 6, 2008 at 10:41:58 AM (0+)
|
|
To Dana
You are simply very ill informed about Iowa or Dennis Kucinich. Dennis Kucinich chose to campaign in NH. Check out who contributes to the Kucinich campaign, its not Disney or ABC or defense contractors or the insurance industry. Hello. Iowa is not the deciding factor in the democratic race and should not be. A small percentage of Iowans actually participate in this caucus. In addition Dennis had many supporters in Iowa, even Clinton wasn't viable in many areas. It was good strategy on the part of the Kucinich campaign to not deal with the arcane Iowa political machine. Iowa does not determine who I want to see in debates and I am appalled that anyone would think that this single state with its undemocratic system should have even the slightest power to do so. Dennis is not about big money, his message does not resonate well with the press or with the agenda of the war candidates. Dennis Kucinich and Ron Paul are the only candidates who will bring America back to the people. by Anna Ragland (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 8 comments) on Sunday, Jan 6, 2008 at 11:50:01 AM (0+)
|
|
Reply: Well said...
Don't waste your time on her website, by the way. I don't spend my time engaging those beyond help, either. Cheers, Bid by C.Bid (0 articles, 7 quicklinks, 7 diaries, 739 comments [2 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Sunday, Jan 6, 2008 at 2:02:03 PM (0+)
|
|
The Fox list of advertisers ..
Here is a link http://www.simpleasthat.com/actionletter/Fox_Advert_Contacts.pdf to the Advertisers on... O Home Depot I just got this and didn't do the research to see the email addies, the 1-800 number, etc. But we must do this as the problem is going to continue throughout the entire "race" ... by ladybroadoak (39 articles, 20 quicklinks, 12 diaries, 394 comments) on Sunday, Jan 6, 2008 at 3:19:42 PM (0+)
|
|
Latest email list via Eileen Danemann ...
LIST OF NETWORK ADVERTISERS CONTACT INFORMATION LINK: feedback@foxnews.com http://www.simpleasthat.com/actionletter/Fox_Advert_Contacts.pdf O Home Depot Here is a link to an article by the Los Angeles Times about this: http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2008/01/ronpaulrules.html Here is an article about Dr. Paul and what he stands for: http://www.usadaily.com/article.cfm?articleID=207908 Thank you for your attention and your caring, ~Frank Boyd -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Jack Crompton Comments@foxnews.com, Cavuto@foxnews.com, AmericasNewsroom@foxnews.com, Beltway@foxnews.com, Studiob@foxnews.com, Special@foxnews.com, Redeye@foxnews.com, Ontherecord@foxnews.com, Martha@foxnews.com, Lineup@foxnews.com, JER@foxnews.com , Heartland@foxnews.com, Hannityandcolmes@foxnews.com, Atlarge@foxnews.com, Foxreport@foxnews.com, Newswatch@foxnews.com , AmericasNewsroom@foxnews.com, Fncspecials@foxnews.com, Feedback@foxnews.com, Comments@foxnews.com, Friends@foxnews.com, Forbes@foxnews.com, Fncimag@foxnews.com , Bigstory-weekend@foxnews.com, Myword@foxnews.com Cash@foxnews.com, Bullsandbears@foxnews.com 1-888-369-4762 GENERAL FOX NEWS CHANNEL E-MAIL ADDRESSES: by ladybroadoak (39 articles, 20 quicklinks, 12 diaries, 394 comments) on Sunday, Jan 6, 2008 at 4:54:10 PM (0+)
|
|
Reply: Thank you, ladybroadoak.
You've provided excellent info throughout this thread! Lists that should often be utilized from now on. by C.Bid (0 articles, 7 quicklinks, 7 diaries, 739 comments [2 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Sunday, Jan 6, 2008 at 6:02:43 PM (0+)
|
|
AGREED! Here is one way to speak out.
I think that what ABC has done to Dennis Kucinich, Mike Gravel and Duncan Hunter is pretty much an outrage, keeping them out of their televised debates. Corporate controlled media has no right to decide who the valid contenders are with ten months to go before the final elections. It is a network that is robbing Americans of our right to make an informed decision about who our leader should be. Any way you want to spin it, it's just wrong. If anyone reading this would like to let the FCC and FEC know how you feel about this, myself and some concerned voters have created a form on our website that will make it easy to do so. Please visit www.everyonespeaks.com and let us know what you think of the place, or better yet, let the FCC know that what ABC has done is wrong. --End of pitch. Sorry for the spam-like nature, but we got this website up over the weekend, and if we can do any good whatsoever, I had to move quickly. Thanks and take care. everyonespeaks.com by EveryoneSpeaks (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 1 comments) on Sunday, Jan 6, 2008 at 6:46:08 PM (0+)
|
|
Reply: Sounds good.
In the interest of true fairness, I hope you have included Dr. Paul on the list of those slighted by the media as far as debates go. by C.Bid (0 articles, 7 quicklinks, 7 diaries, 739 comments [2 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Monday, Jan 7, 2008 at 10:47:28 AM (0+)
|
Want to post your own comment on this Article? 
|
||||
|
||||||||||||||
Must Read (0) 
Well Said (0) 
News (0) 
Touching (0) 
Funny (0) 
Supported (0) 
Interesting (0) 
Inspiring (0) 
Valuable (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tell a Friend:
|
Copyright © 2002-2009, OpEdNews |
