Tuesday, October 14, 2008

A MSM voice for third-parties

[Just realized this morning (Sat.) that in my haste to get this post up between gulps of my morning coffee, I neglected to post a title/headline. I've done so ex post facto.--JB]

Kenric Ward, who writes for Scripps News Service has a great column on third-party candidates, and the duopoly maintained by the Democrat/Republican parties.

Scripps Howard News Service is a major U.S. news service (they sponsor the national spelling bee) and columns like Ward's should be in every newspaper, with other journalists jumping on this story, also.

Ward writes,

Be honest. What have you learned from the first two presidential debates?
Do you expect to be any more enlightened by Wednesday night's third and final
showdown between Barack Obama and John McCain?

If you're like my friends and associates outside the newsroom, you're
setting the bar pretty low. If these "debates" have proven anything, they
confirm our two-party choice is dumb and dumber (you pick).

Three months before the current market meltdown, the Wall Street
Journal carried this headline: "The State of the Union? Furious." When the
ever-bullish Bible of U.S. capitalism acknowledges that the natives are
restless, you know things are serious.

You can read the rest here.

One reason that both major parties refuse to let other candidates into the debates, like Nader, or Baldwin, is because if third-party candidates were included, with real ideas and substance, a schmuck like "Crazy Uncle John" McCain, and the empty suit, Obama, would be shown for the frauds that they are.

Sadly, our so-called democracy falls short once again, with Americans being treated to another "parallel interview," instead of a debate.


Anonymous said...

I don't understand how you can call Obama an empty suit. At least you criticize McBush/McCain.

Barack has ran a world class campaign in every aspect. I can't even say how proud I am of him, he's a great young American who is destined to do great things for America.

No one could ask more or expect more from a candidate, and he has answered the bell at every round. His abilties should give all Americans an excellent preview into what kind of a fine master class leader he will make.

I can't understand why all Americans, no matter what party or race can't look at Barack Obama and be proud of him. He's a truly a great man and American.

Nader is nothing but a spoiler. He'll never win. That's why third-party voters are throwing their votes away.

I'd urge you to make your vote count and vote for Obama. If you watch the debate tonight, I hope you'll make up your mind for Obama/Biden 2008!

Jim said...

Most Americans, content to accept the narrow spectrum of what our politics have become, continue to cling to the canard that voting your conscience is considered "throwing your vote away."

I'm not sure what you base Obama's "greatness" on? The fact that 19 days before election day, objective voters still don't know who Barack Obama is and why he should be considered for president? In fact, while you might disagree about why many right-wing commentators are raising doubts about Mr. Obama's candidacy, the fact that these doubts are impossible to ignore causes me great concern.

Both the Republican and Democrat parties represent values and an ideology that I refuse to support, hence, I will not pull the voting lever for either mainstream candidate.

I urge other undecided voters to vote third-party, or even, stay home, rather than legitimize the pathetic two-party choice we've been handed, a logical dilemma.

Jim's Sister said...

Dear Anonymous,

Please outline for us what "great things" you anticipate Senator Obama will do for America. I've been waiting to hear this for the last 9 months. So far, the only thing I've heard is that he's going to "spread wealth" around. Last time I checked, that was called something other than the type of government outlined in the United States Constitution. I think many voters would like to know what these "great things" are, but the only response I have heard from Obama supporters are vague generalizations. Things like "he's cool, he's smart," or "Obama's for change." Sadly, those type of answers don't help me to better understand your allegations of Obama's greatness.

Enlighten us, please!

Thank you.