Badnarik: I will debate or be arrested

ToshiroOC · Oct 9, 2004, 01:31 AM

http://badnarik.org/supporters/blog/...t-men-to-rebel

Quote:

Michael Badnarik, the Libertarian Party’s 2004 presidential nominee, will debate John Kerry and George W. Bush in St. Louis on Friday. Or he’ll go to jail instead.

“A majority of Americans say that I should be included in the events sponsored by the Commission on Presidential Debates,” says Badnarik, 50, of Austin, Texas. “And the CPD, as a non-profit, has received special treatment from government on the requirement that they be non-partisan in their activities. Bi-partisan is not non-partisan.

“Unless I am allowed to participate, the debates become a massive campaign contribution to two of the candidates, illegal under the very campaign finance laws those two candidates have passed and signed as Senator and President.”

At 8 p.m. on Friday evening, Badnarik, along with the demonstrators expected to assemble in protest against his exclusion, will proceed to the police line erected to keep himself and the other legitimate candidates out during broadcast of the “bi-partisan campaign commercial.”

And then he will cross it.

“We’d have preferred to see John Kerry and George Bush stand up like men to debate the issues facing America,” says Badnarik’s communications director, Stephen Gordon. “However, they have interposed the machinery of government between the American people and the honest debate which must precede any honest election. Now it’s up to patriots like Michael Badnarik to force the issue.” In Arizona, the Libertarian Party is taking the state university to court to prevent the expenditure of state money on a similar event.

Badnarik has previously debated David Cobb, the Green Party’s candidate; Michael Peroutka of the Constitution Party; and Walt Brown of the Socialist Party. Kerry and Bush, as well as Independent Ralph Nader, declined to participate in those debates. Tomorrow morning, he will proceed from a New York taping with Bill Moyers to St. Louis, ready to take on the Republican and Democratic machines in defense of American democracy.

Voters in 48 states and the District of Columbia will be able to vote for Badnarik on November 2nd. More than 600 Libertarians currently serve in public office across the United States.

I rather like Badnarik, and while I don't see him suceeding, I agree that the CPD is a ridiculously bipartisan group.

pr0digal jenius · Oct 9, 2004, 02:14 AM

i think he should debate...but i think this will just classify him as a 'terrorist'....lol...stupid government

thomasabarnes · Oct 9, 2004, 02:16 AM

Good for Badnarik that he can join the debates. I dont mind hearing someone else, but he'll probably get bashed by Republicans, too, even though I dont think he has a chance to be elected President.

thomasabarnes

ToshiroOC · Oct 9, 2004, 05:32 AM

http://badnarik.org/supporters/blog/...narik-arrested

Quote:

8:38PM CST

The first report from St. Louis is in - and presidential candidates Michael Badnarik (Libertarian) and David Cobb (Green Party) were just arrested. Badnarik was carrying an Order to Show Cause, which he intended to serve the Commission on Presidential Debates (CPD). Earlier today, Libertarians attempted to serve these same papers at the Washington, D.C. headquarters of the CPD - but were stopped from approaching the CPD office by security guards.

Fred Collins reported to me from the ground that Badnarik and Cobb are in great physical condition and great spirit.

As soon as more details are available, they will be posted here immediately.

Haha, this rules.

thomasabarnes · Oct 9, 2004, 05:45 AM

You've got to be kidding me!!!!!!!!!

The_Neon_Cowboy · Oct 9, 2004, 06:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ToshiroOC

http://badnarik.org/supporters/blog/...narik-arrested

Haha, this rules.

it seems thier doing this just for attention

ToshiroOC · Oct 9, 2004, 06:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The_Neon_Cowboy

it seems thier doing this just for attention

Yes, to bring attention to the fact that recognized 3rd party candidates are being shut out of taxpayer-funded debates.

Would you say that Rosa Parks was just trying to get attention by not going to the back of the bus?

raid517 · Oct 9, 2004, 06:34 AM

Na, nowing Neon, what he would say is 'Who?'

GJ

raid517 · Oct 9, 2004, 06:37 AM

Lol, don't worry TC, I'll mod myself on that one.

GJ

The_Neon_Cowboy · Oct 9, 2004, 06:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ToshiroOC

Yes, to bring attention to the fact that recognized 3rd party candidates are being shut out of taxpayer-funded debates.

Would you say that Rosa Parks was just trying to get attention by not going to the back of the bus?

With as many people there are in this world it's likely she wasn't the first to try although the most recognised... becouse of the result

some times people do things and don't get recognised but the world stops when it done at the right time by the right person in the right place.... I like to think they moved forward as a people not just one or two people..... just the same martin luther king was a great man but so were many others in the same couse...but he is the most recognised... I'm sure there are many men and weomen that also helped pave the way....

this how ever is diffrent... this is just a stunt to try and get media attention wich isn't going to happen except on the "liberal channel"

I belive it's channel 3 here

you don't see poor ralph nader pulling this now do ya? that would get way more attention then that guy...

I've never even herd of him before today.... and how many states ballots is he on?

anyways I though i'd herd the "Libertarian Party’s " was not recognised
as a legitamate party but i could be mistaken

The_Neon_Cowboy · Oct 9, 2004, 06:48 AM

rofl.. all these parties trying to get thier specail intests elected lol

the only real canadates are of the magor parties and the only ones with 1/100th a chance,,,

http://www.politics1.com/p2004.htm

everyone lests start our own parties and nominate our selfs to run for president

raid517 · Oct 9, 2004, 06:50 AM

Well negating the point that she pretty much was the first - that's an interesting perspective Neon. But I have to admit before TC mentioned this guy, I had never heard of him either. Which is kind of the point he was making I guess.

How can other potentially interesting presidential candidates hope to succeed if they can't confront their opponents - or gain equal air time?

Is a two party state always all that much better than a one party only state. Is a choice between cheese and bread or bread and cheese really all that much of a choice at all?

GJ

The_Neon_Cowboy · Oct 9, 2004, 06:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by raid517

Well negating the point that she pretty much was the first - that's an interesting perspective Neon. But I have to admit before TC mentioned this guy, I had never heard of him either. Which is kind of the point he was making I guess.

How can other potentially interesting presidential candidates hope to succeed if they can't confront their opponents - or gain equal air time?

Is a two party state always all that much better than a one party only state. Is a choice between cheese and bread or bread and cheese really all that much of a choice at all?

GJ

are they really an openet with no money? no air time? no support? not suffecent support to get on the ballot... even if they got on every states ballot and they still couldn't make it to the white house sorry

the people who are on the ballot in all 50 states should count, people with one or a few states have no possibly of ever winning unless everyone else in the world died

what about the primaries etc?

nader should pack it up and get off the ballot... man carries only like 3% and is not going to be on the ballot in a verry few states

ToshiroOC · Oct 9, 2004, 07:50 AM

Badnarik is on 48 ballots.

digerati · Oct 9, 2004, 07:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by raid517

Is a choice between cheese and bread or bread and cheese really all that much of a choice at all?

GJ

I'm a chocolate milk man myself.

ToshiroOC · Oct 9, 2004, 08:05 AM

Keep your olives out of this unless you have some serious meat to bring to the discussion.

digerati · Oct 9, 2004, 08:11 AM

Mmmmm, Toshiro you sure know how to get me started *yum*

Anyways, you should know where I stand on these "debates." If I had the chance I'd make legislation for true open debates, for all the major candidates. As in candidates whose political parties actually have people in the government in levels such as the house of reps or senate.

The_Neon_Cowboy · Oct 9, 2004, 08:17 AM

I'll tell you what tosh, how much you want to bet he's not elected?

Yes, now how collor full would these debates be with specail interest groups hmm?

I mean how about the KKK, NAZI's, Skin head hate gruops and wack jobs they can form thier own parties then they get included in the debates right? How about the gruops that support communism? etc....

not only that alot of these people backgrounds etc would keep 99% of people from voteing for them. They aren't really canadates it's all just a buch of politacal fluff

ToshiroOC · Oct 9, 2004, 08:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The_Neon_Cowboy

I'll tell you what tosh, how much you want to bet he's not elected?

Yes, now how collor full would these debates be with specail interest groups hmm?

I mean how about the KKK, NAZI's, Skin head hate gruops and wack jobs they can form thier own parties then they get included in the debates right? How about the gruops that support communism? etc....

Why not? I'd rather the voter make a choice based on the best possible information, and if the voter chooses to vote for a skinhead, so be it. That's how democracy works, and keeping other candidates out of the race gives undue power to the top two parties and the media.

Vampyromaniac · Oct 9, 2004, 08:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The_Neon_Cowboy

are they really an openet with no money? no air time? no support? not suffecent support to get on the ballot... even if they got on every states ballot and they still couldn't make it to the white house sorry

Instead of supporting more choices, encouraging potential 3rd parties to try harder, you're saying No, don't bother, you'll never be a real 3rd party? So basically you want there to just be 2 parties? Even when you yourself have said that neither of this years candidates are that great? One would think that you would want another choice, to have a better chance of having at least one "good" candidate.

thomasabarnes · Oct 9, 2004, 09:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vampyromaniac

Instead of supporting more choices, encouraging potential 3rd parties to try harder, you're saying No, don't bother, you'll never be a real 3rd party? So basically you want there to just be 2 parties? Even when you yourself have said that neither of this years candidates are that great? One would think that you would want another choice, to have a better chance of having at least one "good" candidate.

Uh oh Neon, I think there was a good point made here, but of course it's nothing you cant stand firmly in opposition to, in view of your unwavering and sometimes nonsensible (to me) support for Bush. LOL

But, hey, it's differences of views that makes it exciting here at times.

thomasabarnes

raid517 · Oct 9, 2004, 10:38 AM

Well the question is should the process be made more open? Can or should it be made easier for other candidates to compete?

Quote:

I'm a chocolate milk man myself.

Mmm... I think free chocolate milk might be a good way for a hopeful candidate to start off a new campaign - but the real question is is could a real free chocalate milk campaign succeed this late in the day?

I wonder....

GJ

raid517 · Oct 9, 2004, 10:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The_Neon_Cowboy

I'll tell you what tosh, how much you want to bet he's not elected?

Yes, now how collor full would these debates be with specail interest groups hmm?

I mean how about the KKK, NAZI's, Skin head hate gruops and wack jobs they can form thier own parties then they get included in the debates right? How about the gruops that support communism? etc....

not only that alot of these people backgrounds etc would keep 99% of people from voteing for them. They aren't really canadates it's all just a buch of politacal fluff

Now now... we musn't get political - this is a presidential debate after all.

I may have several problems with the 'whack jobs' you mentioned - but given that I think that the standard of presidential candidates has been on the decline for many years, I don't think opening the process up in some way to give others a better shot at it would hurt all that much. I don't think the whackjobs would necessarily win - but so long as they weren't breaking the law, believed in in individual choice and were determined to preserve and defend the American consititution (which means not trying to change it every 5 minutes like it was some kind of cheap political football) then hey why not? There might be a couple of other provisios in there too - but nothing too major.

But hey, what do I know, I'm not even American.

GJ

Nacht · Oct 9, 2004, 04:29 PM

I kind of drink chocolate milk...it's that N-Large2 stuff

anyways

i just dont see the point in making such a big deal about it. i guess he should be included, but he wasnt so it's over as far as im concerened.

raid517 · Oct 9, 2004, 06:40 PM

Well it wasn't just him... We did move on somewhat to discussing whether the process should be opend up in general. Although you might not care or think it's a good idea, clearly there are others that do. Will it happen? Not if either of the two main parties can prevent it.

GJ

The_Neon_Cowboy · Oct 9, 2004, 09:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ToshiroOC

Why not? I'd rather the voter make a choice based on the best possible information, and if the voter chooses to vote for a skinhead, so be it. That's how democracy works, and keeping other candidates out of the race gives undue power to the top two parties and the media.

Ever herd of the ellectrol collage? they can get more votes and still lose

the mogor canadats a just that people with the back ground and experince to be able to sway enough votes and claim the white house...

they have no chances is my point i mean come on a porn star,
a drug dealer, murders, pedeofiles, some dude off the streets....
anybody can run then you say..... and debate

come on your kidding me... as for fairness $$$ is king if they don't have the money or support properly not our falts....

it desn't matter is the debate they could dedate 10,000,000,000,000 days with thier 100 canadates and the election will still be the same.... exxpt for some crazy voters going on killing spress from thier madness from tryibg to understand everyone lol

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vampyromaniac

Instead of supporting more choices, encouraging potential 3rd parties to try harder, you're saying No, don't bother, you'll never be a real 3rd party? So basically you want there to just be 2 parties? Even when you yourself have said that neither of this years candidates are that great? One would think that you would want another choice, to have a better chance of having at least one "good" candidate.

some of these parties though are BS... I mean no one in thier right mind will elect a specail interest group to power....

the independanats have some sway but they have to get thier support up... running the same canadates year after year ensures they get no more support then last year... If they ran some body other then nader this might have been a 3 way race....

It's the way it work the two front runners debate, sorry 0.00001 - 5% desn't qualify as a front runner....

I not says what I think it should be but the facts of how it is....

pr0digal jenius · Oct 9, 2004, 10:20 PM

Neon:

you mention "nader not doing anythign like this"
---he doesn't count, he's a republican puppet funded in large by the republicans, and thus has no original ideas of hsi own...lol

you say only the 2 major parties have a shot at an election
---i'll give you 2 guesses why

...nope...not cuz they suck, not cuz they have nothing america wants to hear...it's because people like your friends at the debate are out policing the world without the world's consent to do so.

you mention Badnarik onyl doing this for attention
---newsflash: why is Bush at the debates?....why does bush run commercials on TV?...why all the propogandish speaches at schools and old people's homes? Politicians by nature are attention whores. The feeble minded can be won over simply off of a name recognition basis, thus this blatant abuse of media to 'call attention to ones self' works an abnoxiously lartge percentage fo the time. (I used bush, not because Kerry doesn't do it too, but because if I'd mentioned Kerry you'd flame me for uttering hsi name ratehr then listenign to my point)

you say we shouldn't let Nazi's, Communists, etc run in elections and such
---why? the constitution ensures democracy will be preserved, so why not let in some different thought processes to the 'throne' held by such meatheads as emperor george for the past....well...as long as I can remember. Democracy is allowing the people to choose....tyranny is ruling on the ruler's terms without the consent of the governed....communism is a blank slate with equality for all, as is socialism(for the msot part)....you tell em which category these debates fall into. That's right, unless we let all these 'tyrants', 'nazis', 'commies', etc run and do their thing we become tyrants ourselves.

Oct 9, 2004, 02:16 AM	#3
thomasabarnes Long Time ***** Friend Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: USA Posts: 1,373 Rep Power: 58 System Specs	Good for Badnarik that he can join the debates. I dont mind hearing someone else, but he'll probably get bashed by Republicans, too, even though I dont think he has a chance to be elected President. thomasabarnes __________________ May a song always touch you in a positive way. Sonar 8.5.3 PE, Windows 7 Pro 64Bit, MOTU UltraLite MK3, 150 GB HDD, 250 GB HDD, 1 TB HDD 7200 rpm, My Music Production: Top 40, Contemporary Christian, Pop/Rock, Decent Rap, Inspirationals, and Children Songs

Oct 9, 2004, 05:45 AM	#5
thomasabarnes Long Time ***** Friend Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: USA Posts: 1,373 Rep Power: 58 System Specs	You've got to be kidding me!!!!!!!!! __________________ May a song always touch you in a positive way. Sonar 8.5.3 PE, Windows 7 Pro 64Bit, MOTU UltraLite MK3, 150 GB HDD, 250 GB HDD, 1 TB HDD 7200 rpm, My Music Production: Top 40, Contemporary Christian, Pop/Rock, Decent Rap, Inspirationals, and Children Songs

Oct 9, 2004, 06:48 AM	#11
The_Neon_Cowboy HardwareHeaven Extreme Member Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: U.S.A. Posts: 16,009 Rep Power: 90 System Specs	rofl.. all these parties trying to get thier specail intests elected lol the only real canadates are of the magor parties and the only ones with 1/100th a chance,,, http://www.politics1.com/p2004.htm everyone lests start our own parties and nominate our selfs to run for president __________________

Oct 9, 2004, 07:50 AM	Thread Starter #14
ToshiroOC Unbiased. Join Date: Jun 2002 Posts: 4,812 Rep Power: 0	Badnarik is on 48 ballots. __________________ [img][/img] [color=White]Peace be with you, Joe.[/color] Driverheaven Staff Member (Supermoderator)

Oct 9, 2004, 08:05 AM	Thread Starter #16
ToshiroOC Unbiased. Join Date: Jun 2002 Posts: 4,812 Rep Power: 0	Keep your olives out of this unless you have some serious meat to bring to the discussion. __________________ [img][/img] [color=White]Peace be with you, Joe.[/color] Driverheaven Staff Member (Supermoderator)

Oct 9, 2004, 02:14 AM	#2
pr0digal jenius Delete Me Join Date: Mar 2004 Posts: 14,648 Rep Power: 0	i think he should debate...but i think this will just classify him as a 'terrorist'....lol...stupid government

Oct 9, 2004, 06:34 AM	#8
raid517 DriverHeaven Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2002 Posts: 2,518 Rep Power: 0	Na, nowing Neon, what he would say is 'Who?' GJ

Oct 9, 2004, 06:37 AM	#9
raid517 DriverHeaven Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2002 Posts: 2,518 Rep Power: 0	Lol, don't worry TC, I'll mod myself on that one. GJ

Oct 9, 2004, 06:50 AM	#12
raid517 DriverHeaven Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2002 Posts: 2,518 Rep Power: 0	Well negating the point that she pretty much was the first - that's an interesting perspective Neon. But I have to admit before TC mentioned this guy, I had never heard of him either. Which is kind of the point he was making I guess. How can other potentially interesting presidential candidates hope to succeed if they can't confront their opponents - or gain equal air time? Is a two party state always all that much better than a one party only state. Is a choice between cheese and bread or bread and cheese really all that much of a choice at all? GJ

Oct 9, 2004, 08:11 AM	#17
digerati Everyones life has worth Join Date: May 2003 Location: My Yellow Bug Posts: 3,779 Rep Power: 61	Mmmmm, Toshiro you sure know how to get me started yum Anyways, you should know where I stand on these "debates." If I had the chance I'd make legislation for true open debates, for all the major candidates. As in candidates whose political parties actually have people in the government in levels such as the house of reps or senate.

Oct 9, 2004, 08:17 AM	#18
The_Neon_Cowboy HardwareHeaven Extreme Member Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: U.S.A. Posts: 16,009 Rep Power: 90 System Specs	I'll tell you what tosh, how much you want to bet he's not elected? Yes, now how collor full would these debates be with specail interest groups hmm? I mean how about the KKK, NAZI's, Skin head hate gruops and wack jobs they can form thier own parties then they get included in the debates right? How about the gruops that support communism? etc.... not only that alot of these people backgrounds etc would keep 99% of people from voteing for them. They aren't really canadates it's all just a buch of politacal fluff __________________

Oct 9, 2004, 04:29 PM	#24
Nacht ein Krieger Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Clemson Uni Posts: 3,127 Rep Power: 0	I kind of drink chocolate milk...it's that N-Large2 stuff anyways i just dont see the point in making such a big deal about it. i guess he should be included, but he wasnt so it's over as far as im concerened.

Oct 9, 2004, 06:40 PM	#25
raid517 DriverHeaven Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2002 Posts: 2,518 Rep Power: 0	Well it wasn't just him... We did move on somewhat to discussing whether the process should be opend up in general. Although you might not care or think it's a good idea, clearly there are others that do. Will it happen? Not if either of the two main parties can prevent it. GJ

Oct 9, 2004, 10:20 PM	#27
pr0digal jenius Delete Me Join Date: Mar 2004 Posts: 14,648 Rep Power: 0	Neon: you mention "nader not doing anythign like this" ---he doesn't count, he's a republican puppet funded in large by the republicans, and thus has no original ideas of hsi own...lol you say only the 2 major parties have a shot at an election ---i'll give you 2 guesses why ...nope...not cuz they suck, not cuz they have nothing america wants to hear...it's because people like your friends at the debate are out policing the world without the world's consent to do so. you mention Badnarik onyl doing this for attention ---newsflash: why is Bush at the debates?....why does bush run commercials on TV?...why all the propogandish speaches at schools and old people's homes? Politicians by nature are attention whores. The feeble minded can be won over simply off of a name recognition basis, thus this blatant abuse of media to 'call attention to ones self' works an abnoxiously lartge percentage fo the time. (I used bush, not because Kerry doesn't do it too, but because if I'd mentioned Kerry you'd flame me for uttering hsi name ratehr then listenign to my point) you say we shouldn't let Nazi's, Communists, etc run in elections and such ---why? the constitution ensures democracy will be preserved, so why not let in some different thought processes to the 'throne' held by such meatheads as emperor george for the past....well...as long as I can remember. Democracy is allowing the people to choose....tyranny is ruling on the ruler's terms without the consent of the governed....communism is a blank slate with equality for all, as is socialism(for the msot part)....you tell em which category these debates fall into. That's right, unless we let all these 'tyrants', 'nazis', 'commies', etc run and do their thing we become tyrants ourselves.